Participation grows in NZ for third year in a row

[Benny]

http://www.nrl.com/participation-gr...n-a-row/tabid/10874/newsid/70552/default.aspx

For the third year in a row, New Zealand Rugby League has seen an increase in registered player numbers. Since the 2009 review, the game has worked with its clubs and Zones to ensure that all players are registered and at the end of 2010 the NZRL reported an increase of 52% over the previous year with more than 24,000 registered players. Areas which had experienced significant increases at the time included Manawatu, Taranaki, and the upper North Island as a whole.

In December 2011 numbers were up again, a further 38% on the previous year’s total, taking registered player numbers to 33,500. Doyle said then that the most pleasing aspect of the increase was the number of young players coming into the game who would benefit from the new NZRL pathway.

Since then a number of NZRL programmes have become well established, including the Community Carnivals, the National Competition, Hearts and High Performance camps and elite youth teams, with players having a clear pathway to the highest levels of the game in NZ.

These and a number of initiatives which have seen more young people than ever playing the game at school, in conjunction with the National Secondary Schools tournament – 16 schools in 2011, and 24 schools in 2012 - are considered key to the continued growth of the game.

NZRL CEO Jim Doyle said “With better reporting and improved programmes now well established, we knew growth would slow so to see a further increase is very pleasing. Player numbers for the 2012 season were 35,788 (+7%) with the most positive growth again in the Mini-Mod (6-12 years) age group. That’s where you’d hope to find it, as more young people make Rugby League their sport of choice.
“We have development programmes for everyone from our players to coaches, trainers and managers and this encourages families to get involved. Parents can come to a Community Carnival and while their kids are having fun, the parents are enjoying the free Rugby League Fundamentals programme.

“Our players are offered opportunities to develop as people and as athletes and we are now expanding our League 4 Life Club Development programme (previously a pilot) which assists local clubs to improve their on field and off field facilities, sideline behaviour and community involvement.

“The game is being recognised as a leader in many areas including youth development, it’s culture, and for our pathways and we will be continuing that good work. While the percentage increases will stabilise I am confident we’ll continue to see steady year on year growth as more of our clubs meet our standards and even more families hear about all the great work being done across the game.”

 

[East Coast Tiger]

The growth still seems to be in or on the fringe of Warriors territory.

They need a second team based in the southern half of the country desperately.

 

[Jeu_de_Treize]

Yes absolutely agree with you ECT. The south half on NZ needs it's own NRL side. It is going to happen. The NRL said in 2011 that it was a matter when not if a side starts in the south island or lower north island. At the start of the 2012 Warriors co-owner Owen Glenn offered to write a blank cheque to get a second team up and running. David Gallop turned him down. When NZ gets this second club the game in NZ will boom. Games between the southern side and the Warriors will sell out what ever stadium they put it in. And for the long term good of the game and to stop lossing players to union we need a second team in NZ ASAP.

 

[Señor]

I wonder how much of that increase is new players into the game and how much of it is just more of the original players being properly registered.

 

[deal.with.it]

I think it would be a bit of both. There is definitely increased school based players.

As for a south island team, it is desperately needed. But I am against increasing the number of NRL clubs past 16 - i would prefer clubs to relocate, but the question always arises: would you want your team to relocate?

 

[Señor]

As for a south island team, it is desperately needed. But I am against increasing the number of NRL clubs past 16 - i would prefer clubs to relocate, but the question always arises: would you want your team to relocate?

Or we could just nominate Souths.

 

[Bovrick]

I think it would be a bit of both. There is definitely increased school based players.

As for a south island team, it is desperately needed. But I am against increasing the number of NRL clubs past 16 - i would prefer clubs to relocate, but the question always arises: would you want your team to relocate?

Why are you against the NRL being more than 16 teams? If it's viable financially, and in terms of player numbers shouldn't it be done?

ETA: I agree New Zealand getting a second team would be a great boost, even 3-4 longer term?

 

[The Great Dane]

Why are you against the NRL being more than 16 teams? If it's viable financially, and in terms of player numbers shouldn't it be done?

ETA: I agree New Zealand getting a second team would be a great boost, even 3-4 longer term?

Four would be to many, I think one in Auckland, one in Wellington and one in Christchurch is all NZ will need.

 

[coolumsharkie]

I had a bit of a chuckle there bro, thought you said population.

 

[Bombay Devils RLFC]

Although a second side sounds good is it going to be viable. It cost about 12M+ to run a NRL club. Someone needs to put in any difference and I am not sure who this would be. Secondly although most of the numbers that have increase are indeed around the North it should be remembered this is where the majority of the population of NZ resides. I also believe about 90% of NZ population growth in the next 20 years will be around the Auckland area.

Yes the game needs to expand in these other areas but there is a cost to this.

