Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mr Plow

Which Sydney club must go

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Rugby League should be played on pitches, not in the stands or on balance sheets.

Sydney has nine clubs and NSW as a whole and on a smaller scale, Sydney, is the games heartlands in Australia, therefore, it is vital that Sydney and NSW keeps its stranglehold on its heartlands when there are other sports vying for the same area/city. While growing the game in Queensland and further afield holds obvious importance, the heartlands clubs are vital to the game. The “less is more” strategy seems baseless and I’m yet to see any genuine proof that the game would be better off with fewer clubs from the Sydney area. 

If clubs are loss making and/or suffering a drop in attendance over a sustained period of 5, 10, 15 years, the answer isn’t dissolving a club or moving it to the other end of the country. You surely seek out why these things are happening and adjust accordingly. 

 

Sorry but you need to research your history of RL a bit more closely before making such assertions. Senior RL has always been based upon the abilities of clubs to pay their way,  one significant difference with RU which led to the split in 1895. Many "famous" clubs of their day (Tyldesley, Manningham, Liversedge, Stockport etc) folded or changed codes because they could no longer afford to compete in the NU despite their early levels of success.

Harsh though this may be it was one of the singular things that allowed the NU/RL to develop its own unique character.


Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

I'm a bit confused at what you are saying here?

If we can choose between them for appropriate reasons we do so.

If we cant it doesnt matter which ones we choose.

 

It matters to the fans of those clubs, especially when there are no standout "weak clubs".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

It matters to the fans of those clubs, especially when there are no standout "weak clubs".

It doesnt really. 

You could pick any of the 9 and come up with fantastic, unarguable reasons why they should be the one to make way, the fans would no more accept that than a random choice. Their reaction would be exactly the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mr Plow said:

The only sensible option would be to have conferences. How you would do that I’m unsure with most teams based in NSW/ that corner of Australia.

Conferences are a means to an end rather than an end themselves. 

If the NRL goes up to 18 or 20 then conferences are an obvious option. Im not sure they necessarily need to be geographically organised though. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

It doesnt really. 

You could pick any of the 9 and come up with fantastic, unarguable reasons why they should be the one to make way, the fans would no more accept that than a random choice. Their reaction would be exactly the same. 

They would be absolutely arguable on the basis they apply to most of the other 9.

Do you not like people or something?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

They would be absolutely arguable on the basis they apply to most of the other 9.

Do you not like people or something?

I just dont agree that not being able to please everyone is an excuse for not doing something

Even if those reasons didnt apply to the other clubs, people would still argue. Making decisions to please them is a futile effort. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

They would be absolutely arguable on the basis they apply to most of the other 9.

Do you not like people or something?

You are learning, slowly, TG.    ??


Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you cull teams you have to be willing to accept that you are culling supporters also. I am a Sydney Roosters fan, if they are culled I stop supporting a team, I am not going to suddenly support the Central Coast Roosters or the Southeastern Rooster-Rabbits. Yes there are probably too many Sydney teams for a modern-day competition, but sometimes you work with the hand history has dealt you. If a team falls over financially on its own you could argue for not saving it but to actively cull a Sydney team is madness and just brings the game back to the dark days of the late 90s.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

I am fairly ignorant about the funding situation in the NRL but where does the governing body's money come from in the first instance?

Most of it comes from broadcasting rights contracts, but sponsorship money and profit from events as well.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, fairfolly said:

Does anybody have any idea how many of the Balmain Tigers immediately jumped to support the Wests Tigers when they merged. I would hazard a guess as not very many. I know one of Balmains best known supporters who had supported them basically all his life, Laurie Nicholls, the guy who used to lead the Aussies out in the tours in the U.K. with his vest on in whatever the weather,swore he would never watch his beloved Balmain ever again when they merged.

I do believe he eventually relented after several years and was persuaded to go again by his great friend Artie Beetson.How long he carried on though I would not know.I believe he actually died around 20 years ago now .

Actually, because in the early days they were basically just a continuation of Balmain the Wests Tigers early fan base was made up mainly of Balmain fans. It was mainly Magpies fans that they lost in the early days.

But the key point about the Wests Tigers is that a generation later probably over half of their fan base isn't connected with either Balmain or Western Suburbs, and are purely Wests Tigers fans.

Edited by The Great Dane
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, eal said:

If you cull teams you have to be willing to accept that you are culling supporters also. I am a Sydney Roosters fan, if they are culled I stop supporting a team, I am not going to suddenly support the Central Coast Roosters or the Southeastern Rooster-Rabbits. Yes there are probably too many Sydney teams for a modern-day competition, but sometimes you work with the hand history has dealt you. If a team falls over financially on its own you could argue for not saving it but to actively cull a Sydney team is madness and just brings the game back to the dark days of the late 90s.

If it was done sensibly the teams would just be dropped into a lower tier where they are competitive and sustainable. So the Roosters would still exist more or less exactly as they do now, but they'd be playing in the NSW Cup instead of the NRL.

If you'd still leave the game just because your team dropped down a tier, then firstly you weren't much of a fan to begin with , and secondly, fine we'll replace you with a guy from Perth or two guys from Brisbane,  and after a generation of heavy marketing and community engagement we'll have your kids and/or grandchildren supporting the Rabbitohs or another club.

You can say that if a club folds that they shouldn't be saved, and every administration I can remember going back to Kevin Humphreys in the 70s has said the same thing, but when push came to shove all of them, except one, bailed out the teams that were folding.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

Actually, because in the early days they were basically just a continuation of Balmain the Wests Tigers early fan base was made up mainly of Balmain fans. It was mainly Magpies fans that they lost in the early days.

