Gold Coast decision anger Wests Tigers

[LeagueXIII]

A combined average of 16,108 for Wests and Balmain. Wests Tigers average is 14,000. Now that the league has finally tried to equalise the comp with the salary cap and most clubs have a chance in games all crowds are up. What were the Roosters crowds?

Also once clubs have got their leagues clubs in order as the Roosters and Penrith have, it reflected in their football teams fortunes. Wests have developed their two clubs and Balmain are looking to redevelop theirs, I think Wests could handle the JV on their own no problem.

On the issue of amalgamation during the sixties the Auckland RL merged all their clubs into regional sides, it lasted 6 years before it fell apart and clubs went back to their original status. So in regards of clubs culture they just don't work went forced into mergers. Financially maybe but spiritually no, as of the 3 in Australia the N Eagles fell apart, St. George is really a take over of Illawarra and WT is often referred to as Balmain.

 

[Kurt Angle]

Step down from what?

A step down from being a RL team in the competition with the most prestige in the rea they represent.

Wynnum-Manly used to be a big deal in Brisbane.
It no way has the degree of prestige in Brisbane now.

The NRL has grown from the old Sydney premiership, and no other.

And that the cause of virtually all of the problems plaguing the expansion of RL in Australia.

SO in 1998, with all these 3 competitions for example, a national comp should of been started with the body handpicking select teams ?

The reality is the NRL represents a national competition of 16 teams.

The important part is the placement of these 16 teams.

If you started up a game called foo-ball which you wanted to make a national competition, and it had very similar rules to RL, and RL fans would be your supporters, would you put 12 of those teams in Sydney ?

No.

That's because the Sydney premiership was the strongest, wealthiest, and most popular.

All that should mean is it was the most capable vehicle to assisting the transition to a national competition.

IT should not be regarded from 1988 to eternity as the NSWRL comp with some add-ins.

It should be viewed as a national competition with that the goal in mind.

To witness a club like Wynnum-Manly go from an urban comp to a state wide comp, and use that to justify the death of a club elsewhere is like blaming Sir Frances Drake for the Asian Tsunami.

I didn't even infer that. What I am saying though is a club like Wynnum-Manly used to be a club with the highest prestige in RL in Brisbane.

It has now taken a backward step, with the Broncos obviously being the club of high prestige, and Wynnum-Manly being a tier below that.

Balmain, a club obviusly out of its depth when it comes the the requirements of a fully professional national competiton should also do the honourable thing and step aside to a tier below for the good of the game.

It can still exist, it can still play against rival foes. It should however be doing it in premier league only.

The club's not dead, no one killed it.

It has utterly NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with it!

I think if the Balmain Tigers take the NRL to court, it has everything to do with it.

 

[yappy]

Kurt as I've posted elsewhere the reason why Sydney has and always will have half of the comps teams is because it has half of the games market and money. 4.3 million people in the Sydney area dwarfs the whole of Queensland. To compare the prestige of the top flight in Brisbane to the old NSWRL comp is a joke. Sydney club Union has more prestige. You mightn't like it that Sydney has all the money and all of the population, but it does. Packer isn't offering $40mil in TV rights because the NRL rates in Wynnum. That's just cream. If League wasn't the no1 game in Sydney it wouldn't be worth a cracker no matter how popular in Brisbane and would have as many media moguls falling over themselves to hand over money as the A-league does. League without Sydney is nothing.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Agree totally. Why else do union and AFL always take pot shots at us. If it wasn't for Sydney they wouldn't bother. Weaken Sydney and see how much money we get, we compete with AFL because we have the crown jewel (ie. Sydney).

 

[Kurt Angle]

Kurt as I've posted elsewhere the reason why Sydney has and always will have half of the comps teams is because it has half of the games market and money. 4.3 million people in the Sydney area dwarfs the whole of Queensland.

8 teams plus St. George in a 15 team competition is the 'half' you're talking about yeah ?

To compare the prestige of the top flight in Brisbane to the old NSWRL comp is a joke. Sydney club Union has more prestige.

NSWRL had more prestige in Sydney than the QRL or whatever.

But I'm sure to most residents of Brisbane, the QRL was a big deal.
To the people of Brisbane, probably the most prestigious.

They've sacrificed all that for one club, the Broncos.

A much greater sacrifice than Sydney has made.

You mightn't like it that Sydney has all the money and all of the population, but it does.

I was born and raised in Sydney, I'm aware of that.
However we have 16 teams, 2 of which are select for Victoria and NZ.

That leaves 14 teams for the heartlands of 10 million people in NSW and Qld.

And it's about a 65/35% split.

However even under the new arrangment with 16 teams, Qld gets 21% of the teams.

Their RL heritage is just as rich as NSW's, but have sacrificed more and receive less.

Packer isn't offering $40mil in TV rights because the NRL rates in Wynnum. That's just cream. If League wasn't the no1 game in Sydney it wouldn't be worth a cracker no matter how popular in Brisbane and would have as many media moguls falling over themselves to hand over money as the A-league does. League without Sydney is nothing.

