1st or 16th Premiership

[Slippery Morris]

Interested to see what they will say IF the Dragons win the premiership this year. Will it be recorded as the 1st premiership for the club or it's 16th?

You would think it is the 16th premiership but then again we have alot of peoplel in denial of this successful merger and will try their hardest to make it our first.

 

[Mr Saab]

if it is stgs 1st then it is also illawarras 1st...and that doesnt make sense as it will mess with the record books.
Like it or not (most not) it will be the 1st premiership as it is a new club.

 

[Willow]

16th offcourse.

Not your call Charlie.

 

[Mr Saab]

i know its not my call, but its my opinion....willow
IF it is the dragons 16th then they should get rid of "illawarra" from their name as it will well and truly be a takeover.

 

[Willow]

Must you stab every thread about Saints? Sadly, well meaning threads like this are too often an open door to ill-informed trolls.

Doust has already said the next one will be number 16. The Football Club Journal says we have a combined history of 15 premierships.

 

[Mr Saab]

every thread huh?

 

[Cheesie-the-Pirate]

Surely if the merger of the ARL and Super League doesn't extinguish the 90 odd years of NSWRL/ARL premiership history than the merger of St. George and Illawarra doesn't extinguish the 75 odd years of St. George premiership history.

 

[Slippery Morris]

Does it go by name or actual club. If it goes by name as Charlie suggested with the "Illawarra" bit was that the "Sydney City" Roosters first premiership on 2003. Previous records would show Eastern Suburbs Roosters winning the Premiership where as their last one was Sydney City Roosters? The name Eastern Suburbs don't exist anymore only thing that is similar is Roosters.

Are the Bulldogs still known as Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs or is it just Canterbury Bulldogs? Their jersey emblem from memory just shows Bulldogs so it could be Lakemba Bulldogs for all I know.

That same red V that won 11 in a row is still around. It has not gone anywhere like it or not.
In saying that wouldn't Balmain and Wests combine their trophy's? How many would they have combined? Or would you just count the Tigers as they are know as Wests "Tigers" and not "Magpies"?

 

[Mr Saab]

slippery...changing your name like the chooks did is alot different to merging two clubs and creating a brand new club.

 

[El Diablo]

Do they consider the Wests Tigers as one?

 

[Willow]

That's a issue for Wests Tigers to sort out. This is a St George - Illawarra issue.

The NRL is comfortable using the history of the NSWRL to suit its own ends, then there should be no argument with St George and Illawarra using their respective histories. It's all dust after 6 billion years anyway so let us enjoy it, if or when it happens.

With the joint venture as it stands, St George quite happily take on the wooden spoons which the Steelers have dished up... and in return, the Illawarra can further be part of the rich St George history.

I say 'further' because the St George and Illawarra districts have enjoyed a close relationship in Rugby League since the 1920s. The JV is a reunification or if you like, a formalisation of what was before. Anyone who knows the history of the area south of the Cooks River will tell you that St George and the Illawarra have always shared common boundaries and backyards.

I've had this discussion so many times now that it types off easily. It's abundantly clear to me that there is no need for division because the club wants it, the supporters want it, it's financially feasable, and it's historically possible to make it happen.

The only Jackasses offering any opposition are book keepers... bean counters who keep their bank statements for 20 years but throw away their love letters.
They have no desire to complicate their calculations. And yet the same people think the NRL started in 1908... work that out.

All we need is another premiership to show that regardless of what other people may try and tell us, WE believe it to be premiership No. 16.

 

[El Diablo]

Going off the NRL site I believe it would be considered a first.

They are only listed as having joined in 1999.

 

[MONY]

it will be the first.

 

[Willow]

As I said, threads like like this invite ill-informed opinion from trolls and fringe dwellers.

I thank the supporters from other clubs for telling other supporters how to think about their club's history.

El, going by your reply, I doubt very much if you even read my last post.

 

[El Diablo]

I did read your post but in response to the first post I'm preuming "they" is the NRL.

What you and both clubs consider it is another matter entirely.

 

[Drew-Sta]

We've got it easier than the Tigers merger. With no disrespect to the Illawarra faction, the fact that they haven't won a premiership means that no totals need to be added together. Hence, the combined history of the two clubs, premiership tally wise, will equal 16 irrespective of the two clubs having separate histories.

By going with this theory, the Tigers are well within their rights to combine both their premiership tally's and stating the merged club has won 'X' amount of premierships, and I really doubt that anyone would hold it against them at all. I wouldn't.

It is really quite easy to say 'The history of the St George and Illawarra clubs was simply joined as of 1999, and the future records they reach will be tallied onto any of their previous accomplishments.'

Most people mistakenly believe 'Merger' is the destruction of two to form one. Incorrect. Merger is a business term used to identify when two entities join together in an effort to survive and expand. A merger is the continuation of both businesses, only now they have the resources of two organisations instead of one. An excellent example is Coles Myer Pty Ltd. Coles and Myer were separate entities, and simply joined to create one super company. Both retained their history and traditions, so why shouldn't we?

 

[Willow]

Understood El and and thanks.
But what we're talking about here the intellectual, emotional and historical ownership of club entity. It can't be cast aside just because a bunch of deskies on the NRL payroll need to have an even ledger.

Make no mistake, the NRL have no issues when it comes to pushing the history of St George to meet some promotion.
They're welcomed to do that and they can inherit NSWRL records dating back to 1908. But they can't have it both ways.

Quite correct Drew-sta, what Wests Tigers do is their business. In company profiles, it's not unusual to combine joint histories. If they choose to do it differently, then that's fine. Totally their choice.

 

[Saint 60]

lol...well on looking If we win....it will be the new clubs 1st..

But not me I'll be saying another one...without a problem

 

[Dragons2005]

16th without a doubt.
Drew summed it up!!
I have always been a St George Supporter and have come to terms with the merger and i believe that the St George Club never shut up shop so why should they lose there history?

 

[wolverine]

1st premiership they are a new entity as St.George Illawarra