Who Cannot Win The Comp In 2006

[sharkadelic]

I think they saw that as product placement and expansion.

Hunter was a sham designed to compete directly with the Knights but Rupert and his american soon learnt the hard way that Australians are not sporting wh*res and won't just support a team coz is there. Especially if they are trying to kill the team the fan in the street has always supported.

And they did sign the majority of the Australian and the Qld Origin teams. The ARL was left with a half baked NSW side that lost to FAtty's no names starring Ben Ikin. THe ARL also had the Crushers, Wests, the Coast, Balmain, and Souths. All the stars were at Parra, Newcs, Manly and Stains

 

[yobbo84]

I think they saw that as product placement and expansion.

Hunter was a sham designed to compete directly with the Knights but Rupert and his american soon learnt the hard way that Australians are not sporting wh*res and won't just support a team coz is there. Especially if they are trying to kill the team the fan in the street has always supported.

And they did sign the majority of the Australian and the Qld Origin teams. The ARL was left with a half baked NSW side that lost to FAtty's no names starring Ben Ikin. THe ARL also had the Crushers, Wests, the Coast, Balmain, and Souths. All the stars were at Parra, Newcs, Manly and Stains

The fact of the matter is ARL was the main competition, that had developed from the NSWRL, and now into NRL, that has been around since 1908. Super League was a breakaway concept that lasted a whole year and has nothing to do with the NSWRL/ARL/NRL. For that reason alone, the ARL was the official competition that year, with a rich history, not some mickey mouse comp made up by a media 'guru'.

As a Souths supporter it's in my blood to hate the Roosters and Manly, but I'll always respect them above any super league scum as they didn't jump ship to some rubbish concept.

That is all.

 

[MrSharky]

You're kidding. Super League had to make up teams just so it could actually have a competition. Not only this, but they had only two sides from the previous year's finals - including neither the premiers or runners up. SL was a mickey mouse comp

What stupid logic.

The following year two SL sides were in the GF...

 

[Misty Bee]

What stupid logic.

The following year two SL sides were in the GF...

So what? Yobbos right about SL -twas a micky mouse comp - the test side got floggged by the same Kiwi side that the ARL roos flogged.

frigging PNG started going higher in international comps than the SL 'national' side!

 

[Knightmare]

'97 was a claytons comp with only half the teams. But so was the ARL one and as much as I hated the supergreed concept, the rebel league was probably the stronger one when it came to star players.

:LOL: When you looks at the quality of the teams in both cops, the ARL was 3/4 of a comp and SewerLeague was only 1/4.

 

[Smartman]

:lol: When you looks at the quality of the teams in both cops, the ARL was 3/4 of a comp and SewerLeague was only 1/4.

Wrong, there was lots of quality in superleague.

Its just that superleague implemented stupid rules ie touch footy.

 

[Knightmare]

I was talking more about the quality of the teams. Two of the 10 sides (Hunter and Adelaide) were added just to make up the numbers. The only two teams in SewerLeague with an impressive recent history were Canberra and Brisbane.

 

[PARANoIR]

Melbourne and Canberra.