Sydney relocations

[georgesnmith]

Only a trioll would be basing avg's on one or two games whilst ignoring that over the course a full season last year six of the seven worse supported clubs in the NRL were Sydney clubs.

Your kidding yourself if you think it is a one off crowd, what was today's crowd at cronulla?

Yes the game needs a strong two heartlands, Brisbane and Sydney, at the moment Sydney is not strong and is holding the game back as confirmed by Grant. The wait and see what happens approach hasn't worked so far has it?

brisbane is strong when its only club gets similar crowds to union and AFL whilst sydney has nine clubs?

nah.

what was todays crowd at the SCG you fruit loop?

 

[georgesnmith]

George your Sydney clubs are not helping you this weekend, did you see the Penrith crowd? Our Aleague team would have been embarrassed by that!

again why do you pick the lowest crowd when the same night there were 23k at the SCG?

tomorrow at leichardt there will be a great crowd.

dead set fruit loop.

 

[georgesnmith]

for those of you who dont go on english RL forums, please let me give you a little background of JB.

he supports Hull KR. the second team in Hull, a small town of around 275,000 people

the top club play in a brand new 24k all seater stadium

JBs club plays in a crap ground, which he defends the clubs use rather than the new KC stadium.

He also supports the idea that a small town of 275,000 people should have 2 SL teams.

Yet he says there are too many teams in sydney

everything he says NRL should do, he argues the exact opposite for his own league

 

[georgesnmith]

So to compare :

Hull population 275,000, 2 teams ie 1 team for 132,500 ppl which is justified apparently

Sydney population 4,750,000, nine teams ie 1 team for 528,000 ppl which is apparently too many.


:lol::lol::lol:

 

[Perth Red]

I thought we were discussing relocation of Sydney teams? like I said if you want to enter a debate about the merits of 2 hull clubs in SL or HKR playing in West hull take it to the SL forum.

Back on topic, yep one game got a decent crowd whilst the other three were embarrassing, once again reinforcing my point that some Sydney teams are cutting the mustard whilst others simply need to be cut.

Reverting to childish name calling and thread derailment, a dead set sign you are badly losing this debate.

 

[georgesnmith]

I thought we were discussing relocation of Sydney teams? like I said if you want to enter a debate about the merits of 2 hull clubs in SL or HKR playing in West hull take it to the SL forum.

Back on topic, yep one game got a decent crowd whilst the other three were embarrassing, once again reinforcing my point that some Sydney teams are cutting the mustard whilst others simply need to be cut.

Reverting to childish name calling and thread derailment, a dead set sign you are badly losing this debate.

its not derailing the thread at all. its a valid comparison to show what double standards you have.

if you think hull can support 2 SL clubs with its population why cant sydney support 9 NRL teams.

whats the difference? how can you rationally explain it.

and Hull KR crowds are 8000 or so below the SL average.

so by your criteria they should be out?

 

[bobmar28]

take a look at skilled park. gio stadium is worse.

AAMA stadium is under half full

and going by your criteria the broncos only average 65% of capacity at suncorp. 20k empty seats a game

KICK OUT THE BRONCOS

None of the cities mentioned has nine NRL teams.

 

[bobmar28]

I think given the Western Force's sudden rise in Super Rugby that the Perth Pirates are dead in the water, again. Central Queensland and Central Coast for mine.

Rubbish. It is time we went national, as in NATIONAL rugby league.

 

[Perth Red]

its not derailing the thread at all. its a valid comparison to show what double standards you have.

if you think hull can support 2 SL clubs with its population why cant sydney support 9 NRL teams.

whats the difference? how can you rationally explain it.

and Hull KR crowds are 8000 or so below the SL average.

so by your criteria they should be out?

Because it Is two very different scenarios in two very different countries. This will be the only post I make on this point here, again happy to debate it in the appropriate forum, as it has nothing to so with Sydney relocations:

1. Hull can sustain 2 SL clubs, both clubs draw above avg crowds and have strong financial backing and finish in the play offs each year
2. There are not bigger cities with 20k fans and corporate support desperate for a SL club like there are in Australia.
3. The day they decided to build the KC a stones throw from the Boulevard was always going to mean HKR would not leave their East Hull fanbase to move west.
4. KC light stream stadium has continually been improved with over ten million pounds of improvements since HKR entered SL with plans for further improvements. It's capacity is 12k which is around 25% higher than current crowd avg.
5. If they had built the KC in central or north hull I would have been a strong advocate for HKR sharing it, you have probably never been, Sydney's idea of "tribalism" is nothing compared to the east/west divide of hull FC and hull kr.
6. There is only one other prof sport team in hull other than RL, Sydney has 6, ie 3 sports team in hull, 15 in Sydney
7. Hull RL people enjoy going to watch live RL, Sydney people don't


And SL is cutting the two weakest clubs end of this year, hopefully it will create the space for two expansion clubs in the future, if and when they are ready.

