By Hoy -
October 5th 2009 @ 12:02am
Get a Roar profile
0
Loading ...View The Roar's top rugby league writers.
NRL Tipping now live on The Roar. Join now.
Love new art, fashion, music? Check out Aussie site which unearths all things cool and creative.
Related coverage
How national is the NRL and its coverage?
This may be a conspiracy theory, but it could be a good one. Long have people outside of NSW felt that their clubs don’t get a fair go by the NRL, the judiciary, Channel 9 and the like.
Some examples of this conspiracy theory include: Canberra hardly ever being shown on free to air [...]
This article is over 2000 days old and has been trimmed.
Get Australia's best NRL opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
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...
(142)
Michael C said | October 5th 2009 @ 5:32am | Report comment
Any reason why it’s taken you this long to come to this conclusion?? Tongue in cheek to a degree, but, you really MUST have been giving them the ‘benefit of the doubt’ for an awful long time!!!
Hoy said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:34am | Report comment
I just couldn’t believe how bad it was over the day’s coverage. Everything was geared towards Parra, everything. I wrote it at about 1:30 QLD time yesterday, and it has been edited to post game, however the lead up was just OTT and not a little disrespectful to the Storm I felt.
I can’t understand any reason behind it, other than the old NSWRL thinking still alive and kicking, and as such, the coverage was a disgrace, and in no way indicative of a national game, rather an Us Vs Them attitude for Sydney clubs taken on by Channel 9.
Mr cheese said | October 5th 2009 @ 6:07am | Report comment
I suppose you lot should be careful what you wish for.
Over here, Rugby League gets very little coverage. Most people don’t even know it exists.
Rugby LEaguers are very upset about that, but c’est la vie.
I suppose it will be gone within a few years in this country. Sad, but inevitable.
Difficult for the Aussies, though, because the second rate Aussies use England as something to fall back on. Seriously, what will happen to them when the Super League falls into the sand ????
Their parents should push them into football. That way, you’re guaranteed to make a few quid even if you’re only quite good.
We can’t all be Billy Slater. The second raters will not be able tofind work in Rugby League.
Shame.
Dommage
Lastima
Chris said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:26am | Report comment
Huh, that’s nothing to do with what the article was about…
Mr cheese said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:15am | Report comment
I was saying that we don’t even have ANY coverage of League over here.
Bill Baxter said | October 5th 2009 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
Who is Mr Cheese and where is he from?. Super League will not die in the UK any more than Rugby League in Australia, which Mr O’Neill predicted a few years ago would fade away and die. It’s pretty clear which brand of Rugby is not in a healthy state now!!!.
Mr cheese said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:01pm | Report comment
I am Mr Cheese and I am from NW England.
Anyways, I have never been to Aussie so I don’t know how Rugby League will do in the future over in the prison colony.
In England, it’s really struggling. They’re desperate to make it more popular in new areas e.g. London, S Wales and the south of France. Rugby Union is growing in both England and France, which can only be bad news for League.
Traditional Rugby League towns such as Halifax, Widnes and Leigh are pretty much neglected. That means their attendances are very low. Widnes even let people in for free in a match against Gateshead because people have lost interest in rugby league.
Rugby League will end up being unpopular in both Widnes and South Wales.
Let’s be honest: very few people in England could name a single RL player. 15 years ago, people could have said “Martin Offiah, Jonathan Davies, Jason Robinson, Shaun Edwards”.
Rugby League may be thriving over in the prison colony but back here it’s in big trouble. What will happen to Aussie RL when English RL disappears ??? That will deprive the 2nd raters or old men of a chance to make a living. Look at Matt Gidley, St. Helens. Matt King, Warrington. Pat Richards, Wigan.
In the future, they will have to work in bars in Earl’s Court.
Perhaps English Rugby LEague should just kiss and make up with Rugby Union. If they rejoin the fold, the north of England can still have a say in egg-chasing.
Let’s be fair: Wigan and Hull are football towns nowadays..
