More support for 16th club!

[DIEHARD]

Extra team to mean shorter season - By Steve Mascord - April 9, 2004

NRL players will win their long battle for a shorter domestic season if a 16th team is added for the 2006 competition.

National coach Wayne Bennett and Test players Darren Lockyer and Danny Buderus broke ranks with officials at Thursday's launch of the representative season in Sydney, each speaking out against the excessive demands on the game's stars.

When Buderus was asked if he was looking forward to playing for Country Origin - which would be unlikely since players involved in the April 23 Test against New Zealand are exempt - he said: "Yes, but something has got to be done about finding a balance with all these games."

Lockyer said: "When these games are organised, no one asks us what we think. We think it's a bit too much but no one seems to be listening."

Bennett called on the NRL to write a shorter season in to its next television deals.

But NRL chief executive David Gallop last night confirmed clubs had last week reached a consensus that a 22-round season was desirable if Gold Coast, Central Coast or Wellington joined the premiership in 2006.

"I think the bell is ringing loud and clear after 19 players withdrew from last year's Kangaroo tour," Gallop said. "There is nothing in our current television contracts which stipulates we must have 26 rounds or 24 games.

"We asked the clubs for their thoughts on the impact of the number of teams on the competition structure . . . and there was a general belief that fewer games was desirable."

Bennett said he was surprised by Gallop's words. "I hope David can deliver on that," he said.

The ARL has unveiled a registration system under which every player in the country is given a number for life. Numbers one to 2000 are reserved for Australian internationals.

I think a move to a 22 round competition is a good move. We finally have a decent international schedule, that could be also bolstered by a trans-tasman test series and a great State of Origin. I want our players hungry. Playing from February to late November/December is insanity.

I hope they add a 16th club and it's a succes, paving the way for further clubs. I'm still hoping for the Gold Coast, we need more Queensland Origin players and we need another QLD club to help win the battle against the Fitzroy Lions.

Judging by Gallop's comments we have conquered the toughest challenge to an extra club, support from the NRL clubs. They seem to support the move.

Good News!

 

[Not so silent Bob]

You make an excellent point diehard.

Less games would equal bigger intensity for test matches and SOO matches.

Can't wait.

 

[Briza]

My Ideal Comp would be 17 Rds in an 18 team comp(each team playing everybody once), SOO best of 3, one test V NZ, one test V GB - then a Tri Series decider for world Champions.

 

[t-ba]

Gallop, the National Coach and some High Profile players do not represent 'the clubs'. Gallop will always be on the News Limited leash and Coaches and players don't have enough power to force their executives to support the move.

I'd love to see it happen, but don't infer to much into the article. The clubs are far too greedy and would probably only agree if the club footed its own bills and didn't disturb their cut of the Club grant pie.

 

[League Freak™]

What I would like to see:

The NRL add the Gold Coast, central Coast and Wellington for 2006.
(Wellingting get their players from NZ, the Gold Coast fight over the rest).

18 teams in 22 rounds.

A one week break in the middle of the season for players (I mentioned this in an article I wrote for League Unlimited).


A Tri Series between Australia, New Zealand and a Combined Pacific islands side to pick of the slack.

 

[dimitri]

My Ideal Comp would be 17 Rds in an 18 team comp(each team playing everybody once), SOO best of 3, one test V NZ, one test V GB - then a Tri Series decider for world Champions.

i totally agree with you and have been saying this for quite a while

*it allows for cc, gc and wellington to gain entry

*it provides the right mix of club footy and international footy without putting too much of a burden on the players

*it is much fairer that each team plays each other the same amount of times

*more focus put on international footy

 

[DIEHARD]

nospam49, I agree Pacific Isles should be involved. But why on earth replace Great Britain with Pacific Isles? What do you propose they do? Sit around and twiddle their thumbs?

I'd like to see the current Tri Nations supplimented by a pacific tri series with Pacific Isles v PNG v possibly the Australian Aboriginals or Australia A.

With a decreased domestic season, we need to add at least something to keep the players who aren't competing in the Tri Nations busy. And the fans will demand football!

I agree bring in Central Coast or the Gold Coast and the other two. 18 teams is the number of teams we want!

 

[Briza]

My Ideal Comp would be 17 Rds in an 18 team comp(each team playing everybody once), SOO best of 3, one test V NZ, one test V GB - then a Tri Series decider for world Champions.

i totally agree with you and have been saying this for quite a while

*it allows for cc, gc and wellington to gain entry

*it provides the right mix of club footy and international footy without putting too much of a burden on the players

*it is much fairer that each team plays each other the same amount of times

*more focus put on international footy

I think it's a brilliant Idea, in shortening the regular season it would help in keeping people like Andrew Johns,Tallis,Lokyer etc etc from putting too much pressure on the body and prolong everyones career. It would mean less injuies which would insure that all rep teams could field their strongest possible sides, more Internationals would mean more exposure for Rugby League.

