Jump to content

Redcliffe Dolphins chosen as preferred NRL expansion club


Recommended Posts


10 minutes ago, Whippet13 said:

The Guardian's take on it:

Redcliffe Dolphins: NRL’s newest team well placed to make immediate impact | NRL | The Guardian

I didn't realise they had agreed to no central funding for a full 5 years, I can see that's going to put ideas into the heads of certain SL chairmen..... 

Blatant puff piece.

Half the stuff in that article is either twisted into the best light or isn’t even true…

For example, leagues club members are meaningless, and  the only way you could consider the Dolphins the richest club in the NRL is if you do some dodgy accounting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It mentions Bennet has basically the option of 3-years. This, is a bit like Craig Bellamy, means he could coach for a single season and then move upstairs.

As I said earlier, it is pretty obvious Wayne nowadays plays a Weekend at Bernie's role with the day to day work going on behind the scenes. He just gets wheeled out for press conferences and pep talks.

Edited by Scubby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2021 at 09:30, The Rocket said:

True, some of the stadiums NRL clubs play out of are a disgrace for a $500m professional sporting competition, we wonder why our crowd averages and club memberships aren`t so flash. Hopefully at least in Sydney we might be seeing that redressed.

But letting a team into the competition with a home ground that holds 12 000, I don`t get it, I feel if that they become popular and the locals can`t get a ticket to a home game - apart from the games they play at Suncorp -  it will alienate fans straight away. It just doesn`t strike me as being very professional.

Those grass areas for fans to lay on look fine. Much better that than the dull, carbon copy stadiums with no character.

Bournemouth had a capacity of just over 11k when they were in the Premier League. They were miles smaller than everyone else (think Fulham was next smallest with 19k) but it was never an issue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Those grass areas for fans to lay on look fine. Much better that than the dull, carbon copy stadiums with no character.

Bournemouth had a capacity of just over 11k when they were in the Premier League. They were miles smaller than everyone else (think Fulham was next smallest with 19k) but it was never an issue.  

Unless you were a Bournemouth fan who wanted to watch their team that is.

You can sit on grass in stadiums in Oz - safety standards are far slacker than in the UK where its not allowed - saying that I did it a few times in Oz watching NRL games and it sounds a good idea but in reality its not conformable - bit of an atmospherekiller as well which the NRL struggles with at the best of times - give me a standing option leaning on a crush barrier with a drink in hand anyday.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DavidM said:

Dolphins on its own just seems weird to me . I know they’re talking about attracting a wider fan base but I just think teams are linked to and embedded in places and the names should show that . This could turn out to be counterproductive , it’s just a bit nebulous . I see these names in super rugby and they mean zero to me 

“The Dolphins”. It’s a strange one. Not having their geographic location in their name is amorphous as Martyn says. 

Arsenal don’t have their location in their name either, but Arsenal is instantly identifiable as it’s a unique name for a club. Dolphins is not.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2021 at 14:35, The Rocket said:

The other place they might have been taking games may have been the Sunshine coast.

I imagine the Dolphins will want the SC Falcons to be one of their feeder clubs to get buy-in from the locals. Which will leave The Storm looking for an alternative Q Cup option.

I`ve said before that long-term The Storm would be well-advised to set up a pathway in PNG designed to unearth more Justin Olams. All circumstantial evidence indicates there must be plenty out there potentially.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

I imagine the Dolphins will want the SC Falcons to be one of their feeder clubs to get buy-in from the locals. Which will leave The Storm looking for an alternative Q Cup option.

I`ve said before that long-term The Storm would be well-advised to set up a pathway in PNG designed to unearth more Justin Olams. All circumstantial evidence indicates there must be plenty out there potentially.

Why don't Melbourne develop more clubs and players in Victoria?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, DC77 said:

“The Dolphins”. It’s a strange one. Not having their geographic location in their name is amorphous as Martyn says. 

 

B1B28214-097F-48C8-ACAC-168D223FD106.png.4dc98e83b26984353e0043e7867a4c0e.png

 

51 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Arsenal don’t have their location in their name either, but Arsenal is instantly identifiable as it’s a unique name for a club. Dolphins is not.