But the key point about the Wests Tigers is that a generation later probably over half of their fan base isn't connected with either Balmain or Western Suburbs, and are purely Wests Tigers fans.

Thats true, for my generation Balmain Tigers and Western Suburbs Magpies sound a bit like 80s throwbacks.

Its Wests Tigers now and has been for 20 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go, this topic again, with @scotchy and @The Great Dane going on ad nauseam about how Sydney is saturated. Promoting a larger footprint rather than actual expansion because for some unbeknown reason, expansion whilst retaining the existing Sydney clubs is for somehow impossible.

Edited by Sports Prophet
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

Here we go, this topic again, with @scotchy and @The Great Dane going on ad nauseam about how Sydney is saturated. Promoting a larger footprint rather than actual expansion because for some unbeknown reason, expansion whilst retaining the existing Sydney clubs is for some reason impossible.

If sydney werent saturated then clubs wouldnt be playing in largely empty stadiums and wouldnt be in financial trouble despite getting a central grant 130% of the amount they pay in wages.

The reason the NRL cant expand whilst retaining all the existing sydney clubs is because there arent enough fans in sydney to sustain it.

Edited by scotchy1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Thats true, for my generation Balmain Tigers and Western Suburbs Magpies sound a bit like 80s throwbacks.

Its Wests Tigers now and has been for 20 years.

Any Warringah fans about owadays?

  • Haha 1

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

If it was done sensibly the teams would just be dropped into a lower tier where they are competitive and sustainable. So the Roosters would still exist more or less exactly as they do now, but they'd be playing in the NSW Cup instead of the NRL.

If you'd still leave the game just because your team dropped down a tier, then firstly you weren't much of a fan to begin with , and secondly, fine we'll replace you with a guy from Perth or two guys from Brisbane,  and after a generation of heavy marketing and community engagement we'll have your kids and/or grandchildren supporting the Rabbitohs or another club.

You can say that if a club folds that they shouldn't be saved, and every administration I can remember going back to Kevin Humphreys in the 70s has said the same thing, but when push came to shove all of them, except one, bailed out the teams that were folding.

The Roosters are more than competitive in the NRL so why would anyone want to relegate them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Eddie said:

The Roosters are more than competitive in the NRL so why would anyone want to relegate them?

If we have to follow through with this obsession some fans of our game have of strategising which Rugby League clubs should be killed off then the assessment should be of their long-term viability rather than their short-term competitiveness. Reliance on one rich owner is also unhelpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When posters here say Sydney is saturated it sounds like more Clubs have started in Sydney in recent times.

There have been no new Clubs in decades.

Wests and Balmain were forced together.

St George and Illawarra were forced together.

North Sydney was pushed into a partnership with Manly and it killed them.

Newtown were killed off.

South Sydney were kicked out but fought there way back in, without their cashed up benefactors they would have been dead years ago.

The “Market” will find its own level and Clubs will survive or fail dependent on their ability to survive.

 

Edited by Allora
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Talent is secondary to whether players are confident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

If sydney werent saturated then clubs wouldnt be playing in largely empty stadiums and wouldnt be in financial trouble despite getting a central grant 130% of the amount they pay in wages.

The reason the NRL cant expand whilst retaining all the existing sydney clubs is because there arent enough fans in sydney to sustain it.

But, new clubs in new markets brings new money to the game but but.

Bigger TV deals but but. 

More sponsors but.

More fans but but.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

But, new clubs in new markets brings new money to the game but but.

Bigger TV deals but but. 

More sponsors but.

More fans but but.

4 straw men in one post! I think you win a prize 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

4 straw men in one post! I think you win a prize 

? true.

The point stands. If these new clubs in new markets are going to bring new sponsors and new fans, they will do that with or without reducing Sydney clubs.

It’s purported that new teams in Perth, Brisbane and NZ will bring a bigger TV deal. As if that is some sort of justification for culling a Sydney club. 

Baffling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

? true.

The point stands. If these new clubs in new markets are going to bring new sponsors and new fans, they will do that with or without reducing Sydney clubs.

It’s purported that new teams in Perth, Brisbane and NZ will bring a bigger TV deal. As if that is some sort of justification for culling a Sydney club. 

Baffling.

But that wasnt what i said. 

Sydney cannot sustain 9 teams on its own merits, regardless of whether or not teams in other places would grow the tv deal and support base. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

But that wasnt what i said. 

Sydney cannot sustain 9 teams on its own merits, regardless of whether or not teams in other places would grow the tv deal and support base. 

Which English teams could be culled or merged as some struggle to get a crowd and have poor stadiums and add little or nothing to a TV deal?

You could throw an Indian Rug over several of them as they are that close together, in some cases closer than the Sydney suburban teams.

Everyone is an Armchair expert from a long way away.

Edited by Allora

Talent is secondary to whether players are confident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Allora said:

Which English teams could be culled or merged as some struggle to get a crowd and have poor stadiums and add little or nothing to a TV deal?

You could throw an Indian Rug over several of them as they are that close together, in some cases closer than the Sydney suburban teams.

Everyone is an Armchair expert from a long way away.

Yes many do, and yes you could. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Yes many do, and yes you could. 

Who do you think could be culled from Super League and who would replace them?

Lets say keep it down to four - six teams to prevent a bloodbath

 


Talent is secondary to whether players are confident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...