alexisUK said:
Cheers,
That's a big help! But what debt is owed to News Corp? Did the ARL effectively have to buy them out to unite the game again? And are people still bitter about the super league war? Being a brit, and having discovered the game in its last winter season I haven't really any idea what RL in Oz was like before the split so I'm kinda interested in what went on and how it's changed.
Before the Super League war, the ARL under Arko and Quayle had grown the game from a huge crisis in the Sydney comp (run by the NSWRL) in the early 80s to a "national" comp with teams in Perth, NQ, Auckland, regional NSW (Knights, Raiders, Steelers), 2 Brisbane teams and more planned. SL brought in Melbourne, Adelaide and the Hunter Mariners (a 2nd Newcastle team) but the last two as well as Western Reds (playing out of Perth) and the South Qld Crushers were wound up as part of the peace deal. That's the story so far...
As part of the peace deal, News got a half share in the NRL, the new body formed to run the club comp. Actually they got more than a half share as they have a veto over the wishes of the ARL half of the NRL. It was agreed that since News had lost a shitload of money fighting the war, they would take an undefined amount of money out of the game for an undefined period until the "debt", their losses, were covered. Where this left Optus, God only knows, the others raise a good point about that but Kerry Packer was playing both sides and cut them adrift when he had a deal that satisfied him. I'm a bit shaky on this last point and others are welcome to correct me if I'm wrong.
Bitterness still exists about the war. Steelers and Saints fans are shitty they had to merge, as are Tigers and Magpie fans. A lot of Sydney fans are quite insular and blame the expansion clubs for the loss of their traditional clubs. The Broncos, the best run club in the league for years, were at the forefront of SL's fight and they are mostly despised by other teams for their role thought this has lessened with their comparitive lack of success in recent years. Others who joined the SL stable are treated like pariahs by the traditional clubs. In their turn, the ex-SL clubs accuse the traditional clubs of living on past glories.
alexisUK said:
There seems to be plenty of support for international league from every single person I come across either in reality or online or whatever. So where does the reluctance to push the international game come from? Surely the one objective thing that RL will ALWAYS have over AFL in Oz is international competition?
NRL fans are rightly proud of their comp as far and away the toughest and best comp in the world and often can't see past our noses for the good of the game. It's very similar, on a much smaller scale, to the G14 clubs in UEFA, it's all about self-interest and stuff the game.
Re Farrell's quote about the soft Aussies the other day, if he was ever man enough to come out and play with the big boys in the NRL, he might feel differently about calling us soft. I would suggest that 24 rounds in the NRL is a hell of a lot harder than in the ESL and those extra games they play in SL and the Challenge Cup are more than covered by the demands of Origin, City/Country and the finals series. Farrell's a lot more comfortable taking the big money on offer in England in a much lower standard of comp than testing himself against the best in the world week-in, week-out.
Just my thoughts, hope it helps.