Changes at the Dragons.

[1st & 10]

Here is how you get there:
5 Sydney super Clubs
Inner Sydney - Easts/Souths
Southern Sydney - STGILL /Cron
Northern Sydney - Manly/Central Coast
Inner West - West Tigers/Bulldogs
Western Sydney - Parra/Penrith

Brisbane
Melbourne
Gold Coast
North Queensland
New Zealand
Canberra
Newcastle

Later could look at PNG and Perth.

Sorry Shero mate

"Southern Sydney - STGILL /Cron"

Never. Cannot happen. Winners don't use drugs ..... oh wait !!

Oh well, still never

Cheers mate

 

[Carlton]

Keep it up Sheridan this is an issue that should be on the top of our worry list as I think it is unfortunately already in play.

One of the misnomers put forward by people who don't think relocation/merger is a possibility is that fans are only those that attend games. This is a digital age and fans can view games without actually being there. In fact this is the majority of fans. These are the fans the media wants because they see the advertising during the broadcast.

If a team is relocated the number of fans who then can't attend a game compared to the number that are still able to watch it is minimal. Relocating may upset a number of fans in the short term but the majority who do not attend games but watch the broadcast will more than likely stay fans.

Increasing the percentage of the fans that attend games does not lead to a significant sustainable increase in game attendance. What needs to increase is the actual fan base so that you are able to fill grounds/stadiums. This is why teams like the Swans, Broncos and NFL teams do well.

Rugby League is tribal and so is every other sport but your tribe is no longer the people that live in your village they now include people 5000km away communicating via social media. The physical location is no longer the defining factor.

For the record I don't want the Dragons relocated, but unless we accept there are really no insurmountable obstacles for it to happen and that financially it is attractive we will wake up one day and it will be all done and dusted.

 

[Mr Red]

I'm of the view that the NRL isn't all that uncomfortable with this state of affairs. They want less teams in Sydney but are generally blocked by the Clubs.If the Clubs are reliant on the NRL then imo this will fit in the NRL's Super League plan.

Agree
It's a lot easier to remove a club or force a club to merge if they fall on their own sword financially rather than the NRL look like they are forcing a club out for no apparent reason.

 

[Sheridan Stand]

Keep it up Sheridan this is an issue that should be on the top of our worry list as I think it is unfortunately already in play.

One of the misnomers put forward by people who don't think relocation/merger is a possibility is that fans are only those that attend games. This is a digital age and fans can view games without actually being there. In fact this is the majority of fans. These are the fans the media wants because they see the advertising during the broadcast.

If a team is relocated the number of fans who then can't attend a game compared to the number that are still able to watch it is minimal. Relocating may upset a number of fans in the short term but the majority who do not attend games but watch the broadcast will more than likely stay fans.

Increasing the percentage of the fans that attend games does not lead to a significant sustainable increase in game attendance. What needs to increase is the actual fan base so that you are able to fill grounds/stadiums. This is why teams like the Swans, Broncos and NFL teams do well.

Rugby League is tribal and so is every other sport but your tribe is no longer the people that live in your village they now include people 5000km away communicating via social media. The physical location is no longer the defining factor.

For the record I don't want the Dragons relocated, but unless we accept there are really no insurmountable obstacles for it to happen and that financially it is attractive we will wake up one day and it will be all done and dusted.

Smart post Carlton.

Any fan who thinks saints are safe because of "our history" or "our brand" or "our following in the country" are living in the past.

I wish it was true and sometimes I think it is because it helps me sleep but as my dad warned me a lot of jealousy stemmed out of the 11 in a row and many would love to see the big red V fall apart.

We did the right thing joining Illawarra and with a great and smart progressive Board we would have become a powerhouse again.

Sadly the opposite happened and now we are sitting ducks - they let Souths go (and though less powerful also newtown and norths).

Supporters have to fight and we have to fight now to save our club let alone worrying about if McGoose can even put an attacking move together.

 

[Carlton]

I agree 100% Sheridan.

