By Steve Jancetic
May 24th 2008 @ 8:10am
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates..
---------------
More Sydney clubs join NRL extinction queue
Four more Sydney NRL clubs today joined South Sydney in claiming they were under serious threat of extinction due to the ongoing financial crisis in rugby league.
More NRL
Opinion divided over Murray’s success as a coach
Dragons pip Manly with late try
While the Rabbitohs are reportedly struggling to make ends meet under the co-ownership of Peter Holmes a Court and Hollywood actor Russell Crowe, several other Sydney clubs are feeling the pinch of the NSW government’s increased poker machine taxes.
Parramatta, St George Illawarra, Penrith and the Bulldogs - all heavily reliant on grants from leagues clubs - admitted their future was far from certain if the status quo remained.
“We’re under massive pressure as well, just like every other club in Sydney,” Bulldogs chief executive Todd Greenberg said.
“We’re on notice that our grant may well be affected going into next year.
“We’re all in the same boat here and the future livelihood of Sydney clubs are all under threat.”
The remaining Sydney clubs - Manly, Wests Tigers and the Sydney Roosters - said while they had moved away from being so reliant on leagues club grants, they too had been and would continue to be grossly affected by a reduction in funding.
Cronulla did not return AAP’s calls.
Parramatta boss Dennis Fitzgerald, who will be part of a sub-committee which will appeal to the government for a relaxation in tax rules, said he could not guarantee the Eels’ long-term future.
“I can’t give an iron-clad guarantee,” he said.
“We as club managers probably underestimated the effect that the poker machines taxes, effectively it’s a 50 per cent increase in what we were planning but with other restrictions such as reduced machines for the big clubs like ourselves, reduced trading hours which makes a hell of a difference and then the smoking bans … it is a very drastic situation.
“Parramatta Leagues Club … the fourth biggest (in NSW) as far as machine revenues is concerned, we had a loss of $4 million and we’re budgeting for a loss of $3 million this year.
“If the government wants to see a whole host of licensed clubs together with NRL clubs collapse, they won’t do anything.
“If they want to help us, they will come to the party and coming to the party means reducing those tax rates.”
NRL chief executive David Gallop met with club bosses this week and admitted the outlook was bleak.
“The message is coming through in no uncertain terms that some Sydney NRL clubs will die if things don’t change,” Gallop said.
South Sydney director of football operations Shane Richardson today moved to reassure fans the club was doing everything it could do to secure its long-term future after Holmes a Court said “I can’t guarantee Souths will survive”.
There have been reports Holmes a Court and Crowe are set to scale back their investment in the club amid talk of a rift between the pair.
“It’s business as usual for us,” Richardson said.
“Now is a time for the members that have stuck by the South Sydney Rabbitohs to support the club.
“We lead the game in terms of growth in membership and sponsorship, but we need everyone who supports the club to stick with us and encourage other supporters to get on board and support what we’re trying to achieve.”
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(23)
Loading ...
Spiro Zavos said | May 24th 2008 @ 9:20am | Report comment
The problems with the financing of the Sydney RL clubs are real. Whether they will be solved by changes to the poker machine taxes and so on is problematical. The business model for the great number of Sydney clubs was set in the 1950s and 1960s when RL was the only game in town in Sydney on a commercial and mass basis. Clubs got reasonable gate money from ancient grounds, and were more than topped up with grants from the league clubs. Players weren’t paid much, and officials even less. Roy Masters tells stories of officials leaving the NSWRL meetings with their pockets stuffed with cheese squares.
The Super League disaster, professional rugby union, the advent of the Swans and the decline of the clubs and increased taxes on them have put the business model under extreme pressure.
What is the new model to be? The franchise system with Peter Holmes a Court and Russell Crow looks like breaking down (something that rugby union should note). It’s not clear that fewer Sydney teams will increase crowds or interests. Cronulla supporters are not going to change allegiances to, say, St George Illawarra. The St George Illawarra model has not been a success. It’s neither fish nor fowl. It seems pretty obvious that Illawarra should have kept its separate identity.
What is the answer. There is talk of putting teams into Perth and Adelaide. That’s been tried before. Perhaps it will work this time. Perhaps not.