John Ryan said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:48pm | Report comment
You are kidding mate, not another RL will be dead soon, one word for you BOLLOCKS
Mr cheese said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:44am | Report comment
That’s a great word to use.
Are you Australian, John Ryan ? I am not talking about the NRL.
I am talking about RL in my own country: England. Over here, RL is doing its very best to become popular in new areas e.g. The South of England, South Wales, and the South of France. With very limited success.
The Play Off quarter final between Huddersfield and Catalan was seen by 4,000 spectators. Meanwhile, at a semi-final in Aussie, you had 75,000.
Rugby League may be doing well over there but it isn’t over here !
AndyRoo said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:40am | Report comment
I doubt that there are a bunch of kids in Minto that love Billy Slater or Cooper Cronk.
Melbourne only entered the comp in 1998, they play a less expansive style and Channel nine have done 3 consecutive years of Storm Grand Finals, would have been running out of things to talk about.
There is also the fact that Parramatta are very cooperative with the media and have made their players much more available.
After the siren it was all about the storm wasn’t it.
Edit: Just saw that Channel Nine then cut away early from the post match in the Southern States. Poor form Channel Nine.
Michael C said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Parramatta WOULD be more ‘available’ to the media….given that they’re a Sydney based team.
The commentary was pretty damn biased, no surprise from Sterling though,
We still think back to 1999 when Warren had a tear in his voice describing the Storm winning,
and Gould…..”Man versus machine”……what a crock!!
btw – any truth that the game was started late because the organisers had forgotten about daylight saving and the fireworks had to be catered for (which then stuffed up the GTV9 timings)???
AndyRoo said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:19am | Report comment
It’s half geography but Parramatta have been willing to let their players go on the Footy show and such on a thursday night even when their playing Friday night all year. Most clubs don’t allow that.
Michael C said | October 5th 2009 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Yep, but again, it’s an unfair proposition to judge Storm on….it’d be like AFL people complaining that the Lions rarely let Jonothan Brown on the footy show…..given that he’d had to be in Melbourne on the Thursday night…..(or, are you talking about live crosses via satellite??)
AndyRoo said | October 5th 2009 @ 12:31pm | Report comment
Live crosses, open training sessions etc etc.
Parramatta and I think the Broncos are more open than other clubs.
I am not so much having ago at the Storm more suggesting the more open clubs are going to get more press….plus there is the fact that Parramatta have more fans than most clubs (including the Storm) and haven’t won a premiership since 1986.
There just a more interesting story becasue by now (this is their 4th appearance) we all know most of the Storm players story.
Melbourne could have done their bit, there was no talk of naming a tram after Billy Slater or Cameron Smith. If Parrmatta had of got up Nathan Rees was going to commision the Moi Moi Express and Hayne Train.
Mick from Giralang said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
I find it hard to understand why Channel Nine works so hard to suppress the game in Victoria. They’ve obviously paid big dollars for it yet coverage is grudging at best and belies the good ratings they get whenever they show the game at a reasonable time. Of course, a lot of the blame for this situation lies with the inadequacy of the TV contract signed off by the NRL administration, which should have mirrored the AFL deal in requiring reasonable coverage of the game in expansion areas. The AFL executive runs rings around its NRL counterpart in terms of competency.
Matt S said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:40am | Report comment
Mick, any support that is taken away from the beloved AFL is a hit for that code. Rugby league on TV at a decent time would attract far greater support for the game but channel nine is willing to suppress that just to keep the AFL happy.
I read Cunxin Lee (Mao’s Last Dancer) is a big rugby league fan after being introduced to it and this is AFL obsessed Victoria. Someone from the arts and business background liking league!! Added, I rerad in the paper, Swiss soccer player (keller) & Czech player for Sydney FC absolutely love league after watching the game on TV. This is the sort of thing that suggests league is as much a major player in TV land (and the residual benefits) than the AFL would like to see.
Victoria is a very protected (& thus Xenophobic) market despite what others here argue.
Redb said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:50am | Report comment
You really have a very distorted view of the world, the AFL is not the enemy and always to blame for everything that happens to rugby league/NRL or on Ch 9?
