Long Live Cronulla

[DRAGONZ_RULE]

It could be argued, that the diggest difference between the Wests Tigers and St. George Illawarra is that Balmain and Wests still both field seperate senior open-age teams in the NSW Cup competitions, the so the respective Balmain and Wests NRL records from 1908-1999 'belong' to the NSW Cup sides, with Wests Tigers having their own records since 2000.

St. George and Illawarra do not field seperate teams at a senior level, so it could be suggested that this qualifies the joint venture to assume the records of both the Dragions 1921-1998 and Steeleers 1982-1998. In my humble opinion, the only criteria St. George need to fulfill to officially incorporate the records from 1921-1998 into the merged teams records is endorsement and approval from the Steelers. If the Steelers agree to it then it becomes an internal club matter between the two joint-venture parties and if that issue is resovled the records from 1921-1998 should become officially part of the joint venture records.

I notice that the Gold Coast records from 1988-1998 are included in David Middleton's yearbook and is seperately listed on the same page beside the Titans records. I can't see how St. George Illawarra can't combine the St. George records from 1921-1998 with the joint team records and then list the Steelers records seperately beside it as the Titans have done.

If it's good enough for Gold Coast to have their full history of records listed in the yearbook I can't see why the Dragons can't have the same. After all, St. George make up half of the existing joint venture, whereas the old Gold Coast from 1988-1998 has not direct connection to the current Titans club.

And as Middleton has listed Gold Coast 1988-1998 records in his yearbook he leaves himself open to inconsistencies. For e.g. why isn't the Newcastle records in 1908-1909 also listed with the Knights records?

Thanks for the post, Bluebags.

Middleton's inconsistency - surely due in a large part to News Ltd directive, as he can't be that stupid, can he? - has never been in question.

I really do feel for the Illawarra supporters who basically lost their team .. they were f**ked over by the ARL vs Super League fight, and their only viable option for survival was to come under our wing.

But whilst they do have a right to be angry about the Steelers, they also have a right to not support the Dragons, a right which a large number of former Steeler fans exercised. A large number of ex-St George fans did likewise.

The overriding point is, however, that we did not join forces, so to speak. St George may well and almost definitely would have survived without becoming a JV club. Illawarra definitely would not have survived .. instead, they were subsumed by St George.

So whilst I do feel badly for former Steeler fans - such as the very passionate Jason Maher, who has commendably become a passionate Dragons supporter in the wake of the disaster he had to endure - ultimately the only people left saying that the post-1999 Dragons should not still have their 1921-1998 history are jealous Cronulla fans, the NRL and News Ltd (but they are one and the same, no?).

 

[Non Terminator]

Nope i showed the ywill classed a win for the stgeorge dragons and a win for stgeorge illawarra dragons , its a joint venture not a merger like the wests tigers are

Incorrect. Both clubs are joint ventures, it makes no difference. The fact is both are entirely new clubs. On the record books, you don't see each record being set by SGI players go into the SG books, only the SGI books.

 

[Non Terminator]

Well anybody claiming that the Dragon's history only dates back to 1999 because two entities merged, better also say that the NRL's history only dates back to 1998. ARL merged with Stupid League. If you don't, you are a hypocrite. You cannot have it both ways.

The St George Illawarra history begins in 1999, the St George history began in 1921 and Illawarra in the 80's.

Also, Steve Menzies cannot be credited with only being a one club man, as the NRL and channel 9 told us ad nauseum last season. So if you listen to the NRL and channell 9 when they say the Dragons were established in 1999, you must also say that Menzies cannot claim his 300 games with the one club.

You are actually very correct. Record books, he is a two club man, he played for Manly, and the other entity, the Northern Eagles.

It seems the NRL wants the best of both worlds. When it suits them to promote the game, Saints are a traditional team from 1921. When it doesn't suit, Saints have only been around since 1999. Sorry to bust your balloon (especially sardine supporters), but Saints next premiership will be their 17th premiership.
They wear the same jersey, same emblem, same home ground, same history.

