Question re SL

[BrisVegas]

I know Illawarra were f**ked when we were classified as a "metro" team. From memory, weren't Norths upset because they weren't considered regional either?

I'm pretty sure they got a verbal assurance from the NRL that they would be counted as a regional team, but neglected to get it put in writing. It's a moot point anyway, once they declared themselves financially insolvent they weren't considered for a spot in the competition.

 

[eastsrule]

hakoah boy, what does pretty much mean

That you don't know the rest and that you aren't a real rl fan.

 

[griff]

St George and Illawarra had merged at the end of the previous season and so were assured a place.

Balmain merged with Wests just before the criteria were released, but would have made the cut standalone anyway, ahead of Penrith.

Norths were not rated under the criteria as they were deemed to be insolvent. Where they would have come if not deemed to be insolvent I'm not sure. Therefore Manly made the cut standalone and were awarded an NRL licence. However they opted to take the money on offer from the NRL and merge with Norths anyway to form the Northern Eagles.

 

[mightybears]

I was always under the impression that Norths missed out although recently I read that it was Penrith... In hindsight, Norths were given special consideration as a regional team, weren't they?

No, thats what they were told would happen-no worries mate your doing the smart thing getting out of sydney etc.

When the criteria was starting to get dodgy [SL clubs were finding money all over the park], and the stadium at gosford was blowing out, Norths management went back to check, only to find the no worries deal wasn't on paper anywhere and they were screwed. They were told they were regional but didn't get it down that they'd be viewed as such.

Gosford got worse, the bastard Jim Henry/NSLC Board wouldn't guarantee a loan, so Norths weren't even 'rated' as such. They'd been screwed before the hammer fell by a mixture of backstabbing, lies, bad luck and NS board stupidity

In one of the subsequent court cases it became public via the evidence of one N. Whittacker that the 'criteria police' had decided to count the massive loyalty handout that penrith got from News [can't have a team from the winner's side being arsed can we], it got penrith to safety.

 

[mightybears]

I'm pretty sure they got a verbal assurance from the NRL that they would be counted as a regional team, but neglected to get it put in writing. It's a moot point anyway, once they declared themselves financially insolvent they weren't considered for a spot in the competition.

Yep.

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

We all know how flawed the "criteria" was, but even the idea of looking at a club's bottom line at the end of just one year made no sense at all when you consider this would be a long standing decision that would affect a sport for years to come.

For example, Balmain would have made the cut, but now Wests are financially stronger(?)
Norths would have been going strong on the Central Coast a few years later and I've no doubt that Perth and Adelaide would have worked (certainly better than Melbourne) if they could have had a proper run post SL war.

In the end, we lost foundation clubs, expansion clubs, regional clubs, national sporting credibility... and all the gain$ went to news.

 

[Eels Dude]

My memory of it all was Souths finished last just behind Wests. Wests, Balmain, Manly and Norths all finished below Penrith but since all those clubs were in the process of merging they were safe.

Norths were given region status despite their planned move up the coast, therefore they were forced to merge with Manly to ensure survival.

I seem to recall they didn't really rank the clubs towards the end of the 1999 season, Souths were the only team cut in the end.

 

[dallymessenger]

I was always under the impression that Norths missed out although recently I read that it was Penrith... In hindsight, Norths were given special consideration as a regional team, weren't they?

The ideal 14 would've excluded Canterbury & Cronulla as well as Penrith.

when the stadium on gosford wasnt finished on time, the nrl took the easy route out and kicked them out.

penrith were the ones that wouldve missed out from the 14, norths were gone before then having merged with manly

 

[dallymessenger]

I think he meant the criteria that determined which 14 teams would be part of the competition had none of them merged.

it was mentioned in george piggins book, which someone borrowed and didnt give back.

similar to what SL is looking at now.

finances, turnover.

i think it was dodgy as how clubs like cronulla stood up on their own is beyond me.

politics played a more important role than which clubs were the best in the competition and deserving of a place.

 

[Eels Dude]

it was mentioned in george piggins book, which someone borrowed and didnt give back.

similar to what SL is looking at now.

finances, turnover.

i think it was dodgy as how clubs like cronulla stood up on their own is beyond me.

politics played a more important role than which clubs were the best in the competition and deserving of a place.

I think the criteria came down to a number of things over the previous five year period, weighted based on more recent outcomes.

It included On field performance, crowds and gate reciepts, sponsorship, finances etc. The clubs who were performing well on the field had the advantage, as better performances equals higher crowds equals better sponsorship etc. Cronulla were going very well on the field in the late 90's, finishing minor premiers in '99 when the list was drawn up. Penrith weren't going that much better on the field than Souths or Balmain but with the richest leagues club in Sydney they were always going to be safe.

 

[dallymessenger]

I think the criteria came down to a number of things over the previous five year period, weighted based on more recent outcomes.

