Axe the Sharks to make way for the Reds

[Mr Angry]

It is far more important than history.

Maybe so but 43 years of history is not "no history"

 

[Vossy]

some of the crap on here is so pathetic, its laughable

Although Cronulla has 20 plus years on the Broncos, they lack prestiege. Brisbanes 6 premierships, truck loads of great players, single city support and stadium, adds to it.

The Raiders have been around longer then Brisbane and Newcastle, but no one (except skeepe) would say that they are more (for lack of a better word) significant.

just because they have won premierships, it doesnt mean they have more of a history then the sharks..i believe history is based on years not trophies

nauseatingly useless Shark loosers you support.

me fail englush, thats unpossible :sarcasm:

I'm disappointed. I was hoping you'd at least post another stupid picture.

you must like looking at yourself..go find a mirror

The NRL is a fair comp

Bullsh!t..the storm are being propped up by the games owners, that alone makes it an unfair comp

 

[Loudstrat]

Nothing can be guaranteed mate.

Even if they just persevered with playing one or more games in Adelaide a year they would've been able to take advantage of the comparatively massive new market (juniors, sponsors, fans). Instead they resorted to navel gazing and abandoned a great idea after a single year...

Sounds like you reckon it was guaranteed success. They drew 8k. It's ok for internet heroes to demand they should have stuck, but it isn't your money or your future on the line.

 

[_Johnsy]

Lockyer4president,

I have to laugh when a someone like you sprouts the usual lines, it's a fair comp etc.

Brisbane woud not know a level playing field if if was shoved 3/4's of the way up their asses.

Who was the only club that it's majority shareholders, News Ltd, on the Broncs behalf demanded that they were the only team in SE QLD for 8 years after the new comp reformed.

Claiming the competition is fair in any way shape or form, Hypocritical when it comes from anyone who supports brisbane or melbourne.

 

[TheRam]

me fail englush, thats unpossible :sarcasm:

Your comebacks are just like the heartless hoaxes you support, a reliable disappointment at best.

Your hapless Sharks need to move or die sooner rather then later so as the NRL can rid itself of one more ball and chain. The league needs contributors not barnacles or sea sponges, which is what the Sharks have become nearly forever now. And no matter what they do, as so many others here have already stated, existing on a little peninsular will always be a recipe for long term failure and its accompanied pain, when the obvious wealth of resources of other teams are so abundantly clear. At least to anyone who cares to take an unbiased and balanced view, especially on the subject of relocation.

Just because it is a harsh and brutal decision to remove a gangrenous limb does not make it the wrong one.

Hey maybe that should be the new moniker for the team...the Cornulla Spongers or the mighty Cronulla Barnacles. Has a certain ring to it, don't you think?

 

[Perth Red]

Sounds like you reckon it was guaranteed success. They drew 8k. It's ok for internet heroes to demand they should have stuck, but it isn't your money or your future on the line.

which is why the NRL should be underwriting them for the good of clubs and the game.

 

[Vossy]

Your comebacks are just like the heartless hoaxes you support, a reliable disappointment at best.

Your hapless Sharks need to move or die sooner rather then later so as the NRL can rid itself of one more ball and chain. The league needs contributors not barnacles or sea sponges, which is what the Sharks have become nearly forever now. And no matter what they do, as so many others here have already stated, existing on a little peninsular will always be a recipe for long term failure and its accompanied pain, when the obvious wealth of resources of other teams are so abundantly clear. At least to anyone who cares to take an unbiased and balanced view, especially on the subject of relocation.

Just because it is a harsh and brutal decision to remove a gangrenous limb does not make it the wrong one.

Hey maybe that should be the new moniker for the team...the Cornulla Spongers or the mighty Cronulla Barnacles. Has a certain ring to it, don't you think?

