West Tigers anti Bears!!!

[t-ba]

Moving (committing) to the Central Coast before the ground had been built was poor management. Telling your current ground landlord North Sydney Council to get stuffed when you dont have a ground to play on is abject stupidity and as it turned out, terminal.

They were pretty much driven out of the Ground. North Sydney Council has always hated League and Catered to the Cricket Club. The fact that they refused Permanent floodlights while the Bears where around, even if they payed for them, but installed them when the Spirit moved in says alot about the Councils attitude.

Norths had planned the move in 1995 and had to spend a few Million of their own money to get the ground construction started. The word criteria hadn't actually raised its ugly head just yet. Maybe you should actually know what happened and the reasons behind the move?

I won't deny that once David Hill left the club was in some very bad hands. It isn't a lesson in abject stupidity, it's just a study of having your worst year at the worst possible time. If the criteria was executed for season 2001, Norths would still be around, as simple as that. Norths Misfortunes culminated at the worst possible time in the clubs history.

Norths killed themselves through poor management, why do they have a right to come back...they, like the crowds on the Central Coast, have had their chance.

And So did The Gold Coast. 3 times. Doesn't mean they shouldn't get an extra chance. The football club, beyond acting as a feeder for the top grade, will have nothing to do with the consortium. The rather wealthy leagues club (who were bickering with the Football club in 1999, and didn't know how bad their finances were until it was too late to inject the cash, which was later put into the Neagles) will be the only thing from Cammeray associated with the New team.

 

[Grantwhy]

Going by this story, Newcastle aren't in favour of a 16th team, and even less so of a Central Coast team.

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,9481389-23214,00.html

Knights reject expansion
By Dean Ritchie
May 6, 2004

NEWCASTLE have told the NRL the club could lose up to $1 million if the Central Coast became rugby league's 16th franchise.

The NRL's partnership committee met yesterday to examine the possibility of adding an extra club - Central Coast, Gold Coast or Wellington - to the competition in 2006.

The committee resolved to seek further details on how a 16th side would impact on existing clubs.

Most clubs contacted by The Daily Telegraph yesterday agreed with expansion - provided the NRL's annual $2.5 million grant to each club was not reduced to help the new club.

Clubs were, however, cautious that a 16th club would alter the playing draw and reduce the number of home games each season from 13 to 11, significantly cutting crowd revenue.

There is still a chance a 16th team will be selected although the odds remain the NRL will consolidate and retain 15 teams.

The NRL asked Knights chief executive Ken Conway to write to them over any concerns.

Conway said his club could lose between $130,000 and $600,000 in lost attendances with two fewer matches.

And the Knights believe they could also lose about $430,000 in attendances and membership from the club's Central Coast fans, who would then support the new Central Coast Bears franchise.

Figures reveal the Knights could lose between $570,000 and $1million if the Bears are reborn.

"If the extra franchise was located on the Central Coast, it would further impact on our revenue stream," Conway said.

"A percentage of our members and attendees are from the Central Coast.

"If the NRL bring in the Central Coast, we would look to be compensated in some way.

"And we would certainly be asking [the NRL] how this situation would be handled if it came up.

"We don't have a registered club to go to and put our hand out for $600,000. This is serious business."

Asked would the NRL compensate Newcastle should Central Coast be accepted, NRL chief executive David Gallop said: "No, but we are aware of Newcastle's concerns.

"They have a new playing facility at EnergyAustralia Stadium and they can expect an increase in game day revenue.

"The partnership is looking at how a 16th side would impact on the current clubs."

NRL clubs last night were supportive of a 16th side - but only if the new club could be sustained without financially affecting the existing 15 clubs.

"We have no problem with a 16th team. As long as they can fund themselves and we don't have our grant reduced," said Raiders chief executive Simon Hawkins.

Penrith chief Shane Richardson was cautious about a new club, saying: "I'm against it until I see a business plan of the NRL going forward."

Gallop added: "The NRL management will prepare some more detailed analysis on the areas, the bid teams and the impact of an extra team."

Gold Coast Bid Team chairman Paul Broughton supported the executive's decision to seek more information about expansion.

The Daily Telegraph