Davo5 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 31 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Who is going to watch them and why dont they go watch one of the many clubs that are already there? The idea that there is a vast untapped market in 1 city that has 9 NRL clubs, many of whom struggle to get people to watch is preposterous. Spent much time in North Sydney ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby Chopra Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 2 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said: any suggestion that Rugby League clubs in Sydney should be closed down, merged or moved out of Sydney is absolutely ludicrous. I was in Sydney when the announcement to effectively close down North Sydney was made, and Rugby League effectively lost a whole swathe of support on the North Shore from that point onwards. It can't afford to do that again. So you wouldn't even consider trading, say, Cronulla-Sutherland (pop. 250k) for Perth (pop. 2 million) even if the latter could be shown to bring more fans and more revenue to the sport? In Britain we have a mechanism for testing out those hypotheses - P&R. In Australia, some teams suck up more and more revenues into a black hole without any threat to their existance, even when another could step in in a much more healthy way. It's dependency, not support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Sadler Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 hour ago, scotchy1 said: Who is going to watch them and why dont they go watch one of the many clubs that are already there? The idea that there is a vast untapped market in 1 city that has 9 NRL clubs, many of whom struggle to get people to watch is preposterous. I went to watch the Bears at the North Sydney Oval in 1997 and there were 15,000 people there, in one of the more prosperous parts of the city. After their club was thrown out of the NRL, most of those people began watching other sports, particularly AFL. Sydney isn't a single city, but a conurbation of many different districts, which differ greatly from each other. Rugby League should try to win the North Shore back. Bringing back the Bears would be a great start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davo5 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 hour ago, scotchy1 said: Yeah, the distance between the SFS and North Sydney Oval is about 2/3rds of the distance from somewhere like Rothwell to headingley. So basically you have no idea of the support base and corporate backing a team in North Sydney could call upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Sadler Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 6 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said: So you wouldn't even consider trading, say, Cronulla-Sutherland (pop. 250k) for Perth (pop. 2 million) even if the latter could be shown to bring more fans and more revenue to the sport? In Britain we have a mechanism for testing out those hypotheses - P&R. In Australia, some teams suck up more and more revenues into a black hole without any threat to their existance, even when another could step in in a much more healthy way. It's dependency, not support. If you want to get rid of the Sharks you'd get tremendous support from the A-League football authorities, who would base a team in Shark Park with the aim of converting the Shire to their sport. And I'm sure they would succeed. There's a very good argument for bringing Perth into the NRL, but it has nothing to do with relocating a club from Sydney. It's like saying that there are too many football clubs in London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby Chopra Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 minute ago, Martyn Sadler said: If you want to get rid of the Sharks you'd get tremendous support from the A-League football authorities, who would base a team in Shark Park with the aim of converting the Shire to their sport. And I'm sure they would succeed. There's a very good argument for bringing Perth into the NRL, but it has nothing to do with relocating a club from Sydney. It's like saying that there are too many football clubs in London. It's not a good comparison. IF some London premier league clubs had dwindling crowds and poor sponsorships, and you had Brighton and Leicester with rich owners and modern stadiums champing at the bit to come in, P&R would take care of that. Same in British rugby league. (Not that I think there are many obvious better candidates for the top flight.) There's no mechanism for that in the NRL. In a closed shop league you have to run sort of assessment of teams to stop them becoming basket cases. I'm not saying Cronulla are, but in principle at least, you have to asess if a team is worth their place if theres no 'on-the-pitch' way to do it. You can't just add Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane 2, or whatever as that splits the TV money more thinly, weakening the competition, and it's the competition as a whole that's the aim to promote, not individual clubs. On many measures (slightly bigger average crowds, massively bigger TV revenues) the NRL is in better shape today than in the last season of N Sydney, so who's to say that wasn't the right decision overall. So yes, a league that has its eye on surviving and thriving in the top sporting marketplace may well decide its worth trading the Shire for Greater Perth. That's the world that we, and our sport, live in. I'm not saying it definitely should happen, or that I want it to happen, but if we can't bring ourselves to even contemplate it, then the world will pass us by. Same applies here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Sadler Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 9 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said: It's not a good comparison. IF some London premier league clubs had dwindling crowds and poor sponsorships, and you had Brighton and Leicester with rich owners and modern stadiums champing at the bit to come in, P&R would take care of that. Same in British rugby league. (Not that I think there are many obvious better candidates for the top flight.) There's no mechanism for that in the NRL. In a closed shop league you have to run sort of assessment of teams to stop them becoming basket cases. I'm not saying Cronulla are, but in principle at least, you have to asess if a team is worth their place if theres no 'on-the-pitch' way