Agreed, Arsenal is a very different case. This concern with the Redcliffe name (or North Brisbane or similar) not appealing to what is effectively very few, ageing, supporters of other QRL clubs is ridiculous. If the club is not going to take the simple option of representing a geographic location, who or what will the club be representing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2021 at 16:54, Sports Prophet said:

The way I see the weekly Sydney derby Friday 6pm KO is like an NRL event. Like Magic, where teams are not necessarily at their suburban home, but still play at least one home game at the nearest venue. In that case, I would be calling SFS “home” for Roosters, Bunnies, Dragons, Sharks, Seagles and Parra Stad for Eels, Panthers, Tigers and Dogs.

It`s reckoned South Sydney have more fans out west these days.

And I`m not sure parochial Sharks fans would venture that far out of the Shire. Most struggled to get as far as Kogarah this year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Daddy said:

Why don't Melbourne develop more clubs and players in Victoria?

I would have thought a Bronco’s supporter would be more open to the idea of the ambitions of a non-heartlands club to develop local talent whilst appreciating the necessity for that club to rely on recruits from heartland areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

It`s reckoned South Sydney have more fans out west these days.

And I`m not sure parochial Sharks fans would venture that far out of the Shire. Most struggled to get as far as Kogarah this year.

Whatever, Souths can play at Parra if they want. 

With regards to Kogarah, it’s a very poor facility, with weak car access and the home of the club’s biggest rival. 

What I can say with certainty is that none of Sydney’s suburban grounds are well serviced for public transport to deliver a consistent rock roaring 20k+ crowd for a Friday 6pm KO.

I’m not talking about just relocating a home game to Parra or SFS for the sake of it. There needs to be an carnival theme to these games to be successful events. They are very close to CBDs with thousands of workers. Otherwise, correct you are, just play the home game at the home ground. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The Daddy said:

Why don't Melbourne develop more clubs and players in Victoria?

They are. VRL is far stronger today than 30 years ago. More clubs, more players. And the Vic Thunderbolts junior rep teams are generally competitive in NSW competitions.

But it`s a tall order developing NRL standard players in relative isolation. And they are up against the most obsessive all-consuming bizarre sporting cult on the planet.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

What I can say with certainty is that none of Sydney’s suburban grounds are well serviced for public transport to deliver a consistent rock roaring 20k+ crowd for a Friday 6pm KO.

I’m not talking about just relocating a home game to Parra or SFS for the sake of it. There needs to be an carnival theme to these games to be successful events. They are very close to CBDs with thousands of workers. Otherwise, correct you are, just play the home game at the home ground. 

I said I liked the concept when you floated it in the ARL section. Not too sure though about the 6pm kick-off or the suitability of some of the clubs you chose for the SFS.

Other than the after-work crowd factor, what`s the advantage of 6pm over 8pm. How many Sharks fans would manage to find their way out of the Shire and be at the SFS for 6pm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

B1B28214-097F-48C8-ACAC-168D223FD106.png.4dc98e83b26984353e0043e7867a4c0e.png

 

Agreed, Arsenal is a very different case. This concern with the Redcliffe name (or North Brisbane or similar) not appealing to what is effectively very few, ageing, supporters of other QRL clubs is ridiculous. If the club is not going to take the simple option of representing a geographic location, who or what will the club be representing?

Unless in due course they decide otherwise, the de facto name of this NRL franchise is "(Redcliffe) Dolphins", where the tacit part can represent something or not, contingent on individual preference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, unapologetic pedant said:

I said I liked the concept when you floated it in the ARL section. Not too sure though about the 6pm kick-off or the suitability of some of the clubs you chose for the SFS.

Other than the after-work crowd factor, what`s the advantage of 6pm over 8pm. How many Sharks fans would manage to find their way out of the Shire and be at the SFS for 6pm?

It would be pretty fair to say for 6pm Friday KO, that probably just as many if not or more Sharks fans could suitably get to the SFS. Should it be an “event” worth attending of course, with you and I both full well knowing that the game itself is struggling to get people to attend in person.

Agreed, an 8pm KO would work significantly better. What the NRL is currently stuck with, is a difficult to fill, Friday 6pm KO slot that works for Warriors and that’s about it… so I am looking for a solution to maximise an underperforming slot. Yes, the after work crowd is a good target when KO is at 6pm.