And League wouldn't get $40 million if it was just the Sydney competition.

$40 million dollars comes from the perceived value of viwers nation wide. That includes Qld sponsors.

League may be nothing with Sydney, but it's not a great deal more if it's Sydney and nothing else.

That is the idea behind expansion.

NSW and Qld used to pay money before, but back then it funded the NSWRL and QRL. The money from this funded 12 NSWRL teams an 10 or whatever QRL teams.

Hence, RL fans in Australia prior to 1988 funded 22(?) teams

Going national rationalised this to 14 teams in the modern era, with Victoria being an expansion project and NZ for similar reasons.

And out of these 14, Qld deserves more.

But instead we get this bitching by clubs such as Balmain (sure we can't afford it, and we hold the rest of the League back, but we were there from the beginning).

Balmain have never been killed, they've just been removed from the number one competition, as rightly so.

 

[super_coach]

look back with your heart--go forward with your brain--the joint venture after a few rocky years is starting to take shape,and has the potential to be the dominant club for the ten year--now weather wests are putting more money in than balmain dosnt worry me-what we need is a winning team.we could split up,but we would be both cellar dewllers again--just dosnt make sense--go forward and become the wests tigers,their a new generation of suporters who want you-and old ones who are growing to like you

 

[Kurt Angle]

I agree with Super Coach.

Out of the 3 JV's that occured, I think the West Tigers is shaping up as the best.

 

[gregstar]

I agree with Super Coach.

Out of the 3 JV's that occured, I think the West Tigers is shaping up as the best.

care to give reasons as to why it is shaping up as better than the dragons JV?

 

[LeagueXIII]

Because they win some games and have Benji, easily won over.

 

[gregstar]

hmmm....

wests tigers - played 135 won 49 drawn 3 lost 83
st george illawarra - played 169 won 84 drawn 5 lost 80

head to head
tigers - 3
dragons - 7

finals series
tigers - nil
dragons - 99', 01', 02' & 04'

rep players
tigers - here & there, now & then
dragons - sh*tloads

 

[yappy]

Great Kurt, we seem to agree on almost everything.
- I've posted elsewhere that I think Brisbane should have a second team so we agree that Qld is under-represented.
- We agree that Sydney should be about half. So if the comp were to expand beyond 16, then Sydney should continue to have about half, not forced relocations or mergers.
- You are absolutely right that a Sydney only comp is not worth anything like $40mil, but it would be worth vastly more than a Sydneyless comp, which would be begging the ABC to show it on Saturday afternoons and probably failing.

The point is that the comp evolved from the Sydney comp because it couldn't possibly have occured any other way. It's like imagining the AFL evolving from the SAFL and all of the Melbourne sides falling by the way to create one or two new teams. The fans would simply have ignored them. When the NSWRL invited the Broncos they were instantly popular, it wasn't that old clubs made sacrifices, it was that their fans chose another better option. If the QRL had invited a single Sydney side into the Brisbane comp in the 80's no one in Sydney would have even known - they'd be too busy going to watch their old sides, reading about them in the papers and watching them on TV. The new Sydney side wouldn't have lasted a week. Expansion has been good for everyone, I'm certainly not arguing against it, but calling what happened to the Brisbane comp a sacrifice is just silly. If Brisbane had been comparable in size and strength as Sydney it would have been different, but it isn't and won't be in our life time.

The Sydney teams that have been culled on the other hand is a very different matter. It was done artificially. The magic 'criteria' was nothing more than contrivance to ensure all of the Super League clubs survived and the Magic Number 14 has been shown to be nothing but a number plucked out of the air. The process was completely artificial with no relationship whatsoever to whether or not the teams culled had a future and could contribute to the future of the game. That is a great sacrifice, and for no good purpose. I'm not saying that old Sydney teams should be in no matter what. If they can't cut it and fall over, then so be it. What I am saying is that those that were artificially culled should have a chance. I know that Wests would thrive.

 

[Kurt Angle]

care to give reasons as to why it is shaping up as better than the dragons JV?

Mainly off field influences.

Logically it should of been the Norths-Manly merger.

The had the entire North shore with no real shared borders, plus an encroachment heading into the CC.

But both sides had petty, bickering tinpot empire builders who were determined to come out on top.

They'd both rather cut off their nose to spite their face, instead of building a North Shore Super club which should of had funding out of north sydney, and an organisation that would of had the credibility to hammer into RU at a grass roots level.

Now we have lost North Sydney, the lower north shore and just getting Manly back to strength.

With the St George/ Illawarra merger, because of it's financial strength, the St. george side appears to be very arrogant with it's treament of Illawarra and just causing all round dissent. It's a bridge that was built 6 years ago now, and it seems to be getting bigger.

Sure it has on field success, but the youth setup talent at their disposal causes that.