Art Sapphire said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Well said Hoy – amazingly Spiro in his piece thought the commentary during the final was exemplary. Everyone in Melbourne thought it was biased. Most people in Melbourne perceive NRL to be a Sydney game and not a national game. Channel Nine’s decision to pull the plug on the celebrations for the Melbourne viewers and the biased commentary they had to listen to during the game only reinforces this perception.
AndyRoo said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:47am | Report comment
I thought they were biased agaisnt Parramatta.
They didn’t show enough replays of Slater dropping the ball but getting a penalty and no one called for Shane Hayne to get the Clive Churchill medal!
Instead they toed the line so they wouln’t take away from the Storms Victory.
Go the Eels
….. I will admit Brent White, Cooper Cronk and Greg Inglis were outstanding though.
Art Sapphire said | October 5th 2009 @ 11:02am | Report comment
They did not show more replays because it would have shown conclusively that it was the defender’s knee that knocked the ball out Slater’s hands. If anything Andy that’s bias against Melbourne as it perpetuated this non-existent injustice against the Eels.
I also liked how Phil Gould was imploring, ordering, begging “just get on with it!!!” that Fui Fui’s try be given even before it went to the video ref. That’s very professional
AndyRoo said | October 5th 2009 @ 11:09am | Report comment
Phil does that every week in regards to video refs…unless it’s the Broncos scoring the try.
Now they have a case agaisnt bias…Gould hates them.
Michael C said | October 5th 2009 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
Was there ever an angle that showed the ball actually touching down??
AndyRoo said | October 5th 2009 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
You can see where the ball would have touched the ground. It was more whether he got it down before/if he went into touch that required more replays.
Hoy said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:59am | Report comment
I would like to possibly set something straight. I have a problem with bias commentary yes, but yesterdays commentary wasn’t even that bad really.
My problem was with the lead up during the whole day. Wide World of Sports, into the Football coverage for the NSW club GF, then the Under 20s, and it was all about Parra.
Parra parents, past Parra players, current Parra players, Parra supporter etc. Updates from Parramatta…
The actual commentary for the game was OK comparatively, but jeez, the lead up was poor.
Brett McKay said | October 5th 2009 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
Hoy, I’m sure a lot of that had to do with the good old Sydney v Melbourne rivalry anyway, but I also think most of the Sydney media was happy to jump on the Parramatta bandwagon this week. I take your point about the balance of the lead-up, but in my opinion it was probably more about catering to where the ratings would come from. Given Ch9 in Melbourne cut to the news before medals were handed out or cup was lifted, they obviously had better things to show the Melbourne audience.
Agree about the commentary too, I thought it was quite balanced, particularly Rabs and Sterlo, but even Gould was quite measured in his analysis. In fact, I thought he could have been more harsh on Parramatta, if he really wanted to point out where they were going wrong. Melbourne he just kept saying were “..just so clinical.”
prowling panther said | October 5th 2009 @ 11:24am | Report comment
the lead up wasn’t broadcast in southern states only the game
the bias was extraordinary though. i was a neutral observer and the commentators were clearly rooting for parramatta who were admittedly the sentimental favourites. Still it is inexcusable for a national coverage. In the first half, Inglis copped a late hit from Ben Smith when parramatta were under siege on their line. Clearly late and intentional but wasn’t even mentioned. Even the Fui’s final try, Sterlo touched on it but I think his leg went into touch before he twisted his body to ground the ball. Rabbs and Gould didn’t give it a look saying ‘Just give it a try!!’ The AFL would never feed such a poor quality coverage into their expansion states. NRL is way too Sydney centric and will not become truly NATIONAL in the near future.
Simone` said | October 5th 2009 @ 11:48am | Report comment
I cant believe Ch9 in Melbourne went straight to the news after the game finished. We had to put on the radio to see who won the Churchill (had a few bets on it). Didn’t even see the players get there medals, or Storm getting the trophy. Was a disgrace. So was the commentating, noone could see the try yet both commentators “It was a try just get on with it.” Lucky i don’t really follow the sport or I may get upset.
