By Steve Kaless
October 7th 2008 @ 7:13am
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates..
---------------
Manly dynasty faces salary cap challenge
Well, the dust has settled on another rugby league season and while the autopsy has already been well and truly completed on the Storm’s capitulation, it also didn’t take long on Sunday for people to ask whether the Sea Eagles could do it all again.
The nature of their victory coupled with the dominance during the regular season for the past two years has certainly given the club a look of one with a dynasty in mind and they look ready to take Melbourne’s crown as the team to beat just as the Storm deposed the Roosters before that.
Of course the Sea Eagles will now face stiff competition from other clubs both on and off the field.
On the field everyone will lift when playing them, everyone does whenever they play the premiers, but it is off the field that some of the greater challenges lie when it comes to building a dynasty.
Much has been made of the fact that Manly have rebuilt themselves in five years, but the forces that helped them rebuild may just start to tear them apart.
During their dark years the Sea Eagles were able to stay close to competitive because the big guns of the competition were reigned in by the salary cap and the talent remained more evenly spread.
Once they had money in the bank again the former silvertails were again able to get into the market because there were always plenty of players being shopped about and the Northern Beaches lifestyle is always a good selling point.
Of course, credit should go to Des Hasler and Noel Cleal for many of the shrewd decisions in their recruitment and retention, they have spent their money well. The big money has gone on players that have earned it, Matt Orford, and they have also got plenty of value out of others on smaller contracts, Glen Stewart.
But this is where things will start to get tricky.
Bearded winger David Williams was probably close to the find of the season and may well end up in the Australian squad, but that will mean that come next contract he maybe able to command more than double his current salary.
The salary caps eats at your depth.
The Sea Eagles had excellent cohesion around the rucks through Matt Ballin and Heath L’Estrange but they may soon find they can only afford to have one instead of the other.
And will one be as effective without his foil?
Brent Kite and Josh Perry, who arrived on big money, may soon be due even more and this may force out the likes of Glenn Hall and Adam Cuthbertson.
And of course when you trim your side, injuries and suspensions bite even harder.
Just ask the defeated Grand Finalists.
Of course, this has happened to most sides that have won the competition and it is nothing new, it is also well known that players will often be happy to stay at clubs for less if they think they can win a comp or play rep footy and the prospects of both look good at Brooky.
But in reality some players will always leave for more money or maybe more game time.
You just can’t keep everyone.
There is no coincidence that no side has won competitions back to back since Brisbane in 1997-1998, Manly will start from pole position in 09 but it is a long, long race.
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...
(32)
Loading ...
Millster said | October 7th 2008 @ 8:37am | Report comment
Well written Steve. Again, the spotlight is squarely put on the perverse effect of the salary cap. It artificially created a protected environment in which Manly was able to build, and now that they are successful it has the reverse (yet equally artificial) effect of not letting that building go on - and rather of being a force for dissolution of the playing group at the club.
The Link said | October 7th 2008 @ 9:15am | Report comment
The Delmage and Penn families ensured Manly survived, but by any measure they haven’t simply opened the chequebook and bought the premiership. This makes it all the more satisfying and the lesser of evils.
Anyway, I would’ve thought that the same teams playing each other in GF’s two years in a row (for the first time in 15 years) would prove that dynasty’s are possible.
If Manly don’t make the big one next year it wont be for lack of trying, Dessie’s already got the cones out and doing 400’s in prepartation for the off season.
oikee said | October 7th 2008 @ 9:20am | Report comment
Manly might lose a few good players but the competition gets stronger with good players moving around, also the players wages go up to meet there ranking in the game, so the benifit of the salary cap does its work again. With the N.R.L being such a strong competition this is good for the game, in other comps it might not work that well, but with so much talent coming through the ranks it makes sense, even allowing for good players to move overseas frees up alot of money for the juniors.
The system in place has created so many opportunities for more players than ever before in the rugby league history. Now thats a good thing not only for the game here, but also for the growth of the game overseas as well. The super league in england has nearly come up to par with our game here. Which i have to say is good for a healthy comp and international scene.
The players skills are at the best level i have seen, not just 1 or 2 teams but all 16 clubs. Now thats a good result and something that i think has been overlooked.
