Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Can’t post the link but there’s a consortium putting a bid together in NZ for a 2nd NZ based NRL franchise to be called the southern orcas which will represent and play games in Wellington and throughout the South Island.

Cant stand these joint bid clubs that try to be all things and represent numerous places only to end up representing nothing and no one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the context of NZ it makes perfect sense to have a club representing the North Island and one the South Island. Realistically NZ is very unlikely to get more clubs than that and certainly will never get two clubs on the South Island.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

Can’t post the link but there’s a consortium putting a bid together in NZ for a 2nd NZ based NRL franchise to be called the southern orcas which will represent and play games in Wellington and throughout the South Island.

Cant stand these joint bid clubs that try to be all things and represent numerous places only to end up representing nothing and no one.

There representing the South Island and surely taking games around the area is a good thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

Can’t post the link but there’s a consortium putting a bid together in NZ for a 2nd NZ based NRL franchise to be called the southern orcas which will represent and play games in Wellington and throughout the South Island.

Cant stand these joint bid clubs that try to be all things and represent numerous places only to end up representing nothing and no one.

Link: https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/125103132/bidder-enters-fray-for-second-kiwi-nrl-licence-based-in-wellington

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As opposed to the NZ (or Vodafone) Warriors who play mainly in Auckland but also invariably Wellington, North Harbour, and occasionally Christchurch?

A second NZ team will always face the inevitable reality that Auckland is where most of the money and people are (especially if you take in nearby Hamilton too). As such by being "not Auckland", its going to have to have a broader base to draw on beyond just Wellington or Christchurch or Dunedin. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Damien said:

In the context of NZ it makes perfect sense to have a club representing the North Island and one the South Island. Realistically NZ is very unlikely to get more clubs than that and certainly will never get two clubs on the South Island.

Christchurch would be perfect but not something like the southern orcas that’s trying to be all things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

There representing the South Island and surely taking games around the area is a good thing.

Not for me it isn’t. Either base yourself in Wellington or Christchurch and represent that city or nothing at all.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

Christchurch would be perfect but not something like the southern orcas that’s trying to be all things.

They can still have a main base whilst maintaining a broader appeal and playing the odd game elsewhere. Its not a binary choice.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Orcas is the name of the Wellington provincial rep team. As such there`s not much chance of buy-in on the South Island.

The South Island team in the under-20s National Championship went well on and off the field this year. Inevitably Canterbury-dominated, but with a healthy sprinkling of impressive players from Otago, Southland, and West Coast. Whether this S.I. identity among players could ever be replicated widely enough to build a fanbase for a S.I. NRL franchise is a moot point.

For numerous reasons, I believe Perth is the better option for the 18th franchise.

Edited by unapologetic pedant
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bring it on, given the extraordinary number of NRL players that NZ produces considering they just have one professional RL team, this can only be a good thing for player development. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the article it seems pretty sensible to me? They'll represent Wellington and the surrounding areas but take some games to the South Island and try and gain some foothold there with a view to basing a team there in future (much like how the Warriors have been playing one off games in Wellington and internationals have been played there).

If you can build a rivalry, there's nothing better to drive on both teams.

I was born to run a club like this. Number 1, I do not spook easily, and those who think I do, are wasting their time, with their surprise attacks.

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

Bring it on, given the extraordinary number of NRL players that NZ produces considering they just have one professional RL team, this can only be a good thing for player development. 

I’m all for expanding into New Zealand with NZ2 but this team sounds to broad in terms of representation.

Theres definitely a gap in the market for NZ2 especially with the domestic scene in NZ rugby union in a state of flux.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

Not when Andrew Chalmers is involved.

He will not pass a fit and proper persons test at the NRL. He has form during his time at the NZRL. I don't know about the Bulls but I can't imagine it went well. Good idea - no way should he be involved. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Scubby said:

He will not pass a fit and proper persons test at the NRL. He has form during his time at the NZRL. I don't know about the Bulls but I can't imagine it went well. Good idea - no way should he be involved. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is Chalmers, who racked up a load of debt at NZRL and ran Bradford into the ground. I think the NRL aren’t as easily fooled as the RFL, so I can’t see this happening, though the development of NZ players is definitely something that needs to be on the agenda. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the second NZ team was off when V`landy`s talked about a fifth Queensland team by 2027 in a speech leading up to Magic Round. Especially give the amount of money behind two of the Queensland bids and the complications that might arise if NZRU goes ahead with its` $357 m private equity bid. I was thinking they might put NZ on the backburner until they see how the PE thing plays out over there.