Mick said | October 5th 2009 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
The Cowboys get hard done by on Channel 9 and the footy show. They hardly rate a mention by Fatty and the boys (unless they’re previewing a match). But it’s typical Sydney-centric bias. Gould doesn’t like Nth Qld, that’s pretty obvious but for pete’s sake, at least show us some objectivity when you cover our games. Thurston, Tonga, O’Donnel and Bowen all deserve more of a mention than they are getting. Nth Qld is rugby leage heartland anyway. Btw, Sterlo is one of the most objective and balanced commentors I’ve seen. Keep it up!
Tom Alexander. said | October 5th 2009 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
Gould was more about wanting a great contest rather than going for the Eels. If anything i got the impression that he (like a few others in Sydney and especially QLD) were secretly going for the Storm, in his case to avenge their victory over his old team the Bulldogs the week before. The thing that wasn’t a good look was seeing channel 9 commentator Andrew Johns coaching the Parramatta players at half time. At the end of the day Melbourne won and have gone into the history books as the most dominant and successful team of the last decade. The ARL (Colin Love and Co) are the ones responsible for this sick and twisted love affair with CH9. They have never had the brains or guts to demand that the network make sure the games in Victoria and the other states are telecast live or at the very least at a decent hour. How backwards are these people?
Wilba said | October 5th 2009 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
I want to raise two contradictory points:
1. CH9 coverage of RL in Melbourne is deliberately shoddy as they don’t want to upset the AFL because of the ratings, and AFL community support, they get for ‘the Footy Show’; and possibly some delusional idea that they might get the rights back of 7 & 10. They do not want RL to succeed. The only reason that SOO or the GF is shown live in Melb is because it is an international TV event and they are probably forced by legislation to show it. The have never shown post game coverage, frankly I am worried that if the game goes over time we would miss the end for an infomercial.
It is not uncommon for the only game that is televised in Melbourne in a week to be on at 12:15 on a Friday night after two dodgy movies. This is with a contractual obligation for CH9 to show one game a week before midnight – they refuse straight out. I don’t want to be disrespectful to Redb but if you don’t believe that there is an anti-league conspiracy in Melbourne you are bullshitting yourself.
2. Compared to AFL, the production values of the NRL are complete rubbish, Sydney centred and doing itself no favours. The AFL’s ANZAC day match and the final series are a clear class above anything that the NRL produces; the promos, the footage, analysis, commentary the whole event. Even when I was living in QLD I felt nauseous listening to Phil Gould, living in Melbourne watching the AFL I realise it doesn’t have to be that bad. NRL should do itself a favour and ditch CH9.
Redb said | October 5th 2009 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
Wilba,
Ch 9 promoted the crap out of the NRL GF all through the week, please prove they didnt want people to watch. It was wall to wall advertising of the event and time.
There is absolutely no anti-siphoning condition to show the RL SOO or NRL GF live into Melbourne.
I could easily construct a conspiracy theory that News Ltd the part owner of the NRL/full owner of the Melb Storm are biased and using both the Daily Telegraph and Herald Sun to further RL’s interests to the detriment of the AFL.
Unlike News Ltd, Ch 9 does not part own the sport. The AFL is a non profit independent organisation.
It borders on ludicrous to suggest CH 9 are deliberately damaging their own product (they have for 3 more years) to garner support from the AFL.
If anything they would use the NRL ratings to play hard ball with the AFL on the next rights.
think about it.
Redb
Redb said | October 5th 2009 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
And just on your Footy show theory. Ch 9 promoted the NRL prelim between Melb and Bris during the Thursday night GF AFL Footy Show and then the NRL GF during the AFL Sunday Footy Show.
Please explain why CH 9 marketed the NRL finals directly to AFL fans during the AFL footy shows on commercial breaks?
hows them conspiracy apples looking now
Dogs Of War said | October 5th 2009 @ 3:19pm | Report comment
You can’t say they are doing a very good job overall though. They very rarely show games into the SOuthern States, even though the stuff they do show rates very poorly (well on a Sunday they do, I am sure they do a lot better Friday night).