Greg Russell said | October 7th 2008 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
Ah how we all romanticize. It’s in our nature, and so every year after the grand final the D-word - “dynasty” - gets bandied about. If ever it looked possible it was after last year, when the Storm had a crushing win to match Manly’s this year, and they were to suffer only the negligible losses of Clint Newton and Ben Cross (more than adequately replaced by Sika Manu), and the manageable loss of Matt King. The rest is history.
OK, it’s possible that Manly will go back to back, but the statistics are heavily weighted against them. Brisbane 1997-8 was the last instance, but in 1997 they only had to beat half a competition. Before that it was Brisbane 1992-3, but that was pre-salary cap (wasn’t it?). So Manly will be defying the statistics if they win next year.
How will they be beaten? Steve concentrates on the salary cap, but the reality is that the damage is done on many fronts. Here are just a few:
1. Manly got a rails run from the rep selectors this year, with only Brett Stewart playing Origin. A lot more will be selected next year, and let’s see how fresh they are come finals time. Just look at Melbourne’s tired legs this year in the finals or ask Wayne Bennett about how hard it is for Origin players to put in big performances in the finals.
2. I can’t remember who else will be leaving apart from Beaver (someone please enlighten me!), but he alone will be a huge loss. Don’t be fooled by him playing off the bench: right to the end he retained his uncanny nose for the tryline (1 try per match from a backrower is a big gap to fill) and, perhaps even more importantly, he was the key element in Manly’s phenomenal kick-chase game, which was the major factor in setting up their wins over the Warriors (kicking to Vatuvei’s wing) and Melbourne (Turner’s). Both these opponents found it very difficult to get out of their red zone, with Beaver often being the one who tackled the kick receiver.
3. “He who makes no progress goes backwards in the eyes of God”. Just ask Bellamy (Storm) or Mark Thompson (Geelong), who steadfastly stuck to the same tactics this season as last, so confident were they that their superiority in personnel would carry them to victory. But on the big day this year, both coaches got found out by opponents who had gradually developed new tactics (who would have thought that the Manly of 2007 could have laid on the tries they have in recent weeks?). Well now the onus is on Hasler to devise new tactics, and he will find that is a lot harder to do as reigning premiers than it as a team who “are still flying under the radar” (Hasler’s own words).
4. Injuries. I know Manly were without one or two players through injury (e.g. Luke Williamson), but the bottom line is that they had all their key players for the finals. It’s hard to imagine they will be so lucky again next year.
Having said all the above, I like Manly’s prospects for 2009 much better than those of the Storm! They really are history as we have known them.
Millster said | October 7th 2008 @ 2:36pm | Report comment
Oikee on that I disagree. I don’t see how, if a club has built a team with good player development and a good game play and tactics, splitting that team up can be good overall for the league. A bloke that plays great for one team doesn’t necessarily mean he will play great for all teams. To me I’d prefer a system that allows a successful club more freedom to keep itself together and really set the benchmark for the rest of the league to match. Also I don’t agree with players wages going up to meet their standard. Either of two things happen with the premiership players - they stay at their winning club but can’t get paid much more because there is no room under the cap, or they leave for a club where there is more salary cap room so they can be paid more but in doing so they are playing with a club of lesser standard. I think it brings the game down because its a system so biased towards propping up the bottom clubs rather than really consolidating and extending the standards at the top end of the ladder. I’d like to see at least some kind of loyalty provision under the cap (like the Larry Bird exemption in the American NBA) so that a winning club can keep its winning squad together and set the benchmark. Its only in that way that the standard will be set by the top clubs not those at the bottom.
oikee said | October 7th 2008 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
But thats part of my argument Millster, the bar is already set high. You cant get much better with the amount of talent on show, and manly was also made up of bits and pieces from other clubs, everyone thinks beaver and then think that all manly players are from manly, not true, lyons is from the eels, bell from melbourne, etc. So this benchmark might never be acomplished under your no salary cap system, theres so much talent around.
By the way Greg, that guy you mentioned Williamson is headed off, along wioth Bryant and bell, also one more i think beaver, so if you look at it like this then they do retain most of there squad. Beaver was about to retire but he is getting paid a fortune to have another couple of years in the super-league. Next year there might be a few players moving on, but next year they might not be at the top of the comp, not because they have lost players, because the other teams just get better, all of them.