What is the answer? Or the answers?
sheek said | May 24th 2008 @ 9:53am | Report comment
Steve?Spiro,
I can readily accept many of the Sydney based rugby league clubs, & some out of towners, are struggling financially. Even rugby union is under the pump.
What is more difficult to ascertain is just how popular RL remains in Sydney? There are many in the print, radio & TV media with vested interests in keeping RL at the forefront of the Sydney sporting landscape. You could say the situation with AFL in Melbourne, Adelaide & Perth, re vested media interest, is even more acute.
These people in the media have staked their careers on the continuing popularity of RL in Sydney. But it goes further, to corporate sponsors & merchandising retailers.
The apparent deteriorating private equity arrangement between celebrities owners Crowe & Holmes a Court & the rabbitohs must be sobering for the ARU (& their fans), who have seen private equity as the saviour of the future.
I was howled down for suggesting it before, but I will suggest it again. Rugby league may have to surrender its resources to rugby union, to form one new rugby code. But the new game might only look passably as being either league or union.
I would retain league’s 6 tackle count. But I would retain union’s 15 players on the team, competitive scrum & lineout. All other considerations aside, the scrum is a joke in league, & fast becoming an anacronism in union.
Previously, I have suggested league abandon the scrum in favour of an American football style line of scrimmage, & also allow the first tackle pass to be thrown forward.
Imagine my surprise when reading a Sean Fagan article on how American football evolved almost 100 years ago. In 1906, I think it was, AF abandoned the scrum for the line of scrimmage & allowed the first tackle throw to be forward. Although lateral passes are still allowed, they have almost gone out of fashion. And stats argue there is less passing & more kicking in league today, than ever before.
Another article surmised the changing nature of the five-eighth position. fagan argues this was the last backline position to be formaised in union. Originally, there were two halfbacks, but the one standing back was called the ’stand-off’, still a popular term for the flyhalf in the UK.
Fagan went on to argue the league halfback is more like a quarterback today. History repeating itself? Firstly, American football? Next rugby league? Then perhaps rugby union? Makes your hair stand up!
The sporting landscape is definitely changing, but exactly how is difficult to predict (for me anyhow). Union & league may be forced to merge out of survival necessity. Then either seperately, or as a combined entity, they will have to address the increasing anachronism of the scrum.
The scrum is a 19th century invention, & 21st century sports fans are tolerating it’s oddity less & less. The scrum/maul/ruck was invented long before mass media TV exposure. What may have been a quaint 19th century entertainment, befuddles 21st century fans who want to see what’s going on, not imagine it.
Sorry, you might wonder how the scrum got into this? However, the structure of various games, as well as merges between codes, are all part of the big picture. The history of rugby union & rugby league in the annals of mankind, may prove to be nothing more than a single grain of sand on Bondi Beach!
cosmos forever said | May 24th 2008 @ 9:57am | Report comment
The English Super League has 12 teams, I can see the NRL heading that way (despite all of the talk of expansion).
3 x QLD teams, 1 x VIC, ACT, NZ, 6 x NSW.
That would mean four teams falling away in Sydney, as by my thinking RL is actually better suited to small passionate markets like Newcastle than fighting for space in large markets like the generic ‘Sydney’ (and no - I’m not discounting the passion of Sydney club fans, just pointing out the crowded market that exists).
I keep the ACT, VIC and NZ teams for the same reason - niche teams in one team markets.
This logic makes it even tougher if you consider Penrith as a regional team. That only leaves four spaces…
So - no expansion to Perth or Adelaide. A competition not much smaller than the Super 14 but with the benefit of almost year long competition, hihglighted by SOO. Build in a season long Cup, as has been discussed on the Roar before - that not only allows the four teams that get lost to the NRL to play, but other country and club teams still kicking around like Newton etc and you have a pretty good overall comp. That also does away with all of the merger talk as clubs can face facts and drop a level but still have contact through the cup.
Lowy is talking about promotion / relegation for football by 2018 - maybe the NRL needs to head this way as well.
Midfielder said | May 24th 2008 @ 10:05am | Report comment
Spiro, Sheek, Cosmos,
Enjoyed reading your posts, all made valid points.
cosmos forever said | May 24th 2008 @ 10:10am | Report comment
Off topic but I never understood why AF teams didn’t run a series of lateral passes and force an overlap. Is there a limit on laterals per game? I’d be more than happy to join the NY Jets training staff to show them how to pass.
