Comments on: Sharks circle the prospect of Central Coast relocation

By: Dogs Of War

Dogs Of War — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:39:05 +0000

I wonder how the Sharks are faring now. The development still hasn’t been approved, and not a whisper about any major sponsors for next season.

Not to mention the debacle they are having getting a workable board together, and trying to forgo having another election.

So maybe Sharks being on the move is still on the cards, if the Sharks don’t get a few things going there way sooner rather than later.

By: Scott The Aussie in Devon

Scott The Aussie in Devon — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 22:03:49 +0000

Mate although I am Union bloke, there would be nothing better than a full time League team playing out of Gosford, my home town. I am sure we have enough people and support to make it happen, and if it were the Bear well all the better, as they were my second team when we were swapping footy cards at Gosford Primary School circa 1977……first team naturally the BALMAIN Tigers….

By: Col the Bear

Col the Bear — Fri, 08 May 2009 10:31:51 +0000

Sorry you feel that way Hanjuang.. but we’ll make sure we keep a CCBs jersey aside for you just in case.. Go The Bears…

By: Hanjuang

Hanjuang — Fri, 08 May 2009 08:41:35 +0000

The North Sydney Bears have failed to win a title since 1922.
They failed in their original move to Gosford (blame the rain).
They have already been kicked out of the NRL.
They were part of the failed Northern Eagles.
Have they won anything since?

Is there any reason why they will not fail if they move to Gosford?
Stay in North Sydney.

By the way, the Central Coast is too small to support our own team (population slightly over 300K).
It would not result in a substantial increase in players or supporters.
More NSW teams playing a home game in Gosford is a better idea.

By: Col the Bear

Col the Bear — Fri, 08 May 2009 05:47:16 +0000

Sorry Greg that was no offence to your posting, it was just a generalisation to this whole thing with the CC franchise

one week its melbourne, then Manly, then Souths , then tigers,then parra, and now Sharks.. next week it’ll probably be roosters..all of this has amounted to zilch, but sold a lot of papers don’t you think in the past few days…

..I’m still totally convinced it is going to be the Central Coast Bears, and i’ve seen nothing to disuade me in that opinion.. Just bring on the mighty Bears, next year or the year after, or 2012..The Bears tick all the boxes..and No I don’t know Hamilton..

By: Col the Bear

Col the Bear — Fri, 08 May 2009 03:25:32 +0000

Yawn !! Just briong on the Central Coast Bears…

By: Greg Russell

Greg Russell — Fri, 08 May 2009 01:07:32 +0000

Billo,

I have lived in Christchurch for 15 years but I have never been to Hamilton (I know, I know, I haven’t lived!). Thus I have no idea on whether an NRL franchise would prosper there – you (or someone else) tell me!

By: Skull

Skull — Thu, 07 May 2009 11:47:21 +0000

Just be done with the losers. They have to get bailed out every 20 years or so. Let em fold. If it were Manly or Souths the Tele would be saying this.

By: Crosscoder

Crosscoder — Thu, 07 May 2009 11:21:42 +0000

The issue apart from the Shark’s current financial problems ,revolves around the next Tv contracts ,and how they are sold.
The general feeling is the game was terribly undersold on the last contract.The TV ratings are still dominant for the northern capitals ,yet they ignore the TV ratings of the regionals of the 2 states where rugby league is well entrenched.
eg
The NSW regional market is already larger than Perth and Adelaide,and the Qld bush is approaching Perth.As explained the NRL has teams in Townsville/Gold Coast/Newcastle and Canberra,cities that challenge Perth and Adelaide,but the regional ratings and advt revenue don’t count.
Why did I bring in TV contracts,because a Tv contract negotiated by the NRL should cover for starters the clubs’ salary cap of $4,25M or thereabouts,even up to 18 teams,and we would not be having the Sharks in as deep as they are.
The development proposal has been in the pipeline for at least 8 years,but has had to be redone,adjusted whatever due to EPA requirments,state govt etc etc.
The 5 match deal has been knocked on the head by the NRL(don’t know plan B),so the development approval by council is vital,and will either be given the go ahead or back to the drawing board by the end of june.Apparently according to the local Leader,funding has been lined up for their development company and the club will receive an immediate injection of $1.5m(around early July),once the go ahead is made.
The biggest problem for the football club IMO is the lack of cover.Taking a family when it is either overcast or raining in buckets is a no no.Again I note the team has not played the local Saints/Tigers/Parra/Tigers/Dogs,only out of towners on wet miserable nights.How the hell they expect to get an average of 13,000 then amazes me.To even get 9,000 indicates they have a decent base.

Agree with Billo,the area is middle class,and when the team is going well you will see people from all walks of life attend,and sponsor the club.Hard times have hit,who know the effect on the individuals.Homes in the area are not el cheapo.
Where is Peter Gow when you need him,and Elle.