Millster i like your no-salary cap idea, but it would destroy the game here, we like to have a close comp, this is what we are getting, the skill level is not a issue, i have said before that i was amazed at the skill level of the under 20’s, most of them are 18.
Greg Russell said | October 7th 2008 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Thanks oikee for the information on Manly’s departures. Indeed I should have remembered Steve Bell is leaving. Another Roar article today (”Sea Eagles too manly as Melbourne are cast in void”) says that Michael Robertson is also leaving. These two plus Menzies is most of the “chase” component of Manly’s kick-chase game. I know Hasler is a fitness fanatic who drills his players relentlessly, but one can’t create this cohesion, speed and tackling ability in a pre-season. I therefore can’t see this vital component of Manly’s game being nearly as effective next year, and so all bets are off about them repeating their premiership.
2009 shapes as the most open competition in memory. Canterbury is perhaps the only team I would write off at this stage.
Millster said | October 7th 2008 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
But oikee the “bits and pieces” would happen anyway without a cap. A club would determine what positions it wanted filled and would make offers accordingly - either picking up out-of-contract players, or if it wanted someone contracted to another club it would have to agree a transfer fee with the club involved to get the player. So that freedom is not lost. In fact it is gained because under a cap clubs are limited in what they can put on the table to assemble the squads they want whereas without one the club can offer up to what it sees as the real value of the player and what the player will bring to them.
While I’m not bagging NRL standards - I agree that some great skills are shown in the code - I don’t think any code can sit on its hands and say “you can’t get much better than this”. And part of that is making sure the standards rise. If successful teams can be held together, and if groups of the best players can be assembled (through both purchasing and player development) then the standard will surely rise. But if you have a system that distributes high-value players away from the good clubs and towards the crap ones then its not so clear to me that this leads to rising standards overall. The thing it does is make the code more internally competitive - it brings the best clubs down and raises up the worst ones a bit. This of course is great for the fans in terms of ‘even-ness’ and I understand the logic of doing so. But to me it is clearly at the cost of the best clubs being able to ‘lead the way’ over a number of years in improving the standard, even if this means the weakest clubs fall away and risk disappearing.
oikee said | October 7th 2008 @ 4:03pm | Report comment
Why would you want any clubs to dissapear millster, this is australia not england, and your thinking is all over the place, look i have told you before that soccer has done this and it has worked for them, hence complete world game but the quality never differs, hence any team is capible of winning the world cup, just look at who has won it the last 20 years. So to put your thoery to practise here in oz is a waste of time, for any code. Salary caps are only to help the clubs survive at the moment, if we had unlimited money there would not be a salary cap. Thats all i am saying.
Ray yes they lose robertson but they have picked up a under 20 player in williams from parra, now thats what i mean, plenty of talent to replace players.
skull said | October 7th 2008 @ 4:06pm | Report comment
Robertson isnt leaving, they wint miss Williamson and they have a couple of new signings, that big unit winger from Parramatta is one, but I think they may have earmarked him for the forward. Menzies will be badly missed, not only for his general play, it was after he came on they really started to fire due to his running off and with the ball and his tackling. Menzies will also be badly missed in the dressing room as well
oikee said | October 7th 2008 @ 4:06pm | Report comment
And also ray, i think the doggies will make the top 8. Fingers crossed.
oikee said | October 7th 2008 @ 4:09pm | Report comment
Agree Skull, but how do you think brisbane will go without lockyer, they all retire sometime. And the game still goes on, to me it gets better. The beaver will be back in some capicity one day.
Mick of Newie said | October 7th 2008 @ 4:18pm | Report comment
The Manly dynasty will go the same way as the Penrith, West Tigers, Newcastle versions. 8 different premiers in 8 years says the most likely outcome is someone else will be premiers in 09. I’d bet on it.
Millster said | October 7th 2008 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
Oikee - I genuinely don’t understand you with “the quality never differs” line and also the reference to the World Cup. The World Cup is an international tournament and so has little to do with club level sports. Socceroos players can be drawn from any club in any league in the world, as long as they are Aussie. So I just don’t understand what you are saying.