Imagine blowing al of those deep zone defences off the park with some good old fashioned spinning it wide…
Sorry to go off topic!
Rob said | May 24th 2008 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Sheek, Fair comments. But are we just looking at League and Union through Aust. eyes ? Are those codes in strife in say Uk and/or France.? I dont know that answer. Any thoughts from you?
sheek said | May 24th 2008 @ 2:08pm | Report comment
Rob,
Initially looking at Australia only. Although I think the scrum, as mentioned, is something both codes will be required to look at, league sooner, & union later. But that’s part of another debate, I guess.
I’m guessing each generation of newer sports fans will be less & less interested in the mysteries of the scrum. Just the same way cricket 5 days tests is struggling to compete with the hurly burly of today’s life, & the threat from twenty20 cricket.
Cosmos forever,
There’s nothing stopping AF teams from performing as many lateral passes as they like. You might remember video footage shown on The Roar some months ago of a US University match. The winning team strung together about a dozen passes to touchdown with time up.
Itr’s about ball security, which is also a blight in union & league. But AF took it to extreme measures. Now AF teams will advance basically one of two ways - usually the forward pass, or the short back pass. But retaining possession is all-important.
And my apologies also going off-topic.
There’s a media report AFL wants to buy Stadium Australia, which would make them a hostile landlord to union & league & soccer. Is AFL really that cashed up? Last offer early 2007 was about AU$200m. You would think it would be worth much more now.
There are images flashing through my head that in 50 years 4 footy codes could be down to the 2 AFs - Australian football & Association football. Or 3 AFs, if union & league go down the merged American football path.
Sorry, hope I didn’t spoil anyone’s afternoon supper!
Scuub said | May 24th 2008 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
The merger of the two rugby codes is less likely than the slow degeneration of one by the other.
I believe that, eventually, the huge amounts of money being thrown about by NH rugby union will pull most of the top talent, media coverage and then fans across to the 15 man code. The growth of Union in the North is around 12% pa. Super League is still growing, but at around 4-7%pa. It also doesn’t help that, in the north, Union clubs earn a lot more than League clubs already anyway.
Basically, as all pro sports look to expand their game (and whether or not a salary cap exists) teams will put more and more pressure on their governing bodies to raise salary caps, to be able to attract better talent to their teams . This is prevalent in AFL and has recently occured in the Guinness Premiership, where the salary cap was pushed to 4M pounds, compared to 2M pounds.
Only a handful of the current clubs can realistically afford this raise in wages, but the will of the stronger clubs usually drives any comp, especially so in Soccer.
If the UK and French clubs continue to grow their businesses then very soon the earnings of union player could far outweigh those in league, especially if money remain tight. If SANZAR can also successfully create a SUPER Super Comp, as well as introducing private equity, then the earnings of Rugby Union in Australia may also move out past that of League. A fifth Aussie Super team would mean 35 more highly paid professional Union players.
For the time being however, I beleive these press releases are more about adding fuel to the sub-commitees requests to the NSW government and about trying to get more members to commit money to the clubs.
But it certainly doesn’t bode well for the NRL if money is becoming tight at the same time that Union is looking to double the length of it’s flagship pro comp in the South and when players in NH union clubs can earn so much more year on year.
A few other questions would be:
How would the Raiders fair if the Brumbies were to play twice as many games each season?
How would the Storm fair with a new Super Rugby team in Melbourne?
How would the Warriors go if a Pacific Island Super Rugby team was to move into South Auckland and Mt Smart stadium?
In a time where loyalty in sport appears to be sinking below money, as the major motivator for players, will predicitng the success of a code be as simple as looking at who’s got the biggest chequebook? I hope not, but fear so.
Finally, if the Rugby codes were to become one again, would Soccer try to move into being a direct competitor (ie a winter sport) or do you think it will remain as a niche summer sport as it is currently?