But with Illawarra's entity involved, they are a completely different club, in the record books it will be a SGI premiership, nothing to do with SG.

How come the roosters aren't a new club. They changed their identity from the Eastern Suburbs roosters, to the Sydney Roosters. Using your crap argument, this means their history only dates back to recent times. Same goes for the Berries (sorry, Bulldogs).

Because those clubs never merged.

 

[Scott Gourley's Lovechild]

Yet club records and merchandise for the St George Illawarra Dragons starts from 1921. Statistics from 1982 onwards are considered to be part of the same club.

 

[Non Terminator]

I notice that the Gold Coast records from 1988-1998 are included in David Middleton's yearbook and is seperately listed on the same page beside the Titans records. I can't see how St. George Illawarra can't combine the St. George records from 1921-1998 with the joint team records and then list the Steelers records seperately beside it as the Titans have done.

If it's good enough for Gold Coast to have their full history of records listed in the yearbook I can't see why the Dragons can't have the same. After all, St. George make up half of the existing joint venture, whereas the old Gold Coast from 1988-1998 has not direct connection to the current Titans club.

And as Middleton has listed Gold Coast 1988-1998 records in his yearbook he leaves himself open to inconsistencies. For e.g. why isn't the Newcastle records in 1908-1909 also listed with the Knights records?

From what I know, the clubs wished for the Gold Coast Titans and Newcastle Knights to be seen as brand new identities. When two clubs merge, like Saints and Steelers did, the joint venture is a new identity, hence, the records for the clubs not individually playing in top grade are left alone.

 

[Non Terminator]

Yet club records and merchandise for the St George Illawarra Dragons starts from 1921. Statistics from 1982 onwards are considered to be part of the same club.

Club records for St George Illawarra begin in 1999.
I don't know what you're going on about.
Let's put an example.

Biggest win
ST GEORGE ILLAWARRA - 54-0 over Warriors in 2000
ST GEORGE - 91-6 over Canterbury in 1935

Merchandise, well, clubs change merchandise often.

 

[Scott Gourley's Lovechild]

Club records for St George Illawarra begin in 1999.
I don't know what you're going on about.
Let's put an example.

Biggest win
ST GEORGE ILLAWARRA - 54-0 over Warriors in 2000
ST GEORGE - 91-6 over Canterbury in 1935

Merchandise, well, clubs change merchandise often.

You seem to think that I am 100% against the Steelers. The fact of the matter is that the STGRLFC and the Steelers have decided that all records from 1921 will stand, and that records from 1982 will be included. Therefore, for statistical purposes the two clubs are considered to be one from 1921.

It is the NRL (actually, it's David Middleton) who has decided that facts start from 1999, not the clubs involved or the supporters.

 

[Non Terminator]

You seem to think that I am 100% against the Steelers. The fact of the matter is that the STGRLFC and the Steelers have decided that all records from 1921 will stand, and that records from 1982 will be included. Therefore, for statistical purposes the two clubs are considered to be one from 1921.

It is the NRL (actually, it's David Middleton) who has decided that facts start from 1999, not the clubs involved or the supporters.

I'm not talking in Middleton's eyes just for the record, although mate I see your point.
The fact remains is it's still an entirely new entity, St George Illawarra.

And for the record, it's nothing about my grudge of the club that's putting me to say it. If the St George Illawarra team win a premiership, it belongs to them, not the Illawarra Steelers and not the St George Dragons (as the entities they were).

 

[Scott Gourley's Lovechild]

I'm not talking in Middleton's eyes just for the record, although mate I see your point.
The fact remains is it's still an entirely new entity, St George Illawarra.

And for the record, it's nothing about my grudge of the club that's putting me to say it. If the St George Illawarra team win a premiership, it belongs to them, not the Illawarra Steelers and not the St George Dragons (as the entities they were).

No worries. Just trying to lay out the facts as they are, but there will always be confusion regarding merged entities. Something Queenslanders fail to understand with their endless forum posts about eradicating Sydney clubs.