As for wanting clubs to dissapear trust me I don’t have it in for any particular club (though in the NRL’s case I think there are maybe 2 too many clubs in Sydney). Its not that I want clubs to disappear, its not that strong. Its what I dont want which is for clubs to be propped up by things like salary caps, drafts and other concessions when they may not actually have the financial or playing strength to survive if they were left to their own devices. Look at Manly. However glorious they were on the weekend, reality is that in a competition without so much protection they probably would have gone under some years ago. So while I celebrate their win I also ask myself whether it is such a ‘real’ win given it came about from them being propped up, and also from other clubs not being able to ram their own advantages home because of restrictions like the salary cap. I know its a different world to football and I know what you’re arguing and can see your point, but can you also see mine that under so much protection sometimes people can wonder whether success is maybe sometimes a bit fake in some ways.
The Link said | October 7th 2008 @ 5:36pm | Report comment
Mick - Penrith (in 03), Tigers and Newcastle didn’t already make a GF in the year before when they took it out.
Time will tell but its hard to see Manly not making the Top 4 at least again next year.
Millster, can’t tell the Manly story without referencing Super League.
cosmos forever said | October 7th 2008 @ 8:07pm | Report comment
Millster, hard to tell the Manly story without referencing NSWRFL tyranny
Tom said | October 7th 2008 @ 9:50pm | Report comment
Robertson isn’t leaving, don’t know where you heard that from. One of the most under rated finishers in the game, Manly would do well to hold onto him, especially considering that under rating will mean he probably isn’t on huge money.
Steve Kaless said | October 8th 2008 @ 8:05am | Report comment
Thanks for all the comments gents, looks like a real mungoes forum.
Does anyone know the just how long a dynasty is meant to go for, or how many victories you need to become one?
Greg, I think you certainly raised some excellent points, you do need a bit of luck to win a comp, and Manly had theirs but it is hard to argue against them deserving their title.
I’m clearly in the majority though you believes next year will be just as tight as previous years.
Manly fans should just hope their title defence does follow the likes of the Bulldogs and Tigers.
oikee said | October 8th 2008 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Millster, let me explain myself and then we wont have any misconseption, “the quality never differs” , watching soccer from england way back in the late 70’s i had followed the game for awhile, the skill level back then is on par with the skill level now, maybe a couple of fancy overhead kicks but on a whole it has not changed that much. The one thing that really gets under my skin is when the game at any level, local or international, might be even score with one team the better side and then you have a player who looks to be knocked down as he is running for the ball in the penalty goal. As you know what happens is a penalty and the game is decided on that one result, not that the better side might have won. The crowd goes into raptures and the losing team are devistated. To me this is not a result, never will be so hence my saying, the quality never changes, theres that element of uneveness.
This is why i dont bother watching the game anymore, theres always a element of doubt, but theres always next year for the fans, but you might have to wait 20 years for your next chance, hence different teams winning each year at international level. At club level its the opposite because of the non salary cap, so you get the top 2 - 4 clubs that normally win.
With rugby league its the same but reversed. At club level all the teams are equal so to speak, so you have a good fair comp that being of such high quality we dont really worry to much about the international level. Now at international level you know the senario, australian kangaroos are that good that most people expect them to bring home the trophy, not from lack of trying by other nations, its just because our local game is that strong. And what i am getting at is because they win all the time people seem to get a cob-on, saying how lop-sided the international game is, so to speak this is because there is no salary cap at international level and the best team keeps winning, try and explain that to people and you get your head bitten off. Not the kangaroos fault, there just that good. Its not like they play against weak nations, we all know that england and new zealand are 2 of the best, france is getting stronger, but as you can see in league its a backwood step if you stay at the top, or are just to good without a salary cap involved.
Now imagine if we had no cap at club level. The same would apply, people would lose interest because only 2-3 teams can win, the english soccer is going through a simalar problem over there, people are waking up,(took them long enough) and starting to lose interest. This is why they have discussed the idea of salary cap.
The super league in england has woken up to the fact that by having relagation has broken clubs backs, why invest millions only to go broke. The cap is having a possitive effect on there game. I also have said if money was not a issue then we would not need a cap, but then like english soccer the wages would get out of control, and no player is worth the sort of money that some get in soccer. Unless your superman, and thats fictisous. Thats my veiw.
So by having a strong local comp with salary cap involved helps each team get stronger, so by doing this you also help your international game because like you have said, you get more players right across the board to choose from, have alook at the kangaroos, you will see that nearly every club has a represebtative of their club in the squad.
