haha thought not!
Lets all have a go, its terrible since the North shore lost an NRL team, losing it to netball is a travesty, how could we let them just walk in unopposed. You can't expect people to travel 25 minutes to watch a game in a surrounding suburb. We must have a team in every suburb or ice hockey will take over Sydney.
Fun isn't it? easy to make sweeping statements about how areas have been lost without given any facts to back up such claims. There's currently 10 teams play within an hour of the "North Shore" not like there isn't a choice for RL fans. If you are so p155 weak that you will jump to a rival code because you don't have an NRL side within 15minutes then your not much of a fan in the first place imo. You couldn't pay me enough to follow the Force despite RL neglecting my backyard for 15 years!
I'd say that the Bears being axed had as much an impact on Bears fans as the Reds being axed from Perth had on rugby league in Perth.
Kill off the club that you follow, kill off your interest in the game.
What does the amount of pacific islanders at the club have to do with turning us in to a quasi NZ team? You can not be serious ? /McEnroe. The entire junior RL is dominated by pacific islanders should every team play half their games in a country with less people than Sydney?
The club changed their name - just like Balmain and Canterbury. Remember Wests actually moved their base? Souths also picked up moved. We are still where we have been just with a name that is more appropriate for the 21st century NATIONAL rugby league instead if 20th century NSWRFL
You seriously expect me to continue paying for my season ticket which I've done for years and put my support in to a team I've done since I was child in to a hybrid Easts New Zealand team? C'mon now. I doubt the Kiwis would fully get behind it either.
I just find it interesting that you can support a team with so many New Zealanders yet lose two games year and share that side with New Zealanders and it offends you. I'm just curious - is it the idea of any change at all that offends you? That the best thing about the Roosters is that it hasn't changed up. Like do you think less of Souths for moving to Homebush? For instance, if something happened to the SFS and they had to play at Homebush, would that offend you?
I'm just curious because you admit that changes had to be made to fit in with the 21st century NRL but there's still 9 more decades to go. Anything could happen.
Flip it's well thought out mate, thinking out of the box and all that, but I don't like it. If you're gonna have a team in southern NZ, then it should be a new franchise, I like the name Southern Orcas. The Sharks should go into NSW Cup and be joined with the Storm as they are now, and unfortunately I feel that the Rabbitohs should join them and help out the WA Reds.
Will Sharks supporters follow their team in NSW cup? Probably but nowhere near as much as what they do now.
It would have the same effect as a full relocation.
-There are not too many teams in Sydney. Sydney is the biggest market in Australia, the birthplace and spiritual home of the NRL, and as such it has a right to be over represented in the club mix.
You state that there aren't too many teams in Sydney but then admit it has a right to be over-represented.
- The NRL admin has no problem with crowds, crowds were not identified as a problem in the state of the game report,
The state of the game reports, like any annual report from any sporting body is a puff piece of PR.
Their critical assessment on these matters is of course held privately. To announce in public any negative statement is bad management.
-The NRL admin also does not support any more mergers or relocations unless there are extreme extenuating circumstances. These ventures are commercially risky and no-one really wins. The NRL/ARLC learned from the existing mergers and the northern eagles and souths debacles and thankfully now supports cautious, supported, viable expansion. This doesn't happen overnight.
They've ruled out full relocation but not mergers (an inter-sydney merger still maintains the current club presence). They also have not ruled out a partial merger as I've suggested (which also maintains the current club presence).
-Canberra and the GC are just as financially shaky as the usual smaller sydney club targets on here (Sharks, Panthers). How come we don't hear too much about that?
Canberra is probably the smallest media market in the league after North Qld. It is always going to struggle. The question is - do we want a permanent presence in Canberra? If the Raiders were axed, the NRL would find it hard to get that groundwork back - hence why its not as discussed.
Titans are struggling due to ticket prices and lack of marketing for a new club. Really, just bad management.
- No one region/city/bid/club that is currently not in the NRL has an inalienable right or entitlement to entry into the competition over each other and, particularly over existing clubs. It needs to be earned.
True but the attitude of clubs need to shift from their own self interest to the interest of the game.