By: Billo

Billo — Thu, 07 May 2009 09:07:22 +0000

One of the problems for league in Australia is that it is too strongly identified as a working class sport.
The only middle class areas really represented by league teams are Manly, the eastern suburbs, Cronulla and maybe Canberra.
For league to pull out of any of these areas would be disastrous for its demographic, in my view.
Cronulla have attracted good crowds in the past, but they seem to have had lousy luck with injuries, and with fixtures this season. The NRL should be able to provide them with some liquidity, particularly given its commitment to broadcasters to have eight fixtures every weekend, maybe in return for taking some equity interest in the land that is going to be developed around the stadium.
I’m not sure about the desirability of locating the club, but, if they have to, Adelaide or New Zealand look like the best options.
In New Zealand, incidentally, the best Rugby League stadium is in Hamilton, where the Chiefs play rugby. I wonder whether Greg Russell believes that a league team would prosper there.

By: oikee

oikee — Thu, 07 May 2009 05:42:34 +0000

Good point again, i really think if the warriors win the NRL , maybe then shout it from the roof-tops that wellington need a team. Amazed we have not heard much from (orcas lately) , maybe they might have a silient bid up there sleeves.
But yes i agree with you about another NZ team, seems to me that having planned a test match and city,country origin game for thye same nite we dont have much common sense at top level, i said it once before, the dinosaurs are holding the game back, this is a classic example of heads having to roll.

We cant keep this up for much longer.The game is at a point where we need strong administration. You only have to look at this cock-up to realise we have none.

By: Greg Russell

Greg Russell — Thu, 07 May 2009 05:24:47 +0000

I am not a New Zealander but I live in New Zealand. Rugby is the country’s main football code, but everywhere there is also strong interest in rugby league. This interest is booming at a time when rugby has its problems, when the Kiwis have just become world champions, when the NRL offers a slick and consistently entertaining product (cf. rugby), and when there are record numbers of New Zealanders in the NRL (even if many of them are more correctly described as Australians who are eligible to play for New Zealand!).

Now consider that the NRL has one team for a population base of 4 million New Zealanders, while in Australia there are 15 teams for a population base of 9 million interested in rugby league. Yes, it’s an Australian competition, but this is still exceptionally lopsided against a place that is genuinely interested in rugby league.

So my issue is as follows: why is the NRL seemingly only interested in relocating a team in Australia (whether to Central Coast, Adelaide, Central Queensland or wherever), and seemingly has no interest in having a second franchise in New Zealand, where there definitely is the culture and the interest in the sport?

From what I can gather, the answer is as follows: there is no AFL threat in New Zealand, and the NRL is mainly interested in using franchise relocation as a tool for fighting AFL.

Perhaps this makes a particular kind of economic sense, but from a cultural perspective I find it sad. I also challenge the implicit assumption that economically NZ is already a captive rugby league market – my perception is that there is plenty of room for economic growth of league over here.

A few years ago there was a strong application to the NRL to create a Wellington Orcas franchise in New Zealand. From Sharks to Orcas is not an unnatural progression!

By: Worlds Biggest

Worlds Biggest — Thu, 07 May 2009 03:24:01 +0000

The Sharks have been in a perilous Financial situation for some time. Geoffrey Eddelston where are you !!. The Club has had this land in check from day one and have not done anything with it. Everyone keeps referring to the ” land ” but it aint paying any bills at the moment or for the foreseable future. Who was in charge of the Club 10 years ago when some vision was required for long term survival. The Sharks were the proverbial meat in the Southern Sydney Sandwich back in early 1999 when merger was being mooted between the Dragons and Steelers. Was this ever an option for the Sharks heirarchy to consider merging with the Dragons or Steelers. Hindsight is a great thing however the Shire is not a huge area so why was there long term future not secured 10 years ago by merger ?. Now the Club is close to going belly up. Zappia has no choice but to go down ( or up in this case ) this road.

By: Crosscoder

Crosscoder — Wed, 06 May 2009 22:46:43 +0000

As a Sharks supporter for more than I care to admit,under the current circumstances this is the only move they could have made.
They need the 4-5 years on this basis in order to get their development up and running.If it gets the go ahead,they will survive and thrive,if not then a relocation to Perth etc is a last resort.
The club will be guaranteed $100,000 per game at the CC as well as the same guarantee emanating from Adelaide.They have currently been losing money ATM $25,000 per game.
Bear in mind problems out of their hands,they have played 3 out of town teams at home on ordinary weatherwise nights and an afternoon(Canberra/Penrith/Newvcastle)little travelling support.Then they played the Roosters who are also at the bottom end of the ladder.Not exactly the way to attract crowds.
They lose their best fullback in the 1st game,lose Barrett with a serious injury,have another player suspended for being drunk,another one of their best Bird out permanently and their major prop out for the season.Great boost for the club.
That being said having just Sydney teams such as their local favourite combatant St George plus Parramatta/Dogs/Tigers/Manly and Souths will ensure decent crowds for the next 5 seasons and be easier to sell to their fans.

By: oikee

oikee — Wed, 06 May 2009 21:46:52 +0000

Good point, I like the Aderlaide idea, why not go to Aderlaide. I know you will get your knockers saying Aderlaide dont follow league and are not interested, give them time i think they would love having a team, even more so if Perth finally have a team in the NRL. Just means they will have to throw more money into grass roots there. Its a idea worth trying, they have a million people , i am 100 percent they all dont follow only AFL.