 

[georgesnmith]

Hull KR require half a million pounds every year from their owners to stay alive / break even. the current owners have threatened to walk out if it doesnt turn around soon. the club has lost money every year its been in sl ...10 years now?

the ground is still a dump compared to the KC.

you want sydney fans to travel hours out of their traditional areas (which i support) yet you dont want your own club to move its fans down the road?

and you havent explained why sydney with 4.7 million people cant sustain nine clubs and Hull with 275,000 population can.

the last point needs answering otherwise this thread is done.

are the people of Hull more wealthy than sydneysiders?

is the SL TV deal much better than the NRLs?

do the Hull clubs get better sponsorship?

otherwise all it looks like is a massive bias if you cant explain the difference.

fire away please.

 

[Nerd]

brisbane is strong when its only club gets similar crowds to union and AFL whilst sydney has nine clubs?

nah.

what was todays crowd at the SCG you fruit loop?

Not exactly correct. While the Reds get similar crowds to the Broncos the Lions are lucky to get 20k these days.

I don't think relocating teams works to be honest and don't see the merit in moving any Sydney teams. But I also don't think the NRL should pour money into propping up any teams on the grounds of tradition that can't support themselves . If a Sydney team has to drop back to the NSW Cup because they can't afford to play in the NRL so be it.

I think any additional teams should have to be built locally from the ground up like what the Pirates are doing. My vote for a second Brisbane team would be the Brothers consortium as this organisation has many local teams already based throughout QLD.

 

[Perth Red]

and you havent explained why sydney with 4.7 million people cant sustain nine clubs and Hull with 275,000 population can.

the last point needs answering otherwise this thread is done.

are the people of Hull more wealthy than sydneysiders?

is the SL TV deal much better than the NRLs?

do the Hull clubs get better sponsorship?

otherwise all it looks like is a massive bias if you cant explain the difference.

fire away please.

On this point, you seem to be mixing the notion of population and popularity. It is evident from the lack of people attending games in Sydney that, whilst there is a big population, few of that population follow the game or a club strongly enough to commit to going to a game. Like was jokingly said if you are going on purely population we should be putting teams in Mumbai and Beijing. The formula comes down to a mix of population big enough to draw from and popularity in that population to support the club. Penrith at the weekend classic example, population of that region million plus, attendance 7,700. Tell me how your population theory actually makes any sense in the Penrith scenario. They've been there 50 years plus and still get crowds sub 10k.

East of hull has a population of around 140k, of that 8-9000 care enough about hull kr to turn out. If the same % of Sydney's population turned out to NRL games we would not be having this conversation.

 

[CowboyFuriousFury]

Going through the 96 averages WA got bigger attendance than the Bulldogs, Penriths and Souths (all still in NRL). Also, the Bulldogs were premiers the year prior yet WA outdrew them lol.

In 97 WA got bigger crowds than Penrith and Souths. Logically, the teams beneath WA should of got the chop but since they were 'heartland' they were given a free pass while WA didn't get the light of day. Logically, Penrith and Souths would of been gone base on those crowd figures but Penrith survive the chop yet WA/SA got the chop.

Here's the link PR makes for interesting reading:
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1996.html
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1997SL.html
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1997.html
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1998.html

Adelaide also outdrew Souths in 98 too.

As for relocation, if can't happen these days since those teams are too entrenched and no matter how small the fanbase those teams have you lose them there gone for good now.

 

[newman]

Perth Red I want to know why you are equating expansion with relocation or cutting clubs? Relocation and or cutting clubs have barely if ever been mentioned by the ARLC. And if it was, they would be howled down by supporters, former players and celebrities associated with that club. None of your beloved codes who are flexing expansion models have recently relocated or cut clubs. Don't you remember the outcry that happened when Souths were outed? And that was when that club was the ugliest girl at the dance. What about the recurrent angst from bears supporters who are still mega pissed 15 years on?

Your argument seems to be "I want a club in Perth and Sydney crowds are bad so let's cut someone so I can have my wish". It's bullshit.