"unbiased view, especially on relocation" :lol: yeah because its not your team we are talking about..lets talk about your team [whoever the feck it maybe, you're probably some bandwagoner] then lets see an unbiased opinion

the education system obviously failed you, someone with a sh!tload of assets and can maintain themselves until those assets can bring in sh!tload of money, will not be dying anytime soon so suck it up princess

little peninsular..your geography must really suck, causing long term failure..erh whens long term going to come along esp after 43 years and counting mutha fugger

wealth of resources..you sound like a QLD dominated broncos fan

you are so pathetic, im starting to feel sorry for you

which is why the NRL should be underwriting them for the good of clubs and the game.

yeah cause the NRL can really afford it..did you think before you typed?

 

[Perth Red]

"unbiased view, especially on relocation" :lol: yeah because its not your team we are talking about..lets talk about your team [whoever the feck it maybe, you're probably some bandwagoner] then lets see an unbiased opinion

the education system obviously failed you, someone with a sh!tload of assets and can maintain themselves until those assets can bring in sh!tload of money, will not be dying anytime soon so suck it up princess

little peninsular..your geography must really suck, causing long term failure..erh whens long term going to come along esp after 43 years and counting mutha fugger

wealth of resources..you sound like a QLD dominated broncos fan

you are so pathetic, im starting to feel sorry for you



yeah cause the NRL can really afford it..did you think before you typed?

The NRL is spending $140mill a year. Yeh I think they can afford 1% of that to grow the game.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Sounds like you reckon it was guaranteed success. They drew 8k. It's ok for internet heroes to demand they should have stuck, but it isn't your money or your future on the line.

Guaranteed success? No, like I said there are no guarantees but there was a sh*tload of potential.

You don't think that if they had stuck around in Adelaide that it wouldn't have had an impact on the support and sponsors?

8,000 people to a one-off game with little publicity in a place where the only NRL news is negative coverage. If they stuck to the agreement of one game a year for three years then in all likelihood the crowds would've grown, as would have general support for them and the game.
Cronulla don't even have a main sponsor atm, spitting in the face of the SA government wasn't the smartest thing they could've done.

 

[Vossy]

Perth Red, just because you presume they spend so much, doesnt mean they can afford to spend some of it elsewhere..easy for you to say it, not so easy for it to actually happen

Guaranteed success? No, like I said there are no guarantees but there was a sh*tload of potential.

yes Potential..im not going to move to the otherside of the world cause there is a potential to earn a decent income, why would an NRL team up and move to another state, ditching its current fans, based on potential..im glad your not the CEO of any club

8,000 people to a one-off game with little publicity in a place where the only NRL news is negative coverage. If they stuck to the agreement of one game a year for three years then in all likelihood the crowds would've grown, as would have general support for them and the game.

lol little publicity, how would you know, you live in QUEENSLAND

Cronulla don't even have a main sponsor atm, spitting in the face of the SA government wasn't the smartest thing they could've done.

what, you know the full reasons why we left adelaide now do you mr CEO

 

[Talanexor]

Look, lets be honest here: The Sharks just don't have any prospects.

• They've had 43 years of winning bugger all.
• They represent an area with only about 200,000 residents, and support outside the Shire is almost non-existent (compared to teams like the Dragons and Rabbitohs, which have a lot of supporters outside their core areas). The population isn't growing either.
• Their players and coach are so dull to watch, they are pulling crowds that are consistently lower than just about every other NRL team

There are too many clubs in Sydney for them all to remain viable. The market isn't large enough. It stands to reason that the weakest will fold first, and the Sharks just don't have any growth prospects to justify keeping them in the competition when other areas - Perth, Adelaide, Central Coast, NZ, PNG - all have a LOT more potential.

I'm a Cowboys fan, and we haven't won a bloody thing ever either. The difference is that we regularly pull capacity crowds of 20,000-25,000 which is higher than any Sydney club. A lot of our fans even drive several hours to come to games.

Cronulla adds a maximum of 200,000 people to the Rugby League market. Perth would bring 1.5 million people, and Adelaide would bring 1 million. Axe them.