V`landy`s talked about one new Queensland franchise in 2023 and another in 2027, given the money behind at least two of the bids it`s going to be hard to say no to one of them and why would you, what`s the point of having a Rugby League club worth 10`s of millions of dollars running around with a team in the QLD. Cup when they could be investing that money in the NRL.

If they do bring the fifth Qld side in then maybe they will revisit NZ around the end of the decade. You`d have to say they haven`t exactly been inundated with expressions of interest from NZ so far. There`s no need for them to stop or decrease the extra money they`re putting into NZ League development in the meantime.

Maybe NZ2 and Perth,  teams 19 and 20, around 2030.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

 

There`s no need for them to stop or decrease the extra money they`re putting into NZ League development in the meantime.

 

Do the NRL put much into the grassroots game in NZ? Must admit I don’t know much about it but I get the impression that RL is contracting in NZ rather than being developed? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

36 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Do the NRL put much into the grassroots game in NZ? Must admit I don’t know much about it but I get the impression that RL is contracting in NZ rather than being developed? 

Quite the contrary Eddie, there has been a concerted push with the ARLC commission appointing Phil Gould to work with the NZRL to expand their development pathways. ( see below )

Growth areas abound

The emergence of a possible second Kiwi team coincides with a renewed focus on development in New Zealand through the introduction of a national under-20s competition and plans for under-16s and under-18s competitions.

NZRL CEO Greg Peters said the ARLC's investment in New Zealand would not only produce talent for the NRL but also help to grow the international game.

"The ARLC have provided funding in the past but it has significantly increased this year and there is a greater recognition of New Zealand's place in the development pathway, which we are grateful for," Peters said.

"The number of players who come from New Zealand currently sits at about 26 per cent of the NRL and the primary objective was to create to start of a development focus for young players in New Zealand.

"We have utilised some of the funding that we have received for our under-20s competition and the next focus is under-16s and under-18s nationally, as well as coach education and development.

 
 
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Damien said:

They can still have a main base whilst maintaining a broader appeal and playing the odd game elsewhere. Its not a binary choice.

Don’t mind this as long as it’s just 2-3 homes games. Maybe some of the Aussie teams could play their “home” games against NZ2 in NZ as has happened in the past with the warriors l

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

Not for me it isn’t. Either base yourself in Wellington or Christchurch and represent that city or nothing at all.

Don’t the North Queensland Cowboys represent the whole of North Qld ?

Dont several NRL clubs take home games to other areas ?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Don’t the North Queensland Cowboys represent the whole of North Qld ?

Dont several NRL clubs take home games to other areas ?

Yes they do and they are based out of Townsville. They don’t try and represent Darwin or Alice springs etc.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

Don’t mind this as long as it’s just 2-3 homes games. Maybe some of the Aussie teams could play their “home” games against NZ2 in NZ as has happened in the past with the warriors l

It depends how good NZ2 is. Generally Sydney-based teams (that's who take the games to other venues. In their entire history, the Broncos have never taken a game away from Brisbane) take the games with the worst crowds to country areas or to NZ. It's usually the Cows game or Titans or sometimes the Storm. (Storm may look great on TV but they don't put bums on stadium seats for most Sydney teams.)

Often it's tied to financial incentives, like the Parra deal with Northern Territory Tourism or the recent game in Wagga where it was Wagga Racing Carnival (or whatever) so there were already people in town for the Saturday races so put on a Sunday game and make them all pay for motels overnight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cumbrian Mackem said:

Yes they do and they are based out of Townsville. They don’t try and represent Darwin or Alice springs etc.

Has Alice Springs & Darwin moved to Queensland ??

The Cowboys draw support from all over the northern part of the state though with supporters driving hundreds of miles to attend games

Edited by Davo5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...