 

[bender]

Although a second side sounds good is it going to be viable. It cost about 12M+ to run a NRL club. Someone needs to put in any difference and I am not sure who this would be. Secondly although most of the numbers that have increase are indeed around the North it should be remembered this is where the majority of the population of NZ resides. I also believe about 90% of NZ population growth in the next 20 years will be around the Auckland area.

Yes the game needs to expand in these other areas but there is a cost to this.

Doesnt New Zealand TV already put in this sort of money?

A second NZ team really is a no brainer. In fact as already stated Wellington and christchurch are a must and i do not think that Dunedin is totally out of the question. The second team really should start now, there is no reason whatsoever why they should wait, they are already ready, and will largely use there own players and be competive (not championship winners) straight off the bat.

I think that a North Island vs South island Origin series (which is definitely doable if North Island gets those born on the north island and South island gets the rest) will be the catalyst for this. Hopefully we dont have to wait too long.

 

[Broncos thats my team]

The problem is there is not even a bid team for 2nd NZ team.

 

[deal.with.it]

Why are you against the NRL being more than 16 teams? If it's viable financially, and in terms of player numbers shouldn't it be done?

ETA: I agree New Zealand getting a second team would be a great boost, even 3-4 longer term?

It's just a personal opinion. The NRL could financial handle increasing to 20 teams, with at least another two in Australia, one in NZ and one in PNG. It could probably handle another couple in Aus and NZ on top of this.

But from a pure business sense, increasing to that many teams would mean you would most likely have to have 2 conferences, other wise the season would go too long. The more teams also means the smaller market for each individual team. Clubs like the sharks still struggle for sponsorship, while Manly doesn't even break even, as successful as they are.

I just think over saturation isn't a good thing for a country the size of Australia. If we were the USA with hundreds of millions of people, fair enough. Personally, I would prefer 14 teams, all play each other twice, and have an extended international series.
At present, by the time the NRL and ESL seasons are over, the players and spectators are mentally and physically drained.

 

[Bombay Devils RLFC]

Doesnt New Zealand TV already put in this sort of money?

A second NZ team really is a no brainer. In fact as already stated Wellington and christchurch are a must and i do not think that Dunedin is totally out of the question. The second team really should start now, there is no reason whatsoever why they should wait, they are already ready, and will largely use there own players and be competive (not championship winners) straight off the bat.

I think that a North Island vs South island Origin series (which is definitely doable if North Island gets those born on the north island and South island gets the rest) will be the catalyst for this. Hopefully we dont have to wait too long.

Not so sure. I travel to NZ about 5-6 year for business and I also have my sister who lives over there with her NZ husband. They are RL followers but get outside of Auckland and it is nearly all Rugby Union. The south island only has about 1 million people tops and the main city Christchurch is still struggling to even get proper internet connection going.

It would probably be more viable in the future to have 2 Auckland clubs. One based in the south and one in the north of the city. This is based on the growth of the city and the actual increase in interest for RL in this area.

Auckland v the rest would also be a better proposition as there is a degree of anomosity towards the JAFA's as they call then in NZ.

Maybe our NZ friends may have some better insight into what they think.

 

[bender]

Not so sure. I travel to NZ about 5-6 year for business and I also have my sister who lives over there with her NZ husband. They are RL followers but get outside of Auckland and it is nearly all Rugby Union. The south island only has about 1 million people tops and the main city Christchurch is still struggling to even get proper internet connection going.

It would probably be more viable in the future to have 2 Auckland clubs. One based in the south and one in the north of the city. This is based on the growth of the city and the actual increase in interest for RL in this area.

Auckland v the rest would also be a better proposition as there is a degree of anomosity towards the JAFA's as they call then in NZ.

Maybe our NZ friends may have some better insight into what they think.

Whenever i have been to the south island, i have been stunned by just how big both Dunnedin and Christchurch were. I estimate that each is roughly the size of Newcastle? I think that NZ south island seems to have only 1 million people maybe but it did seem quite condensed into only a few decent sized towns, mostly. I remember last time or at least one time, the warriors played a trial and got 20,000 people to the game. I was also in both cities aroudn the time time of a Christchurch test, a few years back and it got really good publicity, surprising for me. Union is obviously no 1, but i have no doubt both these towns would still support the league. I coudl be wrong of course, but i dont think so.

 

[Bombay Devils RLFC]

Whenever i have been to the south island, i have been stunned by just how big both Dunnedin and Christchurch were. I estimate that each is roughly the size of Newcastle? I think that NZ south island seems to have only 1 million people maybe but it did seem quite condensed into only a few decent sized towns, mostly. I remember last time or at least one time, the warriors played a trial and got 20,000 people to the game. I was also in both cities aroudn the time time of a Christchurch test, a few years back and it got really good publicity, surprising for me. Union is obviously no 1, but i have no doubt both these towns would still support the league. I coudl be wrong of course, but i dont think so.

Looked it up today and it would seem that the south island has just over 1M people which represents about 23% of the NZ population of 4.4M. It is projected that the area will have some 1.2M by 2031 which is not much growth at all.