JimC said | May 24th 2008 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
I’m not sure that Sheek’s thesis on the rugby league media is correct. I would say many in the media are enemies of the code. This morning’s appaling article in the SMH by Brad Walter is a case in point. He basically suggests rugby league should throw away the salary cap and pay SBW and Gasnier big bucks to stay, as this will keep the crowds pouring in, despite presenting no evidence of any correlation between Bulldogs, Saints crowds and the presence of either player on the pitch.
He uses the billionaire funded cricket IPL crew like Symonds and Ponting, plus the ridiculous salary of Matt Giteau as evidence that the two players mentioned are underpaid.
This is the economics of the madhouse. The salary cap is the best thing rugby league ever did. People come to see the rivalry of two football teams, not just some big name players. Manly vs St George is what pulled in 12000 last night for a TV game, not a couple of names on the teamsheet.
I hope David Gallop has the strength to ignore myopic opportunists like Walter, who no doubt is trying to keep close to the two player’s respective agents by keeping this story alive, rather than report the news.
Much as i’ve enjoyed watching Gaz and SBW, if they want the big bucks in France, let them go. It’s their life, but it’s our game.
NUFCMVFC said | May 24th 2008 @ 8:41pm | Report comment
Scuub,
I would say that Association Football will stay predominately in Summer here, makes sense not to go directly head to head but it is also in line with the European Leagues
The A League will inevitably have to extend their season though for player development reasons, because a 22 round comp + finals is ridiculously short in the footballing world but there are also requirements from AFC by 2012. I would say that this would be somethign of an overlap where the start and ends of each comp overlap,plus the FFA Cup which has been mooted wil have to incorporate summer A League clubs and winter State and lower league clubs but mostly they will be wanting to share the generalist Sports fans with an interest in a variety of the codes to ensure they have a good “top up” on the hardcore diehards who pretty much live for just the one code. There will be ACL, but that will be weeknights so there still is no direct competition.
Redb said | May 24th 2008 @ 10:03pm | Report comment
Sheek,
The story of the AFL and ANZ stadium was ‘broken’ by a RL writer from the Daily Telegraph - if you read the article it appears the AFL tried a year ago, but the debt was too great. it is pure speculation.
But let’s suggest the AFl does buy the stadium, are they going to be so tunnel focused that they would refuse access to RL’s SOO, union’s Bledisloe or the Socceroos big games? I seriously doubt it. The AFL remains a business it would be crazy to give up this revenue for a single weekly game of AFL in Sydney. Would never happen and smacks of hysteria by News Ltd media.
Redb
Paul said | May 24th 2008 @ 10:32pm | Report comment
The situation is certainly a sad one. It is always sad to see traditions die, but sometimes they are just forced out by market forces. The discussion of code merging has gone on for years, but the only problem with that is whether the two international bodies would want to merge. But in Rugby, Australia is a world leader, so if Australia made moves the rest of the world may think about the issues involved.
My observation though is that Sydney people are simply not turning out enough for the NRL. It is sad, but if people are serious about their team not dying out, then they should turn out to the games. If every fan of the struggling clubs did this, perhaps they will still have a chance to survive.
It seems in general that Sydney people are turning off sports of all sorts. I wonder what the reason for this is, but it is a little baffling.
sheek said | May 25th 2008 @ 7:31pm | Report comment
Redb,
I was looking more at the fact the AFL has the money to buy Stadium Australia, more than anything else. It demonstrates I think AFL is the richest football code in Australia. Association football is making huge strides, & with its global reach, must be respected.
Neither rugby code might survive into the future alone. I would suggest union, with its stronger international flavour, is better placed than league, although league is the stronger in Australia.
The two rugby codes might be forced to amalgamate for reasons of business practicality & survival necessity. I’m not saying it WILL happen, but it MIGHT happen. League might reach a point where, in order to preserve its icons - Broncos, Knights, Storm, Titans, etc - would find it the lesser of two evils to merge with union.
Union, on the other hand, would no doubt covet league’s assets - national club icons, junior player base, etc. I know this suggestion ruffles a lot of feathers, but who knows what the future holds?
And I agree with Paul. In Sydney, sports fans are staying away from many sports. Is it the cost of buying tickets? The hassle of accessible transport & parking? Too easy to watch on TV? Dissatisfaction with the product presented? Maybe a combination of all?