There are big picture issues for the club and there are smaller but still annoying problems like our "coach". We shouldn't forget about the smaller problems because they affect the big picture but sometimes I think as fans we avoid the major issues.

We all have heard about management problems, financial issues, poor reputation with player managers and players, falling crowds, poor coaching, RGRV etc.

All these things feed into our long term future and if we pretend we are untouchable and the same powerhouse club we were in the sixties then that long term future is going to be pretty bleak. Do an honest SWOT analysis of our club and we are not looking good for maintaining our identity as it is, we look great for relocation though.

 

[_Johnsy]

Theres a thing called internet... google search buddy.
All the information u need is available at ur finger tips.

Translated to, "Ummm I've got SFA to back up a claim I made. In short I'm full of it."

Thanks for the clarification Doc.

 

[Gareth67]

Carlton and Sheridan Stand , both of your posts have been most informative , looking at the big picture , so to speak , from a different perspective . You are certainly correct as to the fans viewing from great distances , state wide , anywhere in Australia .

If you follow the Dragons , anywhere is not too far , by whatever means available .
And i am sure that the NRL views St.George Illawarra supporters the same as any other club , as NRL supporters , not as a supporter of a particular team .

If a team is not able to stand on its own , without continuing financial support by the NRL, regardless of the
circumstances , they will make a decision one way or another to stop the drain of funds from its ( NRL ) coffers .

Naturally that would be a worst case scenario , however unless the Dragons current Board changes their way of doing business , it may very well become reality .

 

[Carlton]

Gareth67 said "Naturally that would be a worst case scenario , however unless the Dragons current Board changes their way of doing business , it may very well become reality ."

That's exactly right, it is looking towards the pessimistic end of the spectrum of outcomes but it is plausible.

To avoid this outcome the underlying problems of the board and management need to be fixed. Personally I don't believe they are performing their duties as officers of the club and are not acting in a manner that satisfies the constitutional purpose of the club.

Gareth67 said "And i am sure that the NRL views St.George Illawarra supporters the same as any other club , as NRL supporters , not as a supporter of a particular team ."

I think you are spot on with this statement, the NRL don't have any soft spot for the Dragons and just see us fans as part of the Rugby League supporter base.

 

[Dragon Revival]

PNG is a poor choice and Perth has already failed along with Adelaide. We should just let the current teams settle down as there are already enough problems with clubs and players for the NRL to handle. The Gold Coast has already flopped three times and will do so again as the overall NRL club governance is poor and the standard of Club
Boards is pathetic especially so of the Dragons. Doust, Lockwood, Robinson and co should resign in shame.

 

[2010]

The only change we need is the coach, we have, on paper a team that should do well with the right coach and a firm plan to blood Dufty and co sometime next season, you can't just buy a premiership you need a strong investment in our juniors,

 

[The Doc]

Translated to, "Ummm I've got SFA to back up a claim I made. In short I'm full of it."

Thanks for the clarification Doc.

Yeh cool story dude...
What it actually means is, if ur one of these "prove it... prove it" people then i got no time for you.
I dont need to find the figures to prove anything or back anything up.
Iv seen it, if u want to dispute my claim, then how about u find the facts to prove me wrong.

 

[_Johnsy]

Yeh cool story dude...
What it actually means is, if ur one of these "prove it... prove it" people then i got no time for you.
I dont need to find the figures to prove anything or back anything up.
Iv seen it, if u want to dispute my claim, then how about u find the facts to prove me wrong.

Makes a claim, cannot back it up.

I'm guessing you prescribe to the theory that

 

[The Doc]

Makes a claim, cannot back it up.

I'm guessing you prescribe to the theory that

Again... cool story dude.
I dont need to back any claim i make.
If you think my claim is in-correct... then its on you to prove me wrong.
I dont care if you need a link and source for every comment made, i made my claim, either prove me wrong, or accept my claim and get over your "prove it" little sook.

 

[Old Timer]

Makes a claim, cannot back it up.

I'm guessing you prescribe to the theory that

Johnsy
Remember this post you sent to me in The November 1 Thread


"I've been on this forum since it's inception.