 

[sharknows]

Perth & Adelaide have been tried before and were both dismal failures. Melbourne exists only because it is financed by News Ltd. RL will never fully succeed outside NSW & Qld. The NRL is trying to make itself bigger than the population of Australia will support. RL is no longer a game for the people it is a game to make money for TV.

 

[Ausguy]

Look, lets be honest here: The Sharks just don't have any prospects.

• They've had 43 years of winning bugger all. -does that warrant them being axed? when did souths last win the comp... 1971 or something wasnt it? must be time to axe them soon its almost been 40 years
• They represent an area with only about 200,000 residents, and support outside the Shire is almost non-existent (compared to teams like the Dragons and Rabbitohs, which have a lot of supporters outside their core areas). The population isn't growing either. How many people live in the manly shire? or the eastern suburbs? and to say no one outside of the shire supports them is just ignorant. Im outside and i support them.
• Their players and coach are so dull to watch, they are pulling crowds that are consistently lower than just about every other NRL team The club has had a shocking 18 months on and off the field, its call re-building mate. WHo do you support, let us know so we can make dramatic assumptions about your team.

There are too many clubs in Sydney for them all to remain viable. The market isn't large enough. It stands to reason that the weakest will fold first, and the Sharks just don't have any growth prospects to justify keeping them in the competition when other areas - Perth, Adelaide, Central Coast, NZ, PNG - all have a LOT more potential.

Replace a team that has stayed viable with 2 teams (adelaide and perth) who together lasted a total of 4 seasons? As for the 2nd NZ team im unconvinced, have you seen the Warriors crowds when they are going like a busted?

I'm a Cowboys fan, and we haven't won a bloody thing ever either So if you dont win for another 20 yrs can we axe you? NO? well dont use it as a point above its not an argument point. The difference is that we regularly pull capacity crowds of 20,000-25,000 which is higher than any Sydney club So why isolate Cronulla as the club to axe if your teams crowds are better than all sydney teams, or is it just the universal Cronulla hate train that this forum is enjoying?. A lot of our fans even drive several hours to come to games. And the sharks fans that come from Canberra that sit next to me at the games dont drive hours?

Cronulla adds a maximum of 200,000 people to the Rugby League market. Perth would bring 1.5 million people, and Adelaide would bring 1 million. Axe them.

Ask David Gallop if he can afford to lose 200K ppl out of the market. Perth might have 1.5 Million and Adleaide 1M but Pert has 2 AFL teams and 1 Union Team and 1 Soccer Team Adelaide has 2 AFL Teams and 1 Soccer Team so those supporter numbers are not exclusively Rugby League supporters, IMO they would be lucky to pull 5% off the xisting AFL soccer supporters which means 95% of supporters would have to be exiating league fans - unlikely in such an AFL envirionment.

Finally, if the sharks or any other team can not withstand the current climate and do fold then so be it, but there should not be a team axed just so a previously tried region can come into the comp only to fold (potentially) within 5 years. I would love nothing more for the comp to grow but not at the expense of an existing club.

WHat people dont see is regardless of what club folds its not going to be the last and its NOT GOOD NEWS for any team to go under.

 

[Vossy]

Look, lets be honest here: The Sharks just don't have any prospects.

• They've had 43 years of winning bugger all.
• They represent an area with only about 200,000 residents, and support outside the Shire is almost non-existent (compared to teams like the Dragons and Rabbitohs, which have a lot of supporters outside their core areas). The population isn't growing either.
• Their players and coach are so dull to watch, they are pulling crowds that are consistently lower than just about every other NRL team

There are too many clubs in Sydney for them all to remain viable. The market isn't large enough. It stands to reason that the weakest will fold first, and the Sharks just don't have any growth prospects to justify keeping them in the competition when other areas - Perth, Adelaide, Central Coast, NZ, PNG - all have a LOT more potential.

