The Great Dane

No it's not. The Pacific Tests being bundled into the Super Saturday package shows that it's not a strong enough product to sell independently, which in turn shows that they aren't making a lot of money out of them.

If they can't field a legitimate team, then maybe they shouldn't be participating... Of course the only reason they don't field a legitimate team is because we've made it's easier not to. As a result they don't, and RL is the worse for it because zero effort is put into developing the grassroots in the islands and even more pressure is put on the Australian and Kiwi systems at the expense of local talent. In the case of Australia that local talent looks for different sports where they'll be afforded a genuine opportunity to succeed, and as a result this practice of allowing glorified soldiers of fortune into rep footy directly contributes to the grassroots dying across the country. Sure, but at the expense of much larger pools of talented athletes. But who gives right, we have more competitive "internationals" to watch. I don't give a flying about their view. Whether they like it or not, international sport was intended to be a contest between nations, not ethnicities. I know it's going to be hard for an insufferable racist like you to understand, but the fact that they aren't totally of European decent doesn't mean that they aren't Australian or Kiwi! Only because RU moved to the same edibility rules as RL. I guess everyone's internationals can be a joke now. We didn't do that with the Melanesian nations. Native Papuans and Fijians have been participating in the sport at all levels for generations at this point. Sure most of the Fijians start out in RU, but that's beside the point. Furthermore, placing the responsibility of developing all the talent in the Southern Hemisphere onto the shoulders of the NRL isn't a good outcome for the sport anywhere. Of course you don't actually care about that, so I don't know why I'm wasting my time.

Sometimes reality hurts, but the thing is you can't act to fix it if you refuse to accept that you have a problem. Which has basically been international RL's biggest issue since roughly the late 80s and early 90s. It chooses to ignore it's real problems in the hopes that they'll just go away.

Why? It's not the NRL's fault that international RL's reputation has been run into the dirt by decades of uncompetitive fixtures, a series of truly astounding decisions made in both hemispheres starting well before the NRL even existed, and a series of leaders and champions whom are/were arrogant, entitled, and always looking for a short cut rather than committing to the work of actually building the product and the sport on the ground in nations across the world. In saying that, the NRL's ever-increasing attempts to astroturf it into existence will only hurt it more in the long term.

Of the 34 players to represent Samoa and Tonga yesterday only one (Spencer Leniu) was born or raised in Samoa or Tonga. Now take a second and let just what a joke that is set in.

Rep footy isn't comparable to club footy for a number of reasons, and frankly I think you know that. A one off special event is always an easier sale than a biweekly commitment. BTW, I live in Canberra, and it's not close to a sell out unless they've flogged 10k seats cheap in the last few days. Which isn't impossible mind you, I just haven't heard about it yet if it's happened. Edit; I just checked Ticketek, there's no way that it's close to a sell out. Not yet anyway.

No stress, I wasn't having a go mate.

Ignorance is bliss. The support base is only on the Eastern Seaboard because everything south of Goulburn and west of Bathurst has been neglected by the establishment in Sydney for basically all of the sport's existence. If investment was made into other markets you'd see growth, just like the AFL has in the north east and RL in Canberra and Melbourne. Until that happens the sport will have no significant traction. Furthermore, there're multiple entities across the country interested in investing in the sport that have been shut out by the NRL that could have used the NRLW as a foot in the door, WA being a great example of one that isn't on the Eastern Seaboard. You also failed to address the actual point that I was making, but whatever. If there was any real value to the existing brands then the NRLW, AFLW, W-league, etc, etc, sides wouldn't be averaging crowds roughly 1-5% the size of their male counterpart's depending on the sport. Their social media engagement, ratings, etc, etc, would all be significantly higher as well because the supporters of those brands would support the team simply because it's carrying the brand. They aren't, why? Because 95-99% of the pro club's supporters don't care about the women's product regardless of the brand, and never will. As such it's a niche product that will appeal to a niche audience that can exist regardless of the men's audience. I also never suggested that the NRL should set up 10 brand new franchises, in fact I suggested quite the opposite, so again you are dodging the actual point that was made. Cronulla probably shouldn't be in the NRL, let alone the NRLW, but that's an aside. Under no circumstances, no matter the league or sport, is it necessary to have two Southern Sydney sides in the same national competition. There simply isn't the market for it, and as such in the long run their presence will do more damage than good just like it has done in the NSWRL/ARL/NRL. Taking all that into consideration, their prior investments into women's RL are pretty irrelevant frankly.

It has happened in soccer (Canberra United), basketball (WNBL), and a few other sports. In those sports that have independent clubs and shared clubs, the independent women's club's tend to be the most successful once you take away the subsidies that the others get from their club's men's team's operations. In saying that, both business plans have their pros and cons and it's definitely a horses of courses situation. In saying all that I totally agree with you that the NRLW will almost certainly never have an independent club. The NRL will pay lip service to it, but I doubt it'll ever actually happen.

Sure, but if the NRL demands of new expansion clubs that they field NRLW teams then those NRLW teams aren't in locations without without NRL teams are they.

Why should they not have the right to build their own legacy instead of being forced to ride on the coat tails of the men's clubs? Signing up to be an NRL club's women's team is signing up to eternally be the after thought opening act, and it shows in the variation between the support of women's and men's teams.