There has always been numerous posters who post as if they have inside info. Many do have inside info, but that info does not often eventuate (by default is wrong & yet not held to account as Jon moz has). Many have asked for additional info/sources, but say they cannot reveal, which is understandable. I've never met John moz, but for some reason it's obvious that you've taken exception to his post (whereas many have done the same thing while you've been on JA) & yet your response is never as aggressive as it has been in this post. To be honest mate, it doesn't paint you in a complementary light, & it's the only time I've seen you do it, so i can only summise that there is something else going on, or he's run over your cat ;-)"

So you can't have it both ways or can you?

 

[_Johnsy]

Johnsy
Remember this post you sent to me in The November 1 Thread


"I've been on this forum since it's inception.

There has always been numerous posters who post as if they have inside info. Many do have inside info, but that info does not often eventuate (by default is wrong & yet not held to account as Jon moz has). Many have asked for additional info/sources, but say they cannot reveal, which is understandable. I've never met John moz, but for some reason it's obvious that you've taken exception to his post (whereas many have done the same thing while you've been on JA) & yet your response is never as aggressive as it has been in this post. To be honest mate, it doesn't paint you in a complementary light, & it's the only time I've seen you do it, so i can only summise that there is something else going on, or he's run over your cat ;-)"

So you can't have it both ways or can you?

I clearly remember OT, context helps. The difference between the two scenarios is, being my quote that you've quoted is based on people discussing rumoured signings and inside info relating to possible appointments at the club.

Doc made up a claim to bolster his argument. In short he lied, if he cannot back it up, that fine, just be man enough to just say I cannot back it up.

I don't want it both ways, i just asked if could back up a claim he made, not a difficult concept.

 

[_Johnsy]

Again... cool story dude.
I dont need to back any claim i make.
If you think my claim is in-correct... then its on you to prove me wrong.
I dont care if you need a link and source for every comment made, i made my claim, either prove me wrong, or accept my claim and get over your "prove it" little sook.

So it's a no then.

 

[Willow]

In any debate when someone is stating figures or historical events, the onus of proof is on the person making those claims. When you make a claim, you take responsibility for it.

If challenged, it becomes your responsibility to prove your point and convince others that the data is correct.

Now, you can relinquish that responsibility at anytime, walk away from the debate if you wish. But you cannot continue the debate by telling others to prove you wrong. As soon as you have done this, you have essentially lost the debate.

 

[The Doc]

In any debate when someone is stating figures or historical events, the onus of proof is on the person making those claims. When you make a claim, you take responsibility for it.

If challenged, it becomes your responsibility to prove your point and convince others that the data is correct.

Now, you can relinquish that responsibility at anytime, walk away from the debate if you wish. But you cannot continue the debate by telling others to prove you wrong. As soon as you have done this, you have essentially lost the debate.

Wow... just wow... that is the dumbest thing iv heard.
If i state a fact, and someone says its wrong, the onus is on me to prove its true?
This aint the 1950's, if you claim someones info is wrong, then prove it!!!
The onus is on the person claiming the info is wrong to prove so.
But its all good willow, keep jumping in and acting like a know it all, i have absolutely no issue with putting u in ur place time and time again.

 

[The Doc]

So it's a no then.

Hahaha what it is is this, if u claim my info is incorrect, THEN PROVE ME WRONG!!!
I really cant make it any more simple....
I dont have to prove u wrong, its u thats claiming im wrong.
Prove me wrong or walk along and just give up.

 

[_Johnsy]

Hahaha what it is is this, if u claim my info is incorrect, THEN PROVE ME WRONG!!!
I really cant make it any more simple....
I dont have to prove u wrong, its u thats claiming im wrong.
Prove me wrong or walk along and just give up.

I understand that the question I asked is very complex. I didn't say you were wrong, all I did is ask "do you have anything resembling a fact to back up your claim". I thought it was pretty straight forward, a simple No would have done the job.

I'm guessing all the hot air billowing from your gob makes you a tad confused.