Now think about at club level without a cap, you would have the bulk of players from 1-4 clubs and the rest would lose interest. Its win, win by having caps in league, and soccer will do well by having their cap, maybe in 20 years you will see the players from the local teams more involved. Also in league we only pick players who are playing in our local comp, this is another area that might fast-track the a-league.
You will give me your arguments but i dont think money should be a motavating factor, lets keep greed out of it, thats another thing that erks me. Please dont take any of my comments as a insult, its just the way i see the games and what good there is about them. Thanks millster.
oikee said | October 8th 2008 @ 9:34am | Report comment
The Kangaroos are a dynasty Steve,
lets hope that does not change too soon. Cheers.
oikee said | October 8th 2008 @ 9:47am | Report comment
What i mean by money not a motavating factor, i mean players moving overseas to earn big money have to decide wheather or not they want to play for oz, it works in league and they accept this, so when they are coming through the ranks , if they are any good, they hang around to get there jerseys before they nick off overseas, so we get to see them play. At least they are loyal because this is a factor in the game. It works well for our local game, the socceroos are just a joke to me, no loyalty being paid to local players. This needs to change so we keep the talent here for awhile. Other-wise it will keep happening. Just my veiw.
True Tah said | October 8th 2008 @ 10:06am | Report comment
oikee,
you’re wrong about England-based Australian not being eligible for the Kangaroos - Darren Smith was picked a few years ago.
And if the Socceroos did not pick overseas players, there is a pretty strong chance that we would never qualify for a World Cup.
Millster said | October 8th 2008 @ 10:15am | Report comment
Oikee also the dynamic is different. Rugby League is not really played seriously in many countries. So we can keep players here and have the rep spot as the incentive because here is pretty much the only place the game is played at that standard.
If you tried to do the same in football you’d destroy the game because you’d stop players from testing themselves and developing in the best leagues in the world. Its not only Australia either. Brazil is the most recognised national team yet very few of their players play in Brazil - most play in Europe. France is another example where over two thirds of what is a seriously top-ranking team (1998 world champ, 2006 runner up) don’t play in their ‘home’ league. And I could go on. Probably the only football nations that don’t have the same thing going on are Italy (because the league is so good, and also is of a style that fits the national team’s style well) and England (because for one reason or another few Brits go and play in the best leagues in Europe, much to their detriment I might add).
But the biggest point is that in League players have few places to go other than Australia, plus Australia is the top of the game at club level. Its the big fish in a small pond thing. And it is exactly the opposite in football. In fact I would HATE a Socceroos that came all from the Australian A-League. The whole beauty of them is that they get schooled in so many different leading leagues in the world and come together with those skills for us to enjoy.
Millster said | October 8th 2008 @ 10:27am | Report comment
The long post you wrote before I definitely don’t understand now! On many levels. But just a few things - English football is not losing interest, quite the opposite it is attracting a global audience, the best players and major investors faster than ever before. Second the reason many clubs are represented in the Kangaroos players is a combination of salary cap effect (no one club can fit the good players in the cap) and also cynical marketing by the NRL to pick a team to maximise interest of the League fans. Thirdsly salary cap discussions dont exist at international level so you can’t make the comaprisons you’re trying to. Who would get the ’spare’ Brazil players if theri national team had a cap on it? Its nonsense. And in any case players don’t get paid the same way for internationals anyway so it just doesnt follow. Finally your comment about having a good local comp so not having to be too worried about internationals to me is a real worry. How do you know your local comp is good if its never tested agaist real, strong, external opposition? One can have a fair and exciting comp but where the standards are shit by world standards. That is where we most strongly differ. To me a suburban comp has real problems to be at a world class of skill in a small game not played much anywhere else. The razzle-dazzle might be there but again how do we really know its not just smoke and mirrors?
True Tah said | October 8th 2008 @ 10:41am | Report comment
Millster,
re: your various arguments concerning the issues of having a small suburban comp and the lack of comparable leagues, I really don’t believe that it much of an issue - personally I go to sport to be entertained by that spectacle, I do not worry about how this compares to something else on a world scale, and worry about it being inferior…gosh, my salary is not going to turn me into an Allan Moss or a Warren Buffet and is probably pocket money compared to them, but I enjoy my job, by your logic, I should be packing up my current job.