I hate to say it, but unlike Melbourne, Sydney is a jungle to get around. Maybe we should all go overseas or interstate for 12 months, & nuke the whole place, except for the icons, & start again, with motorways, rail, tram & bus routes a priority.
cosmos forever said | May 25th 2008 @ 7:59pm | Report comment
Or move to Canberra! Seriously, if it had taken me 90 minutes to crawl down the M5 to get home I’d be quite reluctant to head back into town to watch a footy game. I jut don’t know how you people do it.
Redb said | May 26th 2008 @ 9:21am | Report comment
Sheek,
I’m not sure it’s a great move by the AFL. A few of us were around when games were played at Waverley Park in Melbourne’s south-eastern suburbs this was an 80,000 seat venue built and owned by the AFL. The fans hated it, poor access, getting out of the car park was a nightmare, poor atmosphere, nicknamed ‘Artic Park”. Sound familiar?
I’m not sure it would add any value to the AFL, as long as the AFL has access why own the thing?
Re Melbourne and Sydney accessibility - well a few of us Melbournites have been saying this for years on various Sydney forums - the sports precinct adjacent to the CBD houses the MCG, Rod Laver Area, Vodaphone Arena, Collignwood’s Lexus Centre, Olympic Park athletics Track and the new rectangular 30,000 seat stadium which is being built. This is all within walking distance of the CBD (so all city carparks are accessible), trains, trams and buses ferry fans in from the suburbs and back out again. The whole Melbourne sports precinct is linked by elevated walking platforms - it is amazing.
The problem with the NRL Sydney clubs appears to be a lack of solid fan base - clubs built around pokies venues not club membership. Pay Tv revenues go to Foxtel, sure the NRL gets TV money, but growing the game solely on TV ratings creates a false economy. AFL club membership under pins the crowds of the AFL - for about $300 (bronze membership) you can get a guaranteed seat at all 11 home games for the season. It doesn’t mean Melbourne or North Melbourne are viable long term though and the AFL will face similiar problems in the future.
For the record the AFL has managed to maintain the traditional VFL clubs in some form, the only VFL club to fold completely was University about 70-80 years ago. Once you lose your club you lose the traditional link to the game, its hard to just pick another team and become a convert. This is lesson for all new sporting franchies - whilst they are winning the crowds will come but soon as they start losing the support they so easily obtained vaporises - what endures is likelong fan support for your club. I know, I barrack for Essendon and its hard at the moment but I would never give them up for another club.
Redb
Farmer said | May 26th 2008 @ 10:11am | Report comment
I would agree that the RL business model is under pressure for several reasons -
1. Unable to pull enough money through the gate. Lower crowds eg 10,000 to a club game delivers say $150,000 - hardly enough to pay the running costs of players. Compare this to an AFL average crowd of 35,000 + contributing 3 times as much. RU crowds of 25,000 contribute two and a half times as much.
2. Sponsorship is too tight with too many competing sports. Previously RL has relied on freebie grants from the Leagues clubs - but these are under pressure now.
3. The owners of the sport ( News ) want their pound of flesh out of the game. For News it is a business which must pay its way and serve its purpose.
Without dollops of cash from the leagues club , NRL football clubs in general are not viable. They do not generate enough cash through the gate , merchandise or NRL grants to do what they need to do. Businesses cannot survive spending more cash than they have - it is a no win game.
The only reason there is a salary cap is to keep the clubs expenditure to a limit where thay might be able to afford it. The reason it is not higher is that there is not enough money in the sport fo all clubs to pay the higher cap. No use having 2 - 3 clubs spending up big and the rest being burnt off for all the talent. So, yes it does serve the purpose of keeping all sides equal in resources / talent, but the reason it is there and the reason it is not higher is that the game cannot afford any more and I sense will be able to afford even less in the future. The only way maintain the staus quo in the furture will be to reduce the number of clubs.
I sense a slow decline in the RL business model. Player drain will continue, especially to the NH ( mainly RU clubs) . The best will continue to be creamed off the top which eventually means the overall standard falls and interest drops. Clubs will be dropped off, those fans wil be disenfranchised and leave the game - they will not jrust on to a new club. The Bears example is a recent eaxmple of this.