In saying what I have, I think there was a reasonably strong turnout to a Penrith 6pm KO this year, so suburban crowds could work. But I envisage Friday night Sydney derbys events will need some considerable input and marketing from the NRL, not just the clubs themselves. I would anticipate the NRL would be more easily positioned to manage events at two familiar venues all season, than learn to manage events at five less resourced suburban grounds.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

The new club has already made two serious mistakes.

Dropping its name 'Redcliffe' and appointing Wayne Bennett as its inaugural coach.

'Dolphins' without the name Redcliffe is an amorphous identity that doesn't work.

The club has been extremely successful as the Redcliffe Dolphins and to change its name at this stage is crazy, as would have been the idea to call the club the Brisbane Dolphins.

Given that half the clubs in the NRL are named after suburbs of Sydney, with the same true of the AFL in Melbourne and football in London, the idea that its location name had to be dropped is lunacy.

Meanwhile Wayne Bennett will be 73 years old by the time the 2023 season starts. To give him a three-year contract as the coach of the new club, rather than employing a younger, more vibrant figure, looks to me to be the height of optimism.

Having said that, perhaps being able to announce him as a figurehead at this stage will help with recruitment, so maybe that underlies the decision.

 

Dropping Redcliffe was the best decision they have made. They want to have broad appeal and having a name of a suburb 40kms from the Brisbane cbd will not do that. English clubs could learn something here.

Bennett was by far the best choice, the rivalry writes itself and who cares what his age is?  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

'Dolphins' without the name Redcliffe is an amorphous identity that doesn't work.

The club has been extremely successful as the Redcliffe Dolphins and to change its name at this stage is crazy, as would have been the idea to call the club the Brisbane Dolphins.

I agree going with the name The Dolphins is a mistake, but why would the name Brisbane Dolphins be crazy? Redcliffe is within Brisbane as Headingley is within Leeds is it not?

If you travel north it’s over 1000km until you reach the next NRL club from Redcliffe, they can draw supporters from a massive geographical area, for that reason I think they should have gone with Queensland Dolphins. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Whippet13 said:

The Guardian's take on it:

Redcliffe Dolphins: NRL’s newest team well placed to make immediate impact | NRL | The Guardian

I didn't realise they had agreed to no central funding for a full 5 years, I can see that's going to put ideas into the heads of certain SL chairmen..... 

If that’s correct that is absolutely shocking, although I believe Super League were the first to do this, Toronto Wolfpack received no central funding remember, what a massive mistake that was, if The Dolphins also receive no fundings that’s terrible, why the hell shouldn’t they get the same as other clubs. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Whippet13 said:

The Guardian's take on it:

Redcliffe Dolphins: NRL’s newest team well placed to make immediate impact | NRL | The Guardian

I didn't realise they had agreed to no central funding for a full 5 years, I can see that's going to put ideas into the heads of certain SL chairmen..... 

As far as I am aware they haven't agreed to that. They will get their 13m. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

I agree going with the name The Dolphins is a mistake, but why would the name Brisbane Dolphins be crazy? Redcliffe is within Brisbane as Headingley is within Leeds is it not?

If you travel north it’s over 1000km until you reach the next NRL club from Redcliffe, they can draw supporters from a massive geographical area, for that reason I think they should have gone with Queensland Dolphins. 

Brisbane Dolphins would be better than just the Dolphins.

And Queensland Dolphins is another potential name.

But people will happily support a team that takes its name from its own part of town - Tottenham, Everton, Chelsea, West Ham and so on - and they will come from well outside the named suburb to do so.

The fact is that clubs have an identity. Unlike the Jets or the Firehawks, the Dolphins are not a new club. They are the Redcliffe Dolphins who have effectively been given a licence to join the NRL. Changing their identity is crazy, at least in my opinion.

Remember some years ago when Canterbury and Balmain changed their names to the Sydney Bulldogs and Sydney Tigers. It never really worked and they soon dropped the idea.

The only club that it has worked for is the Roosters, who have persevered with their name change from Eastern Suburbs. But I suspect that many of their supporters still call them Easts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...