Women's NRL

[kbw]

Why would the nrl put 1 team from bris 1 from nz and 2 from south of Sydney. Just as stupid as only putting 4 teams.
I can only assume saints will cover the south of Sydney and Illawarra and the Sydney roosters the rest.
For me should have been 6 sides. North(manly, Newcastle)
South(Souths,saints,sharks) east (roosters, tigers)and west (Penrith,parra)plus bris and nz.

Ideally yes, but did you know that only 6 teams where interested, none from the west or north (apart from Bris)

 

[Timmah]

I keep hearing the Sharks "hosted" the WRLWC?

Sorry but what? WRLWC used the Sharks' home venue, it was a venue hire agreement. I don't understand how that qualifies as "hosting".

Also, four teams makes more sense than six - it's important not to put the cart before the horse in terms of the number of quality players to spread across the clubs.

And lastly - this isn't excluding the Sharks forever, they'll definitely be able to submit applications in future years and chances are they'll be one of the first chosen from any future expansion bids.

 

[Springs09]

I keep hearing the Sharks "hosted" the WRLWC?

Sorry but what? WRLWC used the Sharks' home venue, it was a venue hire agreement. I don't understand how that qualifies as "hosting".

Also, four teams makes more sense than six - it's important not to put the cart before the horse in terms of the number of quality players to spread across the clubs.

And lastly - this isn't excluding the Sharks forever, they'll definitely be able to submit applications in future years and chances are they'll be one of the first chosen from any future expansion bids.

I said Cronulla hosted the Women's World Cup, which it did. How does it not qualify as hosting?

4 teams does not make more sense. Let's just have 2 teams then so we don't have anyone outside the Jillaroos and Ferns playing. There are plenty of talented female footballers that deserve a go.

 

[Shorty]

Yeah I just don't understand how 4 works? It needs to be a decent comp and 4 is barely enough.
If they didn't want too much risk, then they should have waited longer and then launched a comp with a respectable number of teams.

 

[bad boy bubby]

And lastly - this isn't excluding the Sharks forever, they'll definitely be able to submit applications in future years and chances are they'll be one of the first chosen from any future expansion bids.

You do understand that the Sharks have been investing time, money and development into these players for a few years now? Only for the NRL to not only exclude their team but another club will gain all the benefit.

 

[T-Boon]

Even with four teams it could be really successful if they promoted it................tumble weed.................
..............hooting owl......

 

[PARRA_FAN]

4 teams might not seem enough but hopefully this is stepping stone towards a 6 or 8 team comp with the next few years. As for the Sharks, if its true theyve put in so much money and had enough depth and resources well its another please explain from the NRL.

 

[T-Boon]

Yeah I just don't understand how 4 works? It needs to be a decent comp and 4 is barely enough.
If they didn't want too much risk, then they should have waited longer and then launched a comp with a respectable number of teams.

4 would be fine if the NRL backed it up by showing how sticking to being really elite and promoting it that way brings in support and sponsors and promotion etc. Problem is the NRL will not do that any of that. They will not promote it. They will announce the comp as is then leave it out there to die on the vine. Next we will hear about it is an article or two before the kick off.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Tod didnt realise the Cricket would provide all the misdirection he needs. Good to have this backup eh toooodles.

 

[insert.pause]

Cronulla's problem is that they are in Cronulla, had 10 teams been admitted and every team bid, they still would have missed out.

 

[T-Boon]

The NRL claim that they do not cover a large enough geographic location.

It is true they dont. They should change their name to Sydney Sharks.

 

[siv]

There was a concern that they didn't have another players at a high enough standard to have 6 teams.

Not Souths and Cronulla

Roosters have no players - thats why

 

[Timmah]

I said Cronulla hosted the Women's World Cup, which it did. How does it not qualify as hosting?

4 teams does not make more sense. Let's just have 2 teams then so we don't have anyone outside the Jillaroos and Ferns playing. There are plenty of talented female footballers that deserve a go.

I wasn't specifically talking about what you said, but the overall point several have made that because their home ground was the venue for WRLWC last year that somehow that entitles their club to a team. I just think there are better arguments that could be used.

I won't even bother addressing your second point. The #1 criticism of AFLW is that they put in too many teams with too small a talent-pool and the first season was barely watchable as a result. There is no harm in starting smaller and growing the thing.

 

[Dragon Slayer]

I keep hearing the Sharks "hosted" the WRLWC?

Sorry but what? WRLWC used the Sharks' home venue, it was a venue hire agreement. I don't understand how that qualifies as "hosting".

Also, four teams makes more sense than six - it's important not to put the cart before the horse in terms of the number of quality players to spread across the clubs.

And lastly - this isn't excluding the Sharks forever, they'll definitely be able to submit applications in future years and chances are they'll be one of the first chosen from any future expansion bids.

You really are a turd of the highest order.

Goes to show how much you know about Rugby League.

The Sharks have been a leader in driving women’s Rugby League for years and this is the reward the Club gets.

It had a $200k sponsorship ready to go and now that money is lost to Rugby League.

And you think that is fine?

Farkwit!

 

[lolesi]

I wasn't specifically talking about what you said, but the overall point several have made that because their home ground was the venue for WRLWC last year that somehow that entitles their club to a team. I just think there are better arguments that could be used.

I won't even bother addressing your second point. The #1 criticism of AFLW is that they put in too many teams with too small a talent-pool and the first season was barely watchable as a result. There is no harm in starting smaller and growing the thing.