RL/RU will not merge into a hybrid game. One is an international game ( and the other is not) and international RU does not/will not need to accomodate changing for a local market like Aust. Just look at the difficulty in getting the ELV’s introduced and the attitude of the rest of the RU world to anything looking like an initiative from Aust RU.
RL will survive - there is a core supporter base but the endless navel gazing and questioning of what is wrong with the game will continue and intensify. The stalwarts will yearn for the good old days but times have changed and the caravan is only a distant sight on the horizon. The RL for a start no longer owns their own game anymore - they lost control in the Super League war. As teams are dropped or amalgamated , more core supporters fall off.
All of the above does not seek to judge what is the best game - RL / RU / Football / AFL - just an observation on the evolution of winter sport in Oz.
Cheers
Michael C said | May 26th 2008 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
I can’t help but think that this centenary year has been used in many respects to try to mobilise the ‘troops’ - -
Gallop has effectively appealled to the ‘heartland’ supporters,
tried to pump up the ‘threat’ of the AFL and the ‘war of the codes’
and why?
Because, irrespective of what happens - even if there’s a short term reprieve re. the pokies taxes - -
NRL clubs need to broaden their revenue base.
They need to engage with their supporters to become cashed up members.
and they need to get bums on seats - -
because,
the TV rights are not enough stand alone.
Even with smaller suburban venues - - where clubs SHOULD have a waiting list for seasons membership tickets - - they don’t.
The larger venues are struggling to be filled enough to turn a profit - - which reduces the value of catering rights etc as well - - as, with the AFL I know that clubs get bonuses based on hitting certain average crowd figures because the AFL effectively sells based on average attendance.
- - - - -
NRL though - probably does need to ‘contract’ -
because, unlike the AFL - - if the NRL tries to expand, and needs to pump $X extra into such expansion - - the reality is that the ARU and Superleague WILL continue poaching the good players - - and, this had become a problem already with a recognition of reducing levels of player ‘depth’. It’ll only get worse.
The NRL might need to strengthen their fortress, putty up some of those cracks.
And -
battlefield Sydney/NSW -
irrespective of the AFL threat (which I still believe is entirely over stated as a deflective way of rallying the forces to actually combat soccer, SL and ARU - - which are the real threats) - -
Sydney and NSW is battleground in the extreme - irrespective of any piddling efficiency gains via shared grounds - - -(which, already exist, so, it’s not like new venues other than Robina are popping up for the benefit of all - - especially in NSW)
and, RL vs RU firstly is not a distinct enough game
RL vs Soccer - already, the HAL is walking all over RL traditional strongholds, such as Newcastle, and possibly might be wedging the NRL out of Gosford/Central Coast, and if many soccerheads get their wish, will go head to head in Wollongong, maybe Canberra, Gold Coast etc - - - Farmer above speaks of the sponsorship dollars - - - and, for predominantly Pay TV product - - the regionals matches - - - the sponsor value is MOSTLY regional. Soccer and RL sharing a venue is a minimal benefit compared to the loss of monopoly professional football code in multiple largish regional markets.
so, NRL - - desperate to develop new support driven revenue streams for the clubs.
sheek said | May 26th 2008 @ 1:18pm | Report comment
Redb,
It fascinates me that the mostly inner-city VFL/AFL clubs have survived so long despite the population growing & moving outwards. There is no Dandenong in the AFL for example. These clubs have maintained their popularity & following despite the population growing up elsewhere.
In Sydney, inner-city clubs came under the pump almost immediately. Glebe, an inner-city foundation club & one of the better clubs, was gone by the mid-20s, just about 20 years after league started in Sydney. Also Annandale. In the 1980s, Newtown went, while inner-city foundation clubs Wests & Balmain merged, but relocated to Campbelltown, in Sydney’s outer south-west.
North Sydney has gone, while South Sydney has gone, reuturned but is unlikely to survive unless it considers a relocation to Central Coast. The only foundation club that has survived unbroken since 1908 is Eastern suburbs, although they prefer to be called Sydney Roosters now.
It’s fascinating how the AFL have preserved their inner-city clubs. i also note that the AFL now uses only 2 grounds in Melbourne for their home games. Another clever idea. In Sydney, if AFL bought Stadium Australia, they would still rent it out to union & league for internationals, supers, SOO, etc. But league would lose its club games access I think. Not that league fans would mind that!
