What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Let the NRL know our frustrations

ali

Bench
Messages
4,962
Despite many of us having differing opinions on how we should go about improving international Rugby League, in general we are all in agreeance that to move the game forward, Internationals must be given a greater priority.

So with the future of International RL currently being brought up in the media by Mascord and then Lockyer, now is the time to get in cotact with the NRL to back them up.

Obviously I know the NRL doesn't run International League, but for International RL to go forward, the NRL may have to take a slight step backward. So its crucial they take a more outward looking approach.

Instead of so many of us wasting our time giving our opinions on here, on what is pretty much a fruitless exercise, go to www.nrl.com.au, click on contact us, which is down the bottom of the page, and send your opinion on the future of international RL to the NRL.
 
Messages
3,296
Good point Ali, but I've been there and done that. Didn't even get the courtesy of a response.

The NRL to listen to the fans, that would be a novel idea! The sad reality is that, despite their advertising, money (ie TV broadcasting rights) dictates the future of the game. It wasn't for the fans benefit that they moved the Grand Final to a prime ratings period.
 
Messages
14,139
Good point Eskimo, but surely the NRL must see that Internationals involving the Roos in Australia are some of the highest rating games of the year. In Qld they usually rank 4th just behind the Origins unless the Broncos make the GF, and I'm talking about 4th overall, not just league and not just sport. I can't believe Nine haven't been at the NRL for more home Tests after all they obviously pushed hard for the Sunday GF when they realised the ratings potential.

The biggest stumbling block in shortening the season is the clubs. They will fight against any reduction in home games and therefore gate receipts (except maybe the clubs that make a loss on the gate??). But the fans are probably on side, at least the REAL supporters are and I'm pretty sure the players will be and now it seems the media might back us as well.

We've seen Lockyer, Daniel Anderson, Steve Mascord and Ray French all push for more internationals and I'm pretty sure the likes of Wayne Bennett and Tony Butterfield would agree along with most of the players, especially the top rep players.

Things are starting to happen and we may have the UWC to thank (that sounds SO stupid...) for getting RL people thinking about the potential of our game internationally.
 

ali

Bench
Messages
4,962
Eskimo Sharkie said:
Good point Ali, but I've been there and done that. Didn't even get the courtesy of a response.

The NRL to listen to the fans, that would be a novel idea! The sad reality is that, despite their advertising, money (ie TV broadcasting rights) dictates the future of the game. It wasn't for the fans benefit that they moved the Grand Final to a prime ratings period.

Obviously they can't reply to everything, but I have sent numerous messages to the NRL over the years and would guess I get a reply 2 thirds of the time.
 

JJ

Immortal
Messages
33,326
I don't agree that internation league is critical - League is only a big sport in NSW, Qld and certain parts of England. It's hardly an international sport.

But - it is true that the NRL doesn't help. More to the point though, English clubs have done more harm to international league than the NRL could possibly do in their wildest dreams. Kiwi players based in the UK are only ever released for tests after endless fighting. To the point that the only players in recent times that Kiwi selectors have bothered trying to recruit have been the PAul brothers - who generally fly out the day before the game - hardly an ideal preparation. Surley players like Craig Smith, Joe Vagana, and now Logan Swann etc should be considered for Kiwi teams?
 

ali

Bench
Messages
4,962
JJ said:
I don't agree that internation league is critical - League is only a big sport in NSW, Qld and certain parts of England. It's hardly an international sport.

But - it is true that the NRL doesn't help. More to the point though, English clubs have done more harm to international league than the NRL could possibly do in their wildest dreams. Kiwi players based in the UK are only ever released for tests after endless fighting. To the point that the only players in recent times that Kiwi selectors have bothered trying to recruit have been the PAul brothers - who generally fly out the day before the game - hardly an ideal preparation. Surley players like Craig Smith, Joe Vagana, and now Logan Swann etc should be considered for Kiwi teams?

Completely agree. But would Adrian Morley be released in the reverse situation? The ESL tend to follow the NRL in a lot of areas. The English RFL understand the importance of internationals, is just the clubs and some chairmen that are the problem. If we can win over the NRL, then the Super League clubs and Super league administration shouldn't be far behind.