to do it. You can't just add Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane 2, or whatever as that splits the TV money more thinly, weakening the competition, and it's the competition as a whole that's the aim to promote, not individual clubs. On many measures (slightly bigger average crowds, massively bigger TV revenues) the NRL is in better shape today than in the last season of N Sydney, so who's to say that wasn't the right decision overall. So yes, a league that has its eye on surviving and thriving in the top sporting marketplace may well decide its worth trading the Shire for Greater Perth. That's the world that we, and our sport, live in. I'm not saying it definitely should happen, or that I want it to happen, but if we can't bring ourselves to even contemplate it, then the world will pass us by. Same applies here. Some of the more successful football competitions in the world have no promotion or relegation, including the NFL and the AFL. Promotion and relegation tends to weaken competitions, not strengthen them. The point about expansion is that it should be expanding the TV audience and thereby making it more valuable, which is why the AFL expanded into Sydney many years ago. Although the TV audience for AFL in Sydney isn't large, it still contributes massively to the overall value of the broadcast rights for that competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUBRATS Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 55 minutes ago, Davo5 said: So basically you have no idea of the support base and corporate backing a team in North Sydney could call upon. Why not your usual style of reply ? Although strangely , I am enjoying your little discussion with Scotchy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 3 hours ago, scotchy1 said: Google is your friend. So you don’t know then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 43 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said: . You can't just add Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane 2, or whatever as that splits the TV money more thinly, weakening the competition, and it's the competition as a whole that's the aim to promote, not individual clubs. On many measures (slightly bigger average crowds, massively bigger TV revenues) the NRL is in better shape today than in the last season of N Sydney, so who's to say that wasn't the right decision overall. On the contrary, the main argument people have put forward on here for culling Sydney clubs and replaying them with teams elsewhere is to increase TV revenues, so they wouldn’t be spread more thinly as they would be bigger. Not that I’m Australian so really am not in a position to comment, but I don’t think NRL extension means you have to reduce the number of Sydney teams, far from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 The comparison with London has several caveats. London supports 12 professional football league sides (at the moment), but only 5 of those are in the top flight and only 3 of those have ever come close to the top. (I'm not counting clubs in the periphery of London ie Watford or Stevenage or Manchester United wahey!). But that is regulated by the ebb and flow of promotion and relegation and even then there's usually a geographical disparity between the locations - West Ham East, Chelsea West, Palace South and Spurs and Arsenal sharing the masses of North London. You could argue the same is true of the Greater Manchester/Lancashire/Merseyside conurbation, the Midlands and South Yorkshire. These clubs are all independent, right the way down to the 12th tier with no such thing as feeder clubs etc. With largely natural selection and finance determining where they fall. Indeed many of the rivalries are built on the basis of haves v have nots. We see this sort of pattern reflected in lots of sports leagues across the world with it all being relative. Dublin has a large number of soccer teams based there for example - but in a bigger competition it could probably only sustain 1? What does that tell us for Sydney? Its probably up to your own interpretation. If you want to say there's not enough room for the current teams then you'll find evidence to do so, if you can see the benefits of increasing the number of teams without loosening the grip on Sydney you'll find reason to do so. I'm generally in the latter camp as it stands but can see why there ought to be a consideration for a shake up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davo5 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 54 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Not enough, like some of the other clubs in sydney. Its mental to look at a saturated market like Sydney where clubs are struggling to pay their way and scrapping with each other for fans and sponsors and think what it needs is more clubs Again you don't really have a clue what Norths would bring to the table and I'm puzzled why you think it's only Sydney clubs that are struggling,while Melbourne have had great on field success they were propped up financially for years by Murdoch,I'm not even gonna go to the Gold Coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AB90 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 58 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said: Some of the more successful football competitions in the world have no promotion or relegation, including the NFL and the AFL. Promotion and relegation tends to weaken competitions, not strengthen them. The point about expansion is that it should be expanding the TV audience and thereby making it more valuable, which is why the AFL expanded into Sydney many years ago. Although the TV audience for AFL in Sydney isn't large, it still contributes massively to the overall value of the broadcast rights for that competition. Agreed Martin. Realistically the only reason we have P&R in European based leagues is because it's part of sporting culture here dating back to the mid 19th century. If football or any sport restarted here and all history of it erased, and a brand new system/competion had to be created, I doubt P&R would be the model used. A franchise system with the biggest clubs, most fans that generated the most money would be inplemented. P&R tends to only strengthen the lower leagues I.e championship and league 1 as it gives them something to aim for. But weakens the highest level which is generally where all the revenue comes