That raises an interesting point....how will they determine whose home game is used? I am assuming the “home” team earn more from the event?
None of the Knights, Warriors, Storm, Titans, or Cowboys better have one of their home games taken away from them unwillingly for this or I'll be pissed, and their fans'll have every right to be furious as well.
They can't take one of the Raiders home games away cause the Raider lease for Raiders HQ and Bruce stadium is contractually reliant on all 12 of our home games being played in Canberra, so the Raiders would be in breach of their contract if one of their home games was taken away from Canberra.
We've been through this before with the NRL and ACT government and it always comes to a stalemate when the government says that they'll wave the clause if either the NRL agrees to play a rep game in Canberra to make up the difference or if the Raiders agree to play an exhibition game of equal standing to the NRL game that is being taken on the road, at which point the NRL refuses to take a rep game to Canberra and the Raiders say they'd be happy to take the game on the road and play the exhibition game but only if the NRL funds it cause they never planned to take the game on the road in first place and will be out of pocket if they have to schedule the exhibition game on top of their regular season because of taking a game on the road as a favour for the NRL, at which point the NRL refuses to fund the exhibition game as well and gives up completely on trying to get a Raiders game moved out of Canberra.
So the Raiders almost certainly won't be negatively effected by this, so I don't really care, but good luck to the other clubs that could be seriously negatively effected by this.