If the NRL is shortened to 22 rounds, the SL may follow.
 

dimitri

First Grade
Messages
7,980
why shorten it to 22 rounds?

then each team would be playing each other 1.192576372 times



why not just have every team plays each other once
 

The Observer

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
1,742
dimitri said:
why shorten it to 22 rounds?

then each team would be playing each other 1.192576372 times

why not just have every team plays each other once

Once the clubs start averaging crowds of 25,000, they may consider shortening the season by a few rounds. Given the state of the game's finances, the clubs probably won't even consider shortening the competition. In fact, David Gallop saids he was wary of getting away from the home and away ideal, which is fair enough for many reasons.

In the UK, a SL chairman said that if RFL reduced the number of competition rounds of SL by 2, then each club would lose 100,000 pounds in revenue. That equates to a quarter of a million dollars. If the NRL reduces the length of it comp, how will they instantaneously make up the money?
 
Messages
14,139
SL clubs rely on gate receipts a lot more than NRL clubs do.

Pushing RL into other markets overseas is only goint to bring more money to the game in the long-run.

For Example: The NRL are worried that if the game takes off in America they will be able to offer NRL players huge amounts of money and they will all go like they have to England.
BUT there are two major problems with this assumption:
1 - Strong American support for the game will pump money into the game in Australia as well as in the US, especially as we are THE elite competition in the world. and
2 - A stronger international game will be a greater incentive for keeping players in RL and in Australia, especially if the ARL rule applies that they must be NRL players. Sailor?rogers/Tuqiri/Harris etc. all suppoedly went to union coz they wanted to play in a strong international competition. Whether this is true or not, it means we need a better international competition ourselves. RU players could earn more money in Japan but most stay here so they can play Tests.

I don't know how we can get our message to the NRL/ARL but if the UWC is not a big enough wake-up call I don't know what will be.
 

The Observer

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
1,742
East Coast Tiger said:
SL clubs rely on gate receipts a lot more than NRL clubs do.

In the advent of the poker machine tax in NSW, NRL clubs are going to rely even more on gate receipts to survive.

I don't know how we can get our message to the NRL/ARL but if the UWC is not a big enough wake-up call I don't know what will be.

I agree with everything you've said about expanding the game, and RL should never have needed a "wake up call". However I don't think its a case of either club or country, and I don't think international RL supporters are going to get anywhere by suggesting a cut in club games.
 
Messages
14,139
Joker said:
East Coast Tiger said:
SL clubs rely on gate receipts a lot more than NRL clubs do.

In the advent of the poker machine tax in NSW, NRL clubs are going to rely even more on gate receipts to survive.

I don't know how we can get our message to the NRL/ARL but if the UWC is not a big enough wake-up call I don't know what will be.

I agree with everything you've said about expanding the game, and RL should never have needed a "wake up call". However I don't think its a case of either club or country, and I don't think international RL supporters are going to get anywhere by suggesting a cut in club games.

In that case we're f*cked then, coz we're not going to get to where we need to be without cutting club games.

And as far as the NSW tax, get rid of that merkin Carr and we shouldn't have a problem. He's got to go. Brogden understands the importance of club revenue and will be more likely to reduce the tax increase, especially if we lobby for it and it wins him office.

If NRL clubs want to increase revenue they have to look further afield than pokies, gate receipts and the same old sponsors. If they could only see the oportunities of promoting themselves in an overseas market. This has supposedly worked for the Storm through their links in Hong Kong and China. If they can't do this and compete in the NRL they probably shouldn't be there. If a Sydney club can't survive in the biggest RL market in the world and the biggest sponsorship market in Australia, they should consider some radical changes, Manly and Souths spring to mind.
 

The Observer

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
1,742
East Coast Tiger said:
In that case we're f*cked then, coz we're not going to get to where we need to be without cutting club games.

Not necessarily - while the number of games is an issue, they've played more in the past - indeed the RECENT past, read 2000/2001. In 2000, some rep players could have played up to 43 games. This year, there was a maximum of 30.

The much bigger issue is game density - particularly the debilitating effects of staging rep games (read City Country and State of Origin) mid season and asking players to back up from them.

Somehow getting back to a 14 team home and away competition would be a huge benefit psychologically for many teams as well. No clubs would need feel they were hard done by with the draw because they all get to play every other team twice. That is a big factor.
 
Messages
14,139
Yeah but it's not just about number of games rep players are playing it's a time matter. We play from Feb to Nov most years and NRL clubs start training between Nov and Jan leaving no time for more internationals or a proper rest betwen seasons.