Personally I don’t believe that either the AFL or NRL suffer from a lack of world class skill - I can recall two German housemates who went to an AFL game and then complained that their sports diet in Germany was limited to futbol, and they found it boring next to AFL - then again they were females, and I think AFL markets its product to women far better than the other codes, and it has that hunk factor that seems to be lacking generally.
oikee said | October 8th 2008 @ 10:54am | Report comment
See your not understanding what i am trying to get across, yes your right about the dynamic of the game, and 30 years ago english soccer was the game being watched, so like i have said to you in my post about reversing what you have in soccer, well reverse that for rugby league, australia is the dominate country, you understand this, so the players from around the world to test themselves at the highest level move over here, from many the islands, now england super league is becoming more of a player, which to me makes sense, this is where all the big money is, so they will continue to make ground on us over here and one day the dynamic will change, maybe for the better, who knows, but unlike soccer league as you know is not a easy game to expand, they have done well to get this far, so your expanding soccer has already made its mark, so will cintinue to grow on the back of this.
And my comment about having a good local comp is just that, because we have a good local comp our interest in the international game has suffered, i am not saying i dont want the international game to florish, i do. But it is going to take time for this so we need to keep our local game strong so we can sell it overseas, like they do at the mommet, it gets telecast overseas as does the a-league i think, not sure but you would know, ( this is the part being reversed, like soccer in england in the 70’s they sold the game to other countries because they had a good comp, as rugby league have here in oz, but league in england is fast catching up)
so all i am saying is yes, in soccer your players go overseas to better themselves, but if you had your own game in your own backyard in order then this would not be such a issue. Until you can see this then i cant help you. You seem to prefer to have our best players overseas, and like i have said, they only do it for money, so maybe not having a salary cap here in oz for soccer might be better, otherwise that galaxy guy billionaire can pay a fortune and you get your wish, galaxy to win every year. Cheers.
Redb said | October 8th 2008 @ 10:57am | Report comment
True Tah,
Rolls my eyes - the AFL does not market itself to females that’s just a byproduct I suppose. I hate listening to female AFL fans carry on about the players - “eww look at that one” blah blah.
Be careful not to undermine Millster’s undermining attempt at the AFL and NRL. He’s got an agenda and he’s not afraid to use it.
Redb
oikee said | October 8th 2008 @ 10:59am | Report comment
True tah, yes maybe 1 or 2 players but it dont happen now, and yes maybe we would not qualify, i am not saying to just do it now, i am saying to maybe have it as a guideline for future players. Just a thought. I am trying to help, make some good strong points, not being negative. I dont want to see them crumble.
Redb said | October 8th 2008 @ 11:00am | Report comment
TT,
Speaking of Warren Buffett - love his work. The most entertaining and intuitively accurate annual reports on the planet.
Redb
oikee said | October 8th 2008 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Also i must point out that rugby league at its current level is a hard game, even afl because the games have not evolved around the world it takes alot longer to bring other countries up to our standard, unlike soccer where you can throw a ball into a pack of kids and you find your next champion, so to speak, look at how many countries play soccer, its a easy game to pick up skills, ( thats not being derogrative ) as for the other games you need to be hard, tough, have balls, and then you have to learn the finer points to even get close to oz, in either games.
sheek said | October 8th 2008 @ 8:33pm | Report comment
Manly beat Melbourne 40-0, & some people start talking about a dynasty. What is a dynasty? A 1000 years??
Back in 1975 Easts beat St.George 38-0 to win their 2nd successive premiership. Back then people talked of an Easts dynasty. Their next premiership win was in 2002!
These grand final games are usually played & won in isolation. They can turn on one of two little things - Smith’s suspension, Storm tired from tough finals run, everything clicking for the Eagles, etc. Back in 1975, the Dragons were demoralised by the sight of their champion captain Langlands drugged legless by a pain killing injection gone wrong.
Give it up. Who knows who will win next year, or why? It might be Manly, it might be Melbourne, it might be someone else. There are probably half a dozen playing rosters capable of winning the premiership.
One final thought. It’s hard getting to the top. Often it’s harder just staying there. Ask the Storm, or the Cats, or the All Blacks even……….
oikee said | October 9th 2008 @ 2:35pm | Report comment
Good point Sheek. Dont forget injuries as well.