WA BEARS

[Wb1234]

Should they? Or is that the arlc and state bodies jobs?

You seem to have afl and rugby league mixed up

 

[titoelcolombiano]

If this is truly your opinion on this and you can’t see how vastly different the situations are, it’s not worth having the discussion.

I think in a national comp with former first grade clubs from Brisbane coming in, we either...

a) only recognise premierships from 1995 onwards (when the ARL was formed to supersede the two first grade comps so there was only one national first grade comp)

or

b) recognise all first grade premierships which will include the Dolphins or any other former Queensland first grade premierships

 

[titoelcolombiano]

That's a fair point - and if Brisbane (Easts) Tigers snare themselves a place in the NRL, then their 8 BRL premierships before 1995 puts them up there with the Sea Eagles & Bulldogs (as it currently stands) - equal 5th place for premierships behind Souths, Easts/Sydney Roosters & St George (Equal 2nd), and Balmain (4th).


To be fair to Queensland, both NSWRL AND BRL premierships up to 1994 should count as top club tier.

Yes, they were both first grade comps before 1995.

The ARL was not just the NSWRL rebranded. It was a separate organisation formed to replace the two state based first grade comps with one national first grade comp. From 1995 onwards, both the NSWRL and QRL became seconds grade comps and the ARL comp took on Perth, Auckland and two more QLD clubs.

The reason counting the BRL / QRL premierships have never been of concern is because we've never had a former Queensland premiership winner enter the NRL. Prior to the Dolphins, all QLD clubs have been new entities.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Yeah but NRL is after rivalries and heritage. You can't have that if you ignore 100 years of the game

Agreed but you have to have one or the other. You either start from 1995 (national ARL formed) or you recognise all first grade premierships which means the Dolphins have two

 

[titoelcolombiano]

If you want to ignore rugby league pre 98 then you only are looking at 20 percent of the game

the reality is this competition is the nswrl which expanded

It's not though, the was formed to supersede both the NSWRL and QRL as the only first grade competition.

I don't think it's wise as a game to selectively count NSWRL Premierships but not QRL first grade premierships especially if we are looking to bring in more old QRL brands.

Embracing the BRL / QRL premierships will build on the history and tribalism in QLD

 

[Wb1234]

It's not though, the was formed to supersede both the NSWRL and QRL as the only first grade competition.

I don't think it's wise as a game to selectively count NSWRL Premierships but not QRL first grade premierships especially if we are looking to bring in more old QRL brands.

Embracing the BRL / QRL premierships will build on the history and tribalism in QLD

I’m not opposed to it

but the nrl is from the nswrl

saying it’s a new comp is bs

Souths and the roosters are the same clubs from 1908

 

[Wb1234]

The birthdate of rugby league in Australia is from the formation of the nswrl

the qra wasn’t formed until 1909

 

[Iamback]

Agreed but you have to have one or the other. You either start from 1995 (national ARL formed) or you recognise all first grade premierships which means the Dolphins have two

So if Brisbane Easts come in their history shouldn't be used to build their fanbase?

Dolphins have been set as a new club haven't they?

 

[flippikat]

I’m not opposed to it

but the nrl is from the nswrl

saying it’s a new comp is bs

Souths and the roosters are the same clubs from 1908

The same clubs, yes.. BUT in 1995 the running of the competition was moved from NSWRL to ARL.

If (say) Souths can count their pre-1995 premierships, so can the Dolphins - because they were playing in the highest tier they had available to them in that era.

 

[Wb1234]

The same clubs, yes.. BUT in 1995 the running of the competition was moved from NSWRL to ARL.

If (say) Souths can count their pre-1995 premierships, so can the Dolphins - because they were playing in the highest tier they had available to them in that era.

lol it was a name change

Arko and Quayle were still running it

maybe need to talk to reebs again about starting another comp without those nasty Sydney teams

 

[Matt_CBY]

Yes, they were both first grade comps before 1995.

The ARL was not just the NSWRL rebranded. It was a separate organisation formed to replace the two state based first grade comps with one national first grade comp. From 1995 onwards, both the NSWRL and QRL became seconds grade comps and the ARL comp took on Perth, Auckland and two more QLD clubs.

The reason counting the BRL / QRL premierships have never been of concern is because we've never had a former Queensland premiership winner enter the NRL. Prior to the Dolphins, all QLD clubs have been new entities.

The amount of spin in this has me dizzy. Lmfao

 

[Matt_CBY]

Agreed but you have to have one or the other. You either start from 1995 (national ARL formed) or you recognise all first grade premierships which means the Dolphins have two

Who is making this up?

 

[Matt_CBY]

So if Brisbane Easts come in their history shouldn't be used to build their fanbase?

Dolphins have been set as a new club haven't they?

Yes they are. There’s been a complete lack of understanding of the difference between the Redcliffe Dolphins and the Dolphins NRL clubs by previous posters.

 

[Matt_CBY]

The same clubs, yes.. BUT in 1995 the running of the competition was moved from NSWRL to ARL.

It doesn’t matter what the competition ownership or brand changed to. The premiership continued.

The Dolphins NRL club isn’t even the same club as the Redcliffe Dolphins.