It included On field performance, crowds and gate reciepts, sponsorship, finances etc. The clubs who were performing well on the field had the advantage, as better performances equals higher crowds equals better sponsorship etc. Cronulla were going very well on the field in the late 90's, finishing minor premiers in '99 when the list was drawn up. Penrith weren't going that much better on the field than Souths or Balmain but with the richest leagues club in Sydney they were always going to be safe.

maybe true but i still think they fudged it.

SL and the ARL each had certain clubs they wanted in and i think deals were done behind closed doors.

 

[cumberlandsashes81]

From the High Court judgment:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/JCULRev/2003/6.html

As a consequence of the selection and merger process, North Sydney failed to obtain admission to the NRL on the basis of its insolvency. When the Gold Coast and Adelaide indicated they would not be seeking admission, and firstly St George and Illawarra, then Wests and Balmain, agreed to mergers, South Sydney became the only team excluded on the basis of its ranking as the fifteenth team under the selection criteria. South Sydney immediately commenced interlocutory proceedings in the Federal Court on 12 November, with the matter being heard by Hely J.

 

[Chapsta]

I read that Balmain Tigers were safe inside the 14, jumping the gun abit, when they scrambled for a merger.

 

[mightybears]

My memory of it all was Souths finished last just behind Wests. Wests, Balmain, Manly and Norths all finished below Penrith but since all those clubs were in the process of merging they were safe.

Norths were given region status despite their planned move up the coast, therefore they were forced to merge with Manly to ensure survival.

I seem to recall they didn't really rank the clubs towards the end of the 1999 season, Souths were the only team cut in the end.

Norths were not given regional status.

 

[mightybears]

We all know how flawed the "criteria" was, but even the idea of looking at a club's bottom line at the end of just one year made no sense at all when you consider this would be a long standing decision that would affect a sport for years to come.

For example, Balmain would have made the cut, but now Wests are financially stronger(?)
Norths would have been going strong on the Central Coast a few years later and I've no doubt that Perth and Adelaide would have worked (certainly better than Melbourne) if they could have had a proper run post SL war.

In the end, we lost foundation clubs, expansion clubs, regional clubs, national sporting credibility... and all the gain$ went to news.

Agree with all that, bar Adelaide working out [i still think even today, it arguably doesn't have the eastern staters/kiwis, corporate support, and generally $ without massive subs from head office/new corp to work.]

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

Agree with all that, bar Adelaide working out [i still think even today, it arguably doesn't have the eastern staters/kiwis, corporate support, and generally $ without massive subs from head office/new corp to work.]

I disagree. They had an excellent membership base and remember... there's nothing to do in Adelaide!

They would be worth propping up though, balanced with the extra TV revenue and national credibility for the NRL. By now they would have been entrenched in SA.

 

[Eels Dude]

Norths were not given regional status.

Sorry that's what I meant. I must have left the 'not' out.

 

[mightybears]

I disagree. They had an excellent membership base and remember... there's nothing to do in Adelaide!

They would be worth propping up though, balanced with the extra TV revenue and national credibility for the NRL. By now they would have been entrenched in SA.

It would certainly add to the 'N' in NRL, and they could charge more re broadcast rev streams, and yes a long term view should always be taken, but to me Perth, Wellington, a second Brisbane, and the CC are obvious expansion moves-Adelaide less so.

That said, there is a recent thread on bearsfandave's mightybears.com http://www.mightybears.com/viewtopic.php?t=2929
that eventually became "would we go for an Adelaide Bears, if the CC was taken by a Sydney team taking the 40 pieces of silver" . Answer was hell yeah as long as they wear red n black and are called the Bears [as an Adelaide team would need a feeder team in Sydney or Brisbane anyway].

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

It would certainly add to the 'N' in NRL, and they could charge more re broadcast rev streams, and yes a long term view should always be taken, but to me Perth, Wellington, a second Brisbane, and the CC are obvious expansion moves-Adelaide less so.

That said, there is a recent thread on bearsfandave's mightybears.com http://www.mightybears.com/viewtopic.php?t=2929
that eventually became "would we go for an Adelaide Bears, if the CC was taken by a Sydney team taking the 40 pieces of silver" . Answer was hell yeah as long as they wear red n black and are called the Bears [as an Adelaide team would need a feeder team in Sydney or Brisbane anyway].

Something like that would be good, two birds with one stone - expansion and re-birth of a foundation club. The history and identity would remain intact, ala the Swans. Fans would turn out in droves to see them play away matches in Sydney, unlike games with Storm, Nth Qld etc.

 

[KalgoorlieRed]

European Super league had only twelve clubs to start off with:

Wigan, St Helens, Bradford, London, Warrington, Halifax, Sheffield, Oldham, Castleford, Leeds, Paris and Workington

And Oldham were mean't to merge with Salford and become Manchester! :lol:

What did the BEars/Roughyeds have to offer us? Buggerall!