from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Sadler Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 42 minutes ago, AB90 said: Agreed Martin. Realistically the only reason we have P&R in European based leagues is because it's part of sporting culture here dating back to the mid 19th century. If football or any sport restarted here and all history of it erased, and a brand new system/competion had to be created, I doubt P&R would be the model used. A franchise system with the biggest clubs, most fans that generated the most money would be inplemented. P&R tends to only strengthen the lower leagues I.e championship and league 1 as it gives them something to aim for. But weakens the highest level which is generally where all the revenue comes from. Although promotion and relegation are usually thought of as two sides of the same coin, I would separate them. I think relegation can be immensely damaging, not just to the club relegated, but to the competition as a whole, depending on which club gets the chop. Promotion, on the other hand, can be highly motivating, exciting and encourages greater support for all the clubs in a promotion race. My ideal would be a Championship that gave the prospect of promotion to its clubs into Super League as long as they satisfied certain criteria, which wouldn't be set at an unattainable standard. If they won their Grand Final they could then join Super League, which would expand by one club. Ultimately Super League would expand in an organic way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 hour ago, scotchy1 said: Expansion doesnt mean you have to consolidate the sydney teams. Expansion and the fact sydney sides are struggling because there are too many of them are the reasons you need to consolidate the sydney sides. Who do you support, out of interest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 4 hours ago, scotchy1 said: Who is going to watch them and why dont they go watch one of the many clubs that are already there? The idea that there is a vast untapped market in 1 city that has 9 NRL clubs, many of whom struggle to get people to watch is preposterous. Every NRL team has an average attendance higher than every SL club I think, or not far off it, so I dread to think what your views on RL in this country are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davo5 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 12 minutes ago, Eddie said: Every NRL team has an average attendance higher than every SL club I think, or not far off it, so I dread to think what your views on RL in this country are. Newtown Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AB90 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 50 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said: Although promotion and relegation are usually thought of as two sides of the same coin, I would separate them. I think relegation can be immensely damaging, not just to the club relegated, but to the competition as a whole, depending on which club gets the chop. Promotion, on the other hand, can be highly motivating, exciting and encourages greater support for all the clubs in a promotion race. My ideal would be a Championship that gave the prospect of promotion to its clubs into Super League as long as they satisfied certain criteria, which wouldn't be set at an unattainable standard. If they won their Grand Final they could then join Super League, which would expand by one club. Ultimately Super League would expand in an organic way. Expanding by promotions great, but surely theres a limit to the amount of teams we can have in a top flight rugby league until its starts to dilute the talent and reduce the playing standard. More teams for the sake of it isn't always better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davo5 Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 hour ago, scotchy1 said: Melbourne are investment working. They took a big city that had no RL to one where RL is growing. Their average attendance last year was higher than any sydney side, it was double St George's. The 8 other NRL sydney clubs lost 12m dollars last year despite 130% of their wages coming from the central grant. A 20yr investment that still can't make a profit and who until recently have relied on handouts from News Corp & extra NRL grants on top of what the other clubs receive. Gold Coast needed the NRL to step in and take on their $4m debt 3 of those Sydney clubs returned a profit last year and 5 of the loss making clubs debts were covered by their affiliated profit making Leagues clubs which really only leaves Manly in trouble if the Penn's stop pumping money in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 hour ago, scotchy1 said: In the NRL? The Storm. I was fortunate enough to be there in 99 No SL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 59 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Not even close. Generally the likes of leeds, wigan and saints get just below the NRL average at 12-15k, Wire and Hull wouldnt look out of place. St george would be about 5,6,7 in terms of SL attendances Wigan Leeds and Saints don’t average anywhere near 15,000. If any of them get a 15,000 gate it’s massive for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 minute ago, scotchy1 said: Leeds How would like it if an Australian came over and said West Yorks is saturated with clubs and said we need to scrap Wakefield, Cas and Huddersfield and replace them with teams from London, Birmingham and Bristol? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 1 hour ago, scotchy1 said: Not even close. Generally the likes of leeds, wigan and saints get just below the NRL average at 12-15k, Wire and Hull wouldnt look out of place. St george would be about 5,6,7 in terms of SL attendances Talk us through this Scotchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 5 minutes ago, Eddie said: How would like it if an Australian came over and said West Yorks is saturated with clubs and said we need to scrap Wakefield, Cas and Huddersfield and replace them with teams from London, Birmingham and Bristol? Spoilers, he' 100% agree with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted March 31, 2020 Share Posted March 31, 2020 2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Why are you making this nonsense up? It’s not nonsense. Your stock response when people demonstrate you’re wrong is to say it’s nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.