 

[Non Terminator]

No worries. Just trying to lay out the facts as they are, but there will always be confusion regarding merged entities. Something Queenslanders fail to understand with their endless forum posts about eradicating Sydney clubs.

Exactly, we'll all have our opinions about it and I wasn't expecting to change yours at all. I do get your point though.
Sydney clubs will live on, we all know that, but there are about 50 other threads to say the exact same thing on.

 

[maestro1]

Non terminator

Where does it state that a team changing its name shall remain the same entity, whilst a merger/joint venture will be deemed a new entity. It is just peoples opinions, nothing more, nothing less. it all depends on where the persons loyalties lay.

A roosters supporter will of course not want their history to start again because they changed their name, but they will of course want the Dragons history to restart as it places them first to win a 1000 games and 2nd in premiership tallys.

You till haven't answered why the merger of the super league and the ARL does not restart Rugby league history in Australia. You cannot have it both ways.

You still haven't answered why the Charity Shield is promoted by the NRL as a traditional game between traditional rivals............WAITING

 

[Non Terminator]

Non terminator

Where does it state that a team changing its name shall remain the same entity, whilst a merger/joint venture will be deemed a new entity. It is just peoples opinions, nothing more, nothing less. it all depends on where the persons loyalties lay.

Well, for starters a joint venture is two entities joining to become a brand new entity. St George Illawarra, the obvious result, and the new identity of two former clubs.

A roosters supporter will of course not want their history to start again because they changed their name, but they will of course want the Dragons history to restart as it places them first to win a 1000 games and 2nd in premiership tallys.

We never merged with anyone.

You till haven't answered why the merger of the super league and the ARL does not restart Rugby league history in Australia. You cannot have it both ways.

You still haven't answered why the Charity Shield is promoted by the NRL as a traditional game between traditional rivals............WAITING

I didn't have to answer to everyone, but if you want.
Ah-hem. Clubs still are the same identity. I mean, NSWRL as well add to it. When the competitions merged, the clubs never changed their identities at all, none of them. Both inputted new parts of history.

And CS, well, how can I answer how the NRL promotes mate? It was a Dragons-Rabbitohs clash, yes. The only thing I can think of is the mascots never changed. In the record books, St George is always noted in 1998 and St George Illawarra in 1999.

And please don't write this WAITING crap. I don't have to answer to every single point, and I never said I was going to reply to every single thing you said.

 

[adamkungl]

Go and give yourself a goatse please.

lol. post of the year.

 

[maestro1]

of corse you don't have to respond to all posts, but you highlighted my comments, so i deemed we were into a friendly banter session.

i follow the dragons....established in 1921 and still playing out of kogarah and wearing the big red v. anybody who tries to disrespect that can go and get well and truly........

i'd expect the same from you if i tried to argue that the roosters have only been around since their name change. why is it a merger or joint venture that starts the new venture. why not a name change. answer: depends on who you follow and what you want to believe. who the f#rk is david middleton to rewrite history. who died and made him king. the nrl have proven they are hypocrites. the nrl were established in 1998, so using your argument, your roosters are a part of the nrl merger and therefore the roosters were established in 1998.

 

[Non Terminator]

of corse you don't have to respond to all posts, but you highlighted my comments, so i deemed we were into a friendly banter session.

Indeed, I am for all whom interested. That's what these forums are for.

i follow the dragons....established in 1921 and still playing out of kogarah and wearing the big red v. anybody who tries to disrespect that can go and get well and truly........

I am not disrespecting history. I am not that sort of person, for any club, whether I like or dislike them.

 

[maestro1]

isn't not recognising our clubs achievements, disrespecting it? .......

just a question.....

 

[redvscotty]

I haven't read ANY of the last page of replies purely because this is to be a full on Cronulla Sharks epic fail thread.

Carry on Shark hating.

 

[redvscotty]

As an avid Rorters hater, I would rather freddy fittlers team won the premiership than the Sharks get anything but the wooden spoon. Might be time to rename to the Cronulla Splinters.

 

[Surely]

I haven't read ANY of the last page of replies purely because .

You can't read when the post contains more than 3 words ?