I'm a Cowboys fan, and we haven't won a bloody thing ever either. The difference is that we regularly pull capacity crowds of 20,000-25,000 which is higher than any Sydney club. A lot of our fans even drive several hours to come to games.

Cronulla adds a maximum of 200,000 people to the Rugby League market. Perth would bring 1.5 million people, and Adelaide would bring 1 million. Axe them.

any excuse to boot the sharks

sorry but you have delibrately forgotten a "prospect" or you live under a rock, we will remain viable for the short term until our development is up and running and we will be able to do it as we have done so for 43 years

short term pain for long term gain

not to mention we also own our own ground, no one else in the league can say that..

consistently lower? 2008

majority of the last decade souths were "consistently lower" then everyone else yet i didnt hear sh!t talk about kicking them out [again] or the cowboys..

so dont give us that BS because every sydney club has a rough period, we are just taking longer to recover because the damage done by the old board, chris anderson and stuart raper was so bad

you want to know why the Cowboys get larger crowds..look at the area you have to work with, your nearest rivals are in SEQ

Adelaide will never work, they just dont care for league, they are AFL and football only where as melbourne love sports, they dont even know what it is, during our game against your mob, they were explaining the rules for the whole game..

population isnt growing, facts or stfu..

there is that word again, "potential"..refer to my last post on "potential"

 

[Scarves]

You shouldn't axe an established team for a risk. An organisation should only axe a franchise if the subsequent option is better.

Yep Cronulla have been struggling, but I would be keeping them at Cronulla unless an established league area was screaming out for a team and proved to offer infinitely more than the Sharks. On this basis, in my view, relocating the Sharks to either the Central Coast or establishing a fourth Qld base would be the only moves I'd remotely consider.

Cutting the Sharks for a Perth team seems to me like we are just hoping a dot on the map in the West gives League new credibility.

 

[Martli]

yes Potential..im not going to move to the otherside of the world cause there is a potential to earn a decent income, why would an NRL team up and move to another state, ditching its current fans, based on potential..im glad your not the CEO of any club

Ever heard of colonialism, Vossy? The only reason the very country you live in is what it is today, is because people did just that; moved to the other side of the world because of the potential to make money. What a stupid thing to say.

 

[Vossy]

Ever heard of colonialism, Vossy? The only reason the very country you live in is what it is today, is because people did just that; moved to the other side of the world because of the potential to make money. What a stupid thing to say.

Nice to know you just compared the birth of a new nation to a sporting club, last time I checked they are totally different things, nice to know you just made an idiot of yourself

 

[Weaponhead]

Look, lets be honest here: The Sharks just don't have any prospects.

• They've had 43 years of winning bugger all.
• They represent an area with only about 200,000 residents, and support outside the Shire is almost non-existent (compared to teams like the Dragons and Rabbitohs, which have a lot of supporters outside their core areas). The population isn't growing either.
• Their players and coach are so dull to watch, they are pulling crowds that are consistently lower than just about every other NRL team

There are too many clubs in Sydney for them all to remain viable. The market isn't large enough. It stands to reason that the weakest will fold first, and the Sharks just don't have any growth prospects to justify keeping them in the competition when other areas - Perth, Adelaide, Central Coast, NZ, PNG - all have a LOT more potential.

I'm a Cowboys fan, and we haven't won a bloody thing ever either. The difference is that we regularly pull capacity crowds of 20,000-25,000 which is higher than any Sydney club. A lot of our fans even drive several hours to come to games.

Cronulla adds a maximum of 200,000 people to the Rugby League market. Perth would bring 1.5 million people, and Adelaide would bring 1 million. Axe them.

Lets check your assertions against some facts.

No prospects - It is well documented that Cronulla own their own ground plus adjacent land that is being redeveloped. If sucessful, this will bring a sustainable income to supplement the operations of the club. Few, if any NRL clubs have these assets. Until the developemnt is shown to be a failure then it is no reason to axe them.

43 Years and won bugger all - true. Souths and St George haven't won in a generation. Should they be axed too? The fact that Cronulla hasn't won anything means they have no bandwagoner fans.