Probably true as a spetical but crowd attendance and tv audience tells a different story.

 

[Springs09]

I wasn't specifically talking about what you said, but the overall point several have made that because their home ground was the venue for WRLWC last year that somehow that entitles their club to a team. I just think there are better arguments that could be used.

I won't even bother addressing your second point. The #1 criticism of AFLW is that they put in too many teams with too small a talent-pool and the first season was barely watchable as a result. There is no harm in starting smaller and growing the thing.

But what's the difference if we go to 6 teams next year or the year after? Will this one season of NRL Women's suddenly create 40 more quality players in the space of a year or so?

The women's game is not like the men's game. The Jillaroos and Ferns are great but the gulf between them and say country players is nowhere near the gulf between the Kangaroos and your average Group 6 first grader. There are a lot of women players that are at least at the level of quality of the other 4 World Cup teams. There were 2 players from my club Yenda who pushed the Jillaroos all the way playing for Samoa at the Commonwealth 9s despite most of them never having played top level league before.

6 teams is not large. 6 teams is a good amount. If we are going to have 4 teams because of 'talent pool' well why not have 2 or 3 teams then? There were more players in the World Cup than there will be in the NRL. Yes 2 teams dominated the WC but spread their players evenly across 6 teams and it will be good footy. 'Small talent pool' is the same dumb reason we keep coming up with against expansion. Expansion is the way we expand the talent pool isn't it? Once second-grade players are in first-grade systems they will get better, just like women new to top-grade rugby league will get better. And women do not have a second tier and many don't even have a rugby league comp, many hopefuls will have to go back to playing leaguetag until internationals come around (and who knows when that will be, we can't even organise men's internationals) or new trials for the NRL clubs come around. Don't know how the talent pool is suddenly going to expand in a year.

 

[Perth Red]

Probably true as a spetical but crowd attendance and tv audience tells a different story.

Yep it was about credibility, launching a 4 team comp smacks of small scale inferiority. It might be better quality games but do you think it will get the media and Public Interest aflw got in its first year? It will rank on the interest scale of the general public as high as the RFuW 5 team comp that started this year with zero coverage.

I mean launching it at the same time as the nrl launches its new strat plan tells you h9w hard nrl is going to work on this!

 

[Timmah]

You really are a turd of the highest order.

Goes to show how much you know about Rugby League.

The Sharks have been a leader in driving women’s Rugby League for years and this is the reward the Club gets.

It had a $200k sponsorship ready to go and now that money is lost to Rugby League.

And you think that is fine?

Farkwit!

Congratulations on playing the ball, and not the man.

At no point, anywhere, did I say the Sharks hadn't been driving Women's RL for years. I agree they probably had a good case but without any of us knowing what their bid looked like or what other clubs' submissions looked like, then the NRL made its decision in its best interests.

Judging by your reply to me you didn't actually read what I said anyway, and I doubt you'll read this, but there's every chance they'll be there in 2019 or 2020. As for the $200k sponsor, I'd be surprised if they were "lost to the game", chances are once Cronulla do enter - which will happen - they'll be there with their chequebook.

To answer your last question - on face value no, I don't think it's fine. But I also don't think anyone can make judgments on face value without knowing things about the criteria, the submissions or any of the other detail.

 

[Timmah]

But what's the difference if we go to 6 teams next year or the year after? Will this one season of NRL Women's suddenly create 40 more quality players in the space of a year or so?

The women's game is not like the men's game. The Jillaroos and Ferns are great but the gulf between them and say country players is nowhere near the gulf between the Kangaroos and your average Group 6 first grader. There are a lot of women players that are at least at the level of quality of the other 4 World Cup teams. There were 2 players from my club Yenda who pushed the Jillaroos all the way playing for Samoa at the Commonwealth 9s despite most of them never having played top level league before.

6 teams is not large. 6 teams is a good amount. If we are going to have 4 teams because of 'talent pool' well why not have 2 or 3 teams then? There were more players in the World Cup than there will be in the NRL. Yes 2 teams dominated the WC but spread their players evenly across 6 teams and it will be good footy. 'Small talent pool' is the same dumb reason we keep coming up with against expansion. Expansion is the way we expand the talent pool isn't it? Once second-grade players are in first-grade systems they will get better, just like women new to top-grade rugby league will get better. And women do not have a second tier and many don't even have a rugby league comp, many hopefuls will have to go back to playing leaguetag until internationals come around (and who knows when that will be, we can't even organise men's internationals) or new trials for the NRL clubs come around. Don't know how the talent pool is suddenly going to expand in a year.

Women do not have a second tier?

Between the NSW Women's Premiership (which expanded again this year), Tarsha Gale Cup (also grew) and the various QLD Women's comps, they absolutely do. The growth of these last season and this season will help expand the talent pool. Rushing too many teams too fast, IMO, was what saw the AFL struggle with their women's comp in some respects (yes it attracted crowds and ratings in various ways but that hasn't stopped widespread criticism of quality). 4 for the first year is fine, then it will keep growing.

 

[MilkShark]

The #1 criticism of AFLW is that they put in too many teams with too small a talent-pool and the first season was barely watchable as a result. There is no harm in starting smaller and growing the thing.

The Sharks team is probably the most talented of the lot, wiping the floor with everyone they play. If they want talent within the comp, why exclude the team that has it in abundance?