Farmer,
My idea of rugby union & rugby league merging is hardly to develop a hybrid game (although I toss the idea up occasionally). I think it will be like a hostile business takeover. The leagueies will be playing union, but would merge in order to preserve their icons. However, I could see even international union moving towards American football, but that’s another story for another day!
Rugby league might not even get a say in it’s future…..News Ltd might make that decision for them! Union & league suffer in Sydney from failing to kill each other off. They develop roughly the same kind of players. Thier markets are always split, allowing/preventing neither the opportunity to maximise their business model.
News Ltd, which is heavily invested in both codes, may decide one day to play God, & kill off one or the other. With union’s greater international popularity, league would be the sport under the pump.
If you read the body language of all the personalities on all the channel 9 TV shows associated with rugby league, & media reports, there is a soberness that has come to their collective demeanour. They are no longer dismissive of union, AFL or soccer. They know their game is in trouble, on may fronts, no matter how they try to dress it up otherwise.
Michael C said | May 26th 2008 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
Sheek -
the irony in the AFL for example - of clubs like North Melb (for a while) and Footscray in trying to trade via more ‘generic’ brandnames - - is that via ground rationalisation - - the traditional name and training venue don’t mean nearly as much - compared to where the people attend the match.
The other irony being that the draft has watered down the capacity to recruit heavily from a local region - - and, yet, this seems to have worked - -
however, were the clubs privately owned - - maybe it wouldn’t,
I still reckon, the member based model is a fine one, and that the NRL needs to avoid the Rusty Crowe style owners - - and move more to community/member owned club models. That is a far, far greater encouragement to take up seasons tickets than simply being a ‘customer’ of the franchise.
Or - - is it just, that so many more people like the ‘idea’ of the Rabbitohs than do like the reality??
Redb said | May 26th 2008 @ 1:47pm | Report comment
Sheek,
I guess you could say that Melbourne and North Melbourne suffer from inner city-itis as well. South Melb already went, Fitzroy right on the edge of the CBD gone as well. Places like Dandenong, Frankston, Greensborough, Werribee all benefit from traditional supporter families moving further out with each generation. The allegiances stay the same.
If only Collingwood could be relocated to Easter Island we could all be happy.
Redb
sheek said | May 26th 2008 @ 3:35pm | Report comment
Redb,
The jibe about relocating Collingwood to Easter island amused me greatly!
Every sport needs its ‘common enemy’. Just imagine the ‘Eddie Everywhere’ statues.
Michael C said | May 26th 2008 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
sheek -
I was dismayed over the last week to find that my 5 yr old sons are concerned about Collingwood LOSING…….just because a friend of theirs might be sad……
I have work yet to do!!!!!!
btw -
‘Eddie everywhere’ was certainly evidence of that ‘Collingwood’ thing, ‘cos, we don’t see any ‘James just about everywhere’ with James Brayshaw…….actually, Eddie, is good, very good, because, he’s so enthused. Gotta love that. Even if he is arguing for North Melb to have to ALSO wear our ‘clash’ jumper when we play Collingwood - - because, their clash jumper DOES NOT infact serve the purpose when playing North Melb?!??!!?!? Onya Eddie.
further re. Eddie, I heard this morning about an apparent extract in a paper (the DT) from a book called ‘Boned’ or something such as that. A very shallow representation of Eddie - - the ‘football’ loving boss called Billy Simpson or something like that.
On 3AW this morning however, the comment that the premise of the whole thing being that a female presenter nearing 40 is attempted to be ‘moved’ on falls kinda flat when you review the high number of over 40 female presenters doing the rounds on Ch.9 - -
- - it’s often been felt in Melb that Eddie has been a popular target in Sydney - - perhaps evidence of the inability of Sydney to respect a ‘Melbournian’ as boss - - or, perhaps evidence of the sick state of Ch.9 at the time - - one gained the impression Eddie was very, very pleased to get OUT of that particular office.
Redb said | May 26th 2008 @ 3:50pm | Report comment
Sheek,
your read my mind, big heads and all.
Redb