And the one thing which I hold strongly is that $$ is ruining the game, LOYALTY is seen with maybe 3-4 players in the comp. and lowering the amount of NRL games played may lower the amount of $$$ being thrown around ATM?

 

[MTK]

Whatever happened to the argument of there not being enough players to go around?

Its an argument I tended to agree with at the time. Souths, Balmain, Cowboys, Magpies, Crushers, Rams, Mariners, Chargers, Reds could not field competitive teams.

At least now the bottom half of the ladder are quite competitive with each other.

 

[DIEHARD]

I'm sure we can dig up enough players for one more club. We do lose alot of players over seas. I'm sure new teams can tap into local talent, sign players that would normally go overseas and sign players that get squeezed out of their club cause of the cap.

 

[League Freak™]

nospam49, I agree Pacific Isles should be involved. But why on earth replace Great Britain with Pacific Isles? What do you propose they do? Sit around and twiddle their thumbs?

I'd like to see the current Tri Nations supplimented by a pacific tri series with Pacific Isles v PNG v possibly the Australian Aboriginals or Australia A.

With a decreased domestic season, we need to add at least something to keep the players who aren't competing in the Tri Nations busy. And the fans will demand football!

I agree bring in Central Coast or the Gold Coast and the other two. 18 teams is the number of teams we want!

First of all.....its not the job of Australia or New Zealand to carry GB's arse around.


They are a train ride from France. They are a plane trip from Russia. They possibly have more opponents avalible to them then Australia does in the South Pacific.


The RFL is big enough and ugly enough to take care of itself. The Pacific Islands arent.


We need to ditch these stupid series that mean nothing and build a true international calander.


A series between Aus, NZ and PI would not only create great interest, it would helpo develope the game in a HUGE way, it would allow so many creative stars to represent their true nations and it nwould create a 4th super power in an instant.

 

[DIEHARD]

It would create a super power in an instant. But I still want Great Britain in the series. France and Russia can't cut it against GB. Aus v NZ v GB is the way to go currently. Possibly with the addition of PI and France, but then it's basically a mini world cup, something we don't want.

Australia playing the British Lions is highly marketable. They are the old enemy. And playing Australia on a regular basis will bring back the old fire. I'd prefer Lions tours though...

 

[League Freak™]

Its not marketable in Australia.

Not only wiould the Pacific Islands be more marketable in Australia, they would be extremely marketable in NZ and that not even mentioning the Pacific Islands themselves!


Great Britian need to work on their side of the world. Heck, how can they keep asking for handouts in the form of Tour games when they havent even expanded the game at the top level; beyond one expansion club in London that is only just surviving!

It now looks like England A will pull out of the Europan Cup too. How does that help matters in the NH?


If GB is so commited to the Tri series, maybe they should drag their sorry arses down to Australia and New Zealand for a chnage. get down here....get your arse kicked, go home and will bring in the Pacific Islands a year laters because they will be more competition then GB will be.


Thats the way I see it. Im sick of England getting a free bloody ride. They ride the coat tails of Australia and New Zealand and yet they REFUSE to do anything to help themselves.

 

[knights04]

15 teams is enough. The bye is handy for each team so they can have a rest during the season. The rounds still should be cut back to 22 or 23.

 

[MTK]

the Pacific Islands be more marketable in <snip> the Pacific Islands themselves!

They may have fans, but not have fans with the money to spend on merchandising / pay tv etc.

It's ok for the NRL to send the occaisional player their as a training camp, but I'll eat my hat if I ever see a team there given decent backing from the hierarchy.

I would like to see it, though. Would be great to watch. Oops, this is starting to sound like the Super League vision! :shock: :lol:

 

[t-ba]

Some Parts of the vision, like the Cable TV, were absolutely tops.

It's execution and much of it (Northern Eagles? South-Western Bulldogs, Sydney Tigstertohs?, 1 team in SE Queensland?) Were attrocious.

 

[Tupac Shakur]

Central Coast.

 

[bluesbreaker]

Whatever happened to the argument of there not being enough players to go around?

Its an argument I tended to agree with at the time. Souths, Balmain, Cowboys, Magpies, Crushers, Rams, Mariners, Chargers, Reds could not field competitive teams.

Erm, what super league were you watching?

Runner up world club champions and moved to Melbourne and took the premiership out with basically the same team.

The only reason the Mariners weren't successful was because the hunter is simply a 1 team town.

Edit: Mariners beat everyone in superleague except Cronulla and Canterbury, not a bad showing.

 

[Alan Shore]

This is great news! An ideal competition would involve 18 clubs:

1. Nth Qld
2. Brisbane
3. Melbourne
4. Auckland
5. Canberra
6. Adelaide
7. Perth
8. Easts
9. Cronulla
10. Illawarra Dragons
11. Parramatta
12. Penrith
13. Canterbury
14. Wests
15. Newcastle
16. Manly
17. Souths
18. CC Bears

 

[DIEHARD]

Sunshine Coast Dolphins
Brisbane Broncos
Brisbane United
Gold Coast
North Queensland Cowboys

Five teams, thank you very much.