Why I think the West Tigers JV is coming along nicely is because both teams come into the venture on humble terms.

Wests were a prime target for the Bulldogs, Tigers for Eels. Initially their JV seemed an escape clause to get out what would of been takeovers.

Since then they really havent torn at the seems fighting each other to be a reincarnation of either side, they havent made their geographical split such a big issue.

They may not have a single identifiable "home" but I don't think that will be such a disadvantage. How they can work on this is sell their brand rather than their local identity, the Bulldogs have done this very well.

 

[Kurt Angle]

Great Kurt, we seem to agree on almost everything.
- I've posted elsewhere that I think Brisbane should have a second team so we agree that Qld is under-represented.
- We agree that Sydney should be about half. So if the comp were to expand beyond 16, then Sydney should continue to have about half, not forced relocations or mergers.

No, I don't think Sydney should get any more teams. The current level or even lose one, even with an 18 team comp would do.

- You are absolutely right that a Sydney only comp is not worth anything like $40mil, but it would be worth vastly more than a Sydneyless comp, which would be begging the ABC to show it on Saturday afternoons and probably failing.

Then that suggest the Sydney/non-Sydney elements need each other to get this $40 million figure, and that's what it's about in the end to ensure we have a 16 team elite fully professional competition.

The point is that the comp evolved from the Sydney comp because it couldn't possibly have occured any other way.

I said that, it was the most convenient vehcile to do this.

We need that becuase of our small population in highly urbanised areas. We can't have a 1 team-1 city model because we'd have a 6 team comp.

It's like imagining the AFL evolving from the SAFL and all of the Melbourne sides falling by the way to create one or two new teams. The fans would simply have ignored them. When the NSWRL invited the Broncos they were instantly popular, it wasn't that old clubs made sacrifices, it was that their fans chose another better option. If the QRL had invited a single Sydney side into the Brisbane comp in the 80's no one in Sydney would have even known - they'd be too busy going to watch their old sides, reading about them in the papers and watching them on TV.

If the sole sydney team in the brissy comp had the NSW SOO team they would.

The new Sydney side wouldn't have lasted a week. Expansion has been good for everyone, I'm certainly not arguing against it, but calling what happened to the Brisbane comp a sacrifice is just silly. If Brisbane had been comparable in size and strength as Sydney it would have been different, but it isn't and won't be in our life time.

No, but if the Brisbane comp had of been of equal size and equal power, and new national comp would of been created with equal representation of 8 teams each.

The issues we are experiencing are due to the fact most people see what we have as an extended Sydney comp, rather that the true altruistic purpose of a national competition.

The Sydney teams that have been culled on the other hand is a very different matter. It was done artificially.

I agree

The magic 'criteria' was nothing more than contrivance to ensure all of the Super League clubs survived and the Magic Number 14 has been shown to be nothing but a number plucked out of the air. The process was completely artificial with no relationship whatsoever to whether or not the teams culled had a future and could contribute to the future of the game. That is a great sacrifice, and for no good purpose. I'm not saying that old Sydney teams should be in no matter what. If they can't cut it and fall over, then so be it.

Yes, but I do believe some clubs be given a helping hand to ensure their survival over other if for the rgeater good of the game.

I.e I would of kept the WA reds in, and the Gold Coast should never have been cut in the first place.

What I am saying is that those that were artificially culled should have a chance. I know that Wests would thrive.

There is a good chance they would now. But we already have enough team in Sydney. The 16th team has to go to Qld for the good of the game.

And the prospective 17th and 18th should go elsewhere other than Sydney for the good of the game too.

 

[galahs]

I agree with Kurt_angle that the Sydney city district has enough teams.

With South Sydney moving to Homebush and deserting their loyal fans, and proving they really didn't make the criteria required by the NRL, they should be told to relocate to the Central Coast or be dropped from the NRL.

Wests Tigers need to also ditch Homebush, and play most of their games at Campbelltown with a sprinkiling of games kept at Leichardt.

The Illawarra region needs a better representation, so they need the same arangement as I propose for Wests. Most games at WIN, and a sprinkling at Kograh.

And if the team does expand to 18 teams in the future, it needs to be from other regional areas outside NSW like Perth, NZ South Island, Qld Sunshine Coast, South Australia, Port Morsbey etc.

But I think 16 teams is the right number for now and I wouldn't think of expansion until at least 2010.

What I would consider expanding is the 2nd tier competition where the winner of the NSW Premier League plays the winner of the Qld cup, and the State sides from SA, NT and WA in a round robbin tournament. This would help build ther profile in the developing states in the lower grades so they are ready in the future for a 1st grade side.

When AFL moved into SA, WA and Qld. They had already developed a very strong junior base to build onto.

 

[galahs]

What: Wests v Cronulla
Where: Campbelltown Sports Stadium, Leumeah
When: Next Fiday Night
Why: King of the Jungle vs the King of the Sea

Lets watch the Sharks die on dry land!!!