I do remember reading recently that the NZ RU was worried about the growth of RL in the Auckland area. Their main issue was the sport was growing in the city which will have 90% of NZ growth over the next 20 years.

Not saying that there is no place for another side in NZ but it has to be commercially viable and take advantage of the growth in the sport also.

 

[kiwileaguefan]

I think the main reason for participation growth in NZ is for two main reasons:

LeagueNet Player Registration, and​

Secondary Schools/ NZRL Community Roots Camps​

I have been involved with rugby league in Auckland, Manawatu and Wellington over the past 10 years and can give a little insight to league in NZ.

I started a new League team in Wellingtons Senior grade two years ago, and this was when LeagueNet (Australian based league rego system) was coming online in NZ. In that two years we registered 70 players new to league, about 20 of them had played league before but have never been registered. So that means NZRL now have a more accurate system to display player participation stats as the districts are extremely hot on players being registered to play. However, there is still a lot of people play the odd game that are not registered.

In saying this, all districts are now coming online with this system so this would be a big reason behind the minor growth. Manawatu is a prefect example of this, though in saying this....they had 10 junior teams play this year for the first times in many seasons. Sadly their Senior grade is not what it use to be.

What i have seen over the years is major fluctuation with players, and teams in the districts. For example, in our Wellington grade in 2011 we had 12 teams - which was the same as this year. However we had 3 completely different teams this year compared to last year....and alot of different faces playing in the same teams compared to last year.

A district that is struggling is Canterbury...from what i have been told they have gone from about 150 teams to like 60 now. Obliviously the Earthquake has played a big part in this.

If a second NRL team was to come about in NZ, then a lower North Island team would be the best bet. This should include Taranaki, Manawatu, Hawkes Bay and Wellington. The talent that is around this region is pretty good....Melbourne Storm sign on average 2-3 kids from Wellington every year. Just had two boys from Manawatu signed by the Roosters and Eels (i think it was the Eels).

Of the top of my head, these players have come from the Lower North Island Region that are playing NRL or Supper League:
Issac Luke, Simon Mannering, Ben Matulino, Rangi Chase, Mose Masoe, Alehana Mara, Russell Packer, Vince Mellars, Elijah Taylor, Matt Robinson, James Tamou.....and i know of at least 3-4 laying in the U20's.

 

[bender]

Looked it up today and it would seem that the south island has just over 1M people which represents about 23% of the NZ population of 4.4M. It is projected that the area will have some 1.2M by 2031 which is not much growth at all.

I do remember reading recently that the NZ RU was worried about the growth of RL in the Auckland area. Their main issue was the sport was growing in the city which will have 90% of NZ growth over the next 20 years.

Not saying that there is no place for another side in NZ but it has to be commercially viable and take advantage of the growth in the sport also.

thanks, but the point I was making is that although only one million people are there, they are spread into provincial towns and there are still quite large cities across NZ. Yes Auckland is definitely no1 (but we are already there). This list (obviously not the best source) shows that Wellington and Christchurch with just under 400,000 people as big or bigger than Canberra and Townsville (both NRL Cities), and Woolongong and not too far off Newcastle and Gold coast

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_New_Zealand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Australia_by_population

Auckland is more important, but a team in Wellington and Christchurch will do more than a second Auckland team. Talk of not being ready is silly, imo, except to the extent that the actual club formed may need some time to get ready. the areas themselves are ready.

 

[Bombay Devils RLFC]

thanks, but the point I was making is that although only one million people are there, they are spread into provincial towns and there are still quite large cities across NZ. Yes Auckland is definitely no1 (but we are already there). This list (obviously not the best source) shows that Wellington and Christchurch with just under 400,000 people as big or bigger than Canberra and Townsville (both NRL Cities), and Woolongong and not too far off Newcastle and Gold coast

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_New_Zealand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Australia_by_population

Auckland is more important, but a team in Wellington and Christchurch will do more than a second Auckland team. Talk of not being ready is silly, imo, except to the extent that the actual club formed may need some time to get ready. the areas themselves are ready.

I understand your points however the difference is that NZ is a Rugby Union stronghold not a Rugby League one. The populations may be similiar but the support for RL is not the same as the above mentioned cities in Australia.

Do not get me wrong I would love to see another NZ side in the NRL as it will strengthen the game I am sure in that country. However the money has got to be there to make it work for those who are going to back a new team. I have the view that there is not enough support or ability to generate the 12M or so needed to make this work at this stage.

All the best.

 

[playdaball]

At this stage I believe there is only room for one Nrl team in nz.

The Phoenix soccer team are down to crowds of around 6k so perhaps the Wellington region is not covered in gold? I think the rugby union attendances were down as well - s15 /Npc.

Ch ch not ready for another team at the moment.

Lets get grassroots rl strong again as another Nrl will suck out Interest in the local comp just as the warriors have done since 1995.