Represent an are of 200k residents - close enough (actual figure is 219k). The northern beaches is 225k and eastern suburbs is 230k. Should they be axed too? Central Coast has 298k. Not much bigger really. Really if you are bagging Cronulla for havin a small area why are you not presenting the full picture?

Dull Team - In the past couple of years they haven't played great attacking football. This goes in cycles. In the late 90's - early 200's they played an attractive brand of football. If you judged teams by attractive football then the Canterbury teams of the mid 80's should have been axed yet they were extremely successful. Very poor reason to suggest axing a team.

Low Crowds dragging the rest of the NRL down - From the figures below you can see that they are in the lower middle ranking in terms of crowds. When the team is going well they tend to draw better like every other team. If they were dragging the NRL down they would run 16th every year. This is not the case. Don't let the facts get in the way of a convenient myth.

Year Rank
2000 3
2001 11
2002 7
2003 12
2004 10
2005 6
2006 10
2007 16
2008 11
2009 15



Bagging Cronulla is a fun pastime for many here with a lot of myths being thrown around. Every sporting league in the world has big teams and small teams. Clearly Cronulla are a small team but your assertions have not presented any compelling rationale to get rid of them. At present they fulfil the criteria required of an NRL team. Until they don't fulfil the criteria, you can expect them to stay exactly where they are.

 

[Gregbyday]

Even in the Cronulla they are getting less press.
This was on the back page of the local rag.

http://www.theleader.com.au/news/lo...alian-rules/women-power-into-afl/1727690.aspx

This Story with John Morris was 2 pages inside. Cronulla is now AFL country.

http://www.theleader.com.au/news/lo...hn-morris-manners-make-the-match/1728657.aspx

 

[Loudstrat]

Look, lets be honest here: The Sharks just don't have any prospects.

• They've had 43 years of winning bugger all.
• They represent an area with only about 200,000 residents, and support outside the Shire is almost non-existent (compared to teams like the Dragons and Rabbitohs, which have a lot of supporters outside their core areas). The population isn't growing either.
• Their players and coach are so dull to watch, they are pulling crowds that are consistently lower than just about every other NRL team

There are too many clubs in Sydney for them all to remain viable. The market isn't large enough. It stands to reason that the weakest will fold first, and the Sharks just don't have any growth prospects to justify keeping them in the competition when other areas - Perth, Adelaide, Central Coast, NZ, PNG - all have a LOT more potential.

I'm a Cowboys fan, and we haven't won a bloody thing ever either. The difference is that we regularly pull capacity crowds of 20,000-25,000 which is higher than any Sydney club.

:lol: Punt a club because their current roster is "dull"? Hows your forward pack? If it wasn't for Thurstons kicking game and the occasional flurry from Bowen, your mob would make a Union side look entertaining. Lets punt them.

BTW, Cronulla's attendance per head of population in the shire is almost 3 times greater than the Broncos.

A lot of our fans even drive several hours to come to games.

That's because the only competing entertainment up there is crock shooting and masturbating.

Cronulla adds a maximum of 200,000 people to the Rugby League market. Perth would bring 1.5 million people, and Adelaide would bring 1 million. Axe them.

How come Adelaide got such a piss poor crowd?

Learn the difference between 'population' and 'market'. For instance 150k people live in Townsville. If I opened up a snow chain hiring service up there I wouldn't have 150k customers ffs.

You shouldn't axe an established team for a risk. An organisation should only axe a franchise if the subsequent option is better.

Yep Cronulla have been struggling, but I would be keeping them at Cronulla unless an established league area was screaming out for a team and proved to offer infinitely more than the Sharks. On this basis, in my view, relocating the Sharks to either the Central Coast or establishing a fourth Qld base would be the only moves I'd remotely consider.

Cutting the Sharks for a Perth team seems to me like we are just hoping a dot on the map in the West gives League new credibility.

What he said.