Maybe, but Cronulla, Bondi, Kogarah, and Balmain/Campbelltown probably wouldn't be in most national competitions, or at the very least not all of them. In RL you'd probably ideally spilt Sydney into 4 or 5 regions each with a single representative- north, south, east, and west, or inner west and outer west. That split was totally achievable in the NRLW, and the only reason it didn't happen is because of myopia and self interest. To give you an analogy; it'd be like a supposedly national competition in the US that has the five boroughs of New York represented but no teams in LA, Chicago, and Dallas.

Nobody is asking for perfection, just for a little more effort than the bare minimum.

If you were starting a 10 team NRL from scratch today it would look something like- Sydney x2 Brisbane x2 Melbourne Perth Adelaide NZ Regional x2 Now in the NRLW's case that probably wasn't going to be feasible, especially with the impact of covid, however the goal still should have been to get as close to that as possible. There also should have been a hard cap on the amount of Sydney clubs as well (probably 4-5), and there's no way that they should have ever been allowed to represent 50% of the competition at any one time. Myth. If it was true the NRLW teams would be significantly better supported than they actually are. The NRL sides don't have a monopoly on popular existing brands either. The NRL would have got a ridiculous amount of publicity if the Bears and/or Newtown were given NRLW licenses for example, and there're plenty of other famous clubs and brands from around the country whom will/should never get a run in the NRL that the NRLW could have been the perfect format for as well. We'll never know because 99% of them were effectively barred from bidding. Doesn't give them a divine right to an NRLW license.

Yeah if the NRL had any intentions of the NRLW being anything more than a glorified publicity stunt then they would have capped the percentage of the competition that could be from Sydney at any one time, and the licenses would have been open to tender. Unfortunately self interest and myopia rules the day in RL.

It’s not my fault that you lot are totally ignorant about the state of Australian RL and utterly delusional about English RL’s position. To be honest with you I used to have hope for English RL, then I came on here and interacted with English RL fans, and it became clear why English RL is screwed and always will be… It’s like Australian soccer actually; anytime positive change is possible it’s own fans and supporters sabotage it in favour of an unachievable ideal.

The FFA is a separate company from from the A-league, and only makes a profit by fleecing money off the top of kids registration fees. In other words every soccer participant in the country pays a massive premium to keep the FFA from going bankrupt. Which is terrible for the sport, but that is an aside. The Socceroo’s activities don’t come close to covering the sport’s expenses, and even if they did local soccer still wouldn’t be a product that could grow to be a serious competitor in the Australian sports market.

You can’t exploit them effectively because there’s no local product that will hold the interest of the vast majority of any potential new fanbase the WC creates until the next WC comes around. Which is exactly the problem that the ARU and FFA has, and basically the whole point of the dessert analogy.

Canberra is a bloody paradise compared to Northern England.

I could feel myself losing brain cells just reading that. BTW, though I am neither a RU or Aussie Rules fan, this sort of gate keeping is a great way to turn potential fans away…

Have you noticed that we're supposedly interested in every SL player with any notoriety these days? The truth is that we're not seriously interested in the vast majority of them, their managers are just trying to use our existence and recent history of hiring poms to increase the value of their contracts at home. That's not to say that the club isn't interested in Regan Grace in particular, as I wouldn't have any more of a clue than you do as to whether they're interested in him in particular.

An even heavier focus on roughly 5-12 (max) games a year isn't going to help English RL's position in the slightest. RU and Soccer in this country revolves around the Wallabies and Socceroos, and basically always has. Yet both sports are still broke and supporter less despite all the exposure the Wallabies and Socceroos bring. The reason why that is, and to give you an analogy, is because international/rep fixtures are dessert while the local club competitions are your staple diet. They're a great treat, but if you rely on junk food to sustain you then you're always going to be unhealthy no matter what you do. If your goal is RL having a strong presence in the UK then the only way to achieve it is through investment into the grassroots and pro-scene nationally in the England, and perhaps the UK more broadly. If you get those things right then a strong rep/international scene will follow, but if you try to jump straight to the good bit without eating your vegetables first then you'll just end up another broke niche sport that can draw a good crowd a few times a year.

Any home games in Sydney would be a monumental mistake. Furthermore, a membership that included tickets to away games would require a reciprocal rights deal with the other club, which are much harder to organise than you might imagine. It's actually quite complicated to find a balance where such deals are financially beneficial for both parties, especially when only one side would be offering reciprocal rights. The Bears situation isn't at all comparable to the Swans relocating to Sydney. The Swans support base in Melbourne being mainly ex-South Melbourne fans is broadly speculation without evidence as well. I have no doubt that a percentage of their members in Melbourne are only members because of their history in Melbourne. However a bunch of teams do/would have similar numbers of members in other cities, the Cowboys in Brisbane and Collingwood and Richmond everywhere for example. Undoubtably a significant portion of Swans members in Melbourne are members for similar reasons to why those other clubs have large fanbases in other cities, and not because of their history in Melbourne. The Bears merging with Perth doesn't benefit anybody but the Bears, and under no circumstances should that be the reason for a Perth team or why they exist. If another Sydney club wants to relocate to Perth we are having a different discussion though, but that's never going to happen.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Qld gov was totally supportive of building a reasonable stadium in Cairns if they were guaranteed an NRL side in Cairns. No chance that happens though.

I doubt Redcliffe will keep Suncorp as their 'main home' for too long. Obviously I don't know this for sure, but I'd be surprised if they don't plan to use their status as an NRL club to get Dolphin Stadium developed into a roughly 20k NRL standard stadium as soon as possible. At that point they'll only play their big games at Suncorp. Playing regularly at Suncorp will hurt their support base in the mid-long term just like the Roar playing out of Redcliffe hurt theirs.