It's also patent bullshit that "Sydney people aren't interested in RL". Sure, there's a minor problem with crowds. But that was always on the cards when they sold the game away to a tv network and despite that there have been about 55,000 sydneysiders attend NRL matches so far this weekend. Sydney people love NRL. It dominates conversation, the news, tv programming and the general psyche of the population. It is the dominant winter sport in the biggest market.

Remember also when the NRL offered 8 million for sides to relocate. There wasn't a single administrator, player or fan who thought that an attractive proposition and the offer has been removed due to a lack of interest.
Cutting or relocating teams is madness and you should stop carrying on like its a real possibility.

 

[newman]

The other piece of bullshit that gets trotted out on here regularly is that the NRL is constantly "propping up struggling Sydney clubs".

The only club being "propped up" by the NRL was Melbourne, an expansion club. Only the tigers have received some minor financial assistance. Regular relocation candidates Cronulla, Penrith and Manly have not received any hand outs for many, many years. The last time Cronulla got cash from the governing body was 1991!

 

[Perth Red]

Newman the onlY reason is because the NRL have been pretty clear that they have to make a big consideration of the state of the current clubs before they will consider adding new ones. What this effectively means is a likelihood of a place like Perth, Gosford or Sw Brisbane where the game could be growing and see success held back due to the struggles of the over saturated Sydney market. I have nothing against any Sydney club and would feel really bad for any true fan who loses their club, I've been through it with Reds, been through it with false hope of expansion and faced the bleak prospect with my life long club so know what it feels like.

I would like nothing better than for Sydney to be super strong all clubs with 25k members and 20k crowds and all making a profit so we could expand to a 20 team comp but I just cannot see it happening so given what the NRL has said since the arlc took over either we don't grow the game and throw more money at existing clubs or we take some hard decisions and look at rationalising an over crowded market.not an easy decision either way. I sit on the cut the weak to add strength, others believe we don't need to look beyond nsw to have a successful NRL. Doubt either will change their minds lol.

 

[georgesnmith]

Going through the 96 averages WA got bigger attendance than the Bulldogs, Penriths and Souths (all still in NRL). Also, the Bulldogs were premiers the year prior yet WA outdrew them lol.

In 97 WA got bigger crowds than Penrith and Souths. Logically, the teams beneath WA should of got the chop but since they were 'heartland' they were given a free pass while WA didn't get the light of day. Logically, Penrith and Souths would of been gone base on those crowd figures but Penrith survive the chop yet WA/SA got the chop.

Here's the link PR makes for interesting reading:
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1996.html
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1997SL.html
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1997.html
http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/1998.html

Adelaide also outdrew Souths in 98 too.

As for relocation, if can't happen these days since those teams are too entrenched and no matter how small the fanbase those teams have you lose them there gone for good now.

you didnt answer the question.

answer the question i asked thanks


Hull KE avg under 8000 these days, this is your idea of a good crowd

 

[georgesnmith]

i think JB has borrowed the RU calculator

so a crowd average for one club which is under 8000 is perfectly OK, but clubs who average 11,000 - 22,000 somehow are classified as being poor.

surely the same standards should apply otherwise hes just trolling?

 

[georgesnmith]

The other piece of bullshit that gets trotted out on here regularly is that the NRL is constantly "propping up struggling Sydney clubs".

The only club being "propped up" by the NRL was Melbourne, an expansion club. Only the tigers have received some minor financial assistance. Regular relocation candidates Cronulla, Penrith and Manly have not received any hand outs for many, many years. The last time Cronulla got cash from the governing body was 1991!

as ive shown on here if people want to argue sydney needs culling due to crowds, or other criteria then there are other clubs which are much worse and therefore should be booted as well

what it seems to be their argument is whatever criteria we judge sydney clubs on, dont judge other clubs on the same criteria ....

cronulla get bagged for averaging 12k.

ill bet if perth averaged 12k, owned their own ground and had a new development coming to give them $50 million profit these same people would be in a lather.

 

[Perth Red]

i think JB has borrowed the RU calculator

so a crowd average for one club which is under 8000 is perfectly OK, but clubs who average 11,000 - 22,000 somehow are classified as being poor.

surely the same standards should apply otherwise hes just trolling?

Different countries, different competitions ffs. Like saying why can a city in America with 2mill people get 70k to an NFL game when Sydney can only get 7k to a NRL game. Pointless comparing apples and oranges.

Hkr's crowd is ok for SL, it would be terrible for NRL. Souths 20k crowd is ok for NRL would be terrible for afl. West coasts 40k is ok for afl would be terrible for NFL. Pointless comparisons,