Also if you want to spread the games out more during rep season to solve this game 'density' problem it will only make the season longer time wise.
 

The Observer

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
1,742
East Coast Tiger said:
Yeah but it's not just about number of games rep players are playing it's a time matter. We play from Feb to Nov most years and NRL clubs start training between Nov and Jan leaving no time for more internationals or a proper rest betwen seasons.

Also if you want to spread the games out more during rep season to solve this game 'density' problem it will only make the season longer time wise.

The elite international players would be playing between Feb/March-November. Your run of the mill FGer cold finish by the end of August if the season was restructured, allowing a good 5 months of rest and training.

The elite players that do participate in the full amount of games would get a rest of December and part of January still. They don't need to be involved in trial matches and elite rep players have often successfully skipped some of the pre season training to recuperate without too many ill effects because they have been conditioned by tough rep football.

Besides, its possible we are going to see more footballers do a Brad Thorn and take a year off in the middle. He was able to go from being a Kangaroo to an All Black, which is no mean feat, in a couple of years that way.

Even if career spans are getting shorter, this could be countered by paying the players more and bringing wages in RL in line with what players earn in other sports in this country e.g. RU, cricket and especially AFL.
 
Messages
14,139
Joker said:
East Coast Tiger said:
Yeah but it's not just about number of games rep players are playing it's a time matter. We play from Feb to Nov most years and NRL clubs start training between Nov and Jan leaving no time for more internationals or a proper rest betwen seasons.

Also if you want to spread the games out more during rep season to solve this game 'density' problem it will only make the season longer time wise.

The elite international players would be playing between Feb/March-November. Your run of the mill FGer cold finish by the end of August if the season was restructured, allowing a good 5 months of rest and training.

The elite players that do participate in the full amount of games would get a rest of December and part of January still. They don't need to be involved in trial matches and elite rep players have often successfully skipped some of the pre season training to recuperate without too many ill effects because they have been conditioned by tough rep football.

Besides, its possible we are going to see more footballers do a Brad Thorn and take a year off in the middle. He was able to go from being a Kangaroo to an All Black, which is no mean feat, in a couple of years that way.

Even if career spans are getting shorter, this could be countered by paying the players more and bringing wages in RL in line with what players earn in other sports in this country e.g. RU, cricket and especially AFL.

Where will th money come from to pay higherr wages? If we can afford this even with the new taxes, surely we can afford to return a few more weeks of NRL to internationals.

Why not at least reduce the NRL season every few years to allow for a major internationalseason, like a WC. If we stick with 26 rounds, but every fourth year cut back to 22 it would be a compromise.

I know people like to have a full home and away, but if we want more than 14 teams it can't happen. I really don't see the need for a full home and away season, it would be nice if possible, but this is not a factor that should get in the way of real beneficial growth and change in the game. If clubs want to complain about having to play certain teams twice or playing or certain teams once away and not at home, then these teams are obviously not very good. The top teams will win no matter who they play, where and how many times. If you want to win the premiership you'll have to win in all kinds of situations and every team has to play finals in Sydney anyway.
 

Jeffles

Bench
Messages
3,412
I've aired my thoughts on a shorter club season in another thread. 22 rounds is my preferred path.

If we wanted a decent international calendar and club season players could play up to 35 matches a year (19 club (take out 3 weeks for Origin camp) + 4 finals + 3 Origin + 3 pre season trials + 6 Internationals).

If players complain there must be a culture change. Clubs and rep sides may have to change selection policy and be mor willing to rest players. Or the players could put in more, risking injuries and shortening careers. It's about finding balance.

As far as money goes, there isn't much in RL. I think a shortened club season provides a good argument for stabilising pay for club players (since players would play less). This would have to be offset by renumeration for the players that do play rep matches (which they do now) not to mention the honour of rep football.
 

zulu

Juniors
Messages
1,350
dimitri said:
why shorten it to 22 rounds?

then each team would be playing each other 1.192576372 times



why not just have every team plays each other once

16 teams 22 rounds is perfect. It's what the AFL do and there's no problem. You play exatcly half the side's twice. We did it for years in the ARL when we had 16 teams. Remember? 16 teams 22 rounds, 3 origins a 3-match tests series? No worries.
 
Top