Why they don’t get the League on Fridays nights somewhere between 9:30pm/10:30pm to try and capture audience who may have stopped watching AFL etc, and are looking for something else is beyond me. You can’t grow the audience when you consistently show the game after midnight.
It’s not about a conspiracy, it’s more about why Channel 9 is treating the product like garbage. The AFL wouldn’t put up with it (consider how much the Swans rate when shown in Sydney), so why the NRL isn’t playing hard ball says a lot.
Michael C said | October 5th 2009 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
The NRL need to negotiate a contractual obligation.
The AFL has.
Nothing to do with networks being ‘nice’.
btw – an article today http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/chance-to-finetune-tv-rights/2009/10/04/1254590906734.html
First it was the Nine Network, only too keen to pay the price, and set new standards in football coverage, but apparently not so keen to take that coverage live into certain key regional and interstate areas.
If the AFL nabobs learnt a lesson there, it presumably should have been: “Whatever you want to happen, you’d better put it in the contract in cold, hard print.”
Presumably they had included a little more detail in the legal documentation when the initial “consortium” of Nine/Ten/Foxtel, gave way to the present one of Seven/Ten/Foxtel.
Don’t blame the networks…..it’s up to the contract writers,
so, perhaps expect a future NRL broadcast rights to be ‘inflated’ in dollar terms, but, not in ‘real terms’ to the game, but, via contra in network coverage and production/promotion etc.
Dogs Of War said | October 6th 2009 @ 7:50am | Report comment
It’s in the contract mate. Games must start being shown before midnight. Gallop for some reason just doesn’t enforce it.
Brett McKay said | October 5th 2009 @ 3:18pm | Report comment
Check and Mate I’d reckon Red…
Wilba said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:52am | Report comment
‘Herald Sun to further RL’s interests to the detriment of the AFL’ ?!? hah hah rotflmao
Have you actually tried to find a league story in the Herald Sun?
I am not sure we can suggest anything in ludicrous when Fast Eddie (former CH9 boss) and demetriou are involved.
Michael C said | October 5th 2009 @ 3:01pm | Report comment
re production values….how much is AFL and NRL and how much is the networks themselves.
Perhaps the AFL has allowed a ‘contra’ component to be put towards the ‘value’ of the overall broadcast rights??
The NRL is littered with ‘buffoons’ (in a ‘nice’ use of the term) in commentary etc – - in that, there’s been too much overlap of commentary personnel with Footy Show personnel. The ‘buffoonary’ or larkinanism transcends….perhaps too much.
re. point 1 – - – agree with Redb – - – channel 9 owes the AFL nothing. Although, for sensible programming out of ch.9 in recent times……that’s rarer than a live Wallabies match in Melbourne……oh yeah, ch.7 on in a conspiracy with the AFL to kill of the ARU!!! (but, all around Australia?? http://www.rugbyheaven.com.au/news/news/why-super-14-is-getting-a-clubbing/2009/10/03/1254418750438.html )
Dogs Of War said | October 6th 2009 @ 6:26pm | Report comment
Well Channel 7 buried soccer to please the AFL, and that ain’t no lie…
Simone` said | October 5th 2009 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
Wilba – Not sure about last year but 2 years preceding it I am quite sure that the post game was shown when Melbourne lost to Bronco’s and when they won. Can remeber the victory laps on both those occasions.
Mick from Giralang said | October 5th 2009 @ 7:08pm | Report comment
No one can avoid the fact that despite holding the rights at great expense, Channel Nine suppresses FTA coverage of the game in Melbourne. This is indisputable (though the reasons for it are open to debate).
Bulldog said | October 5th 2009 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
I have to agree with you Hoy and have always felt that there is an inherent Sydney bias in the NRL, whether it is commentary, coverage, judicary etc. My take on this bias is that the people who comment and officiate over the game (and hence have influence) are all Sydney guys with close Sydney club ties. This is the problem with having ex-players and coaches in the media and running the game. As a NQ Cowboys supporter they appear to get a pretty bad deal on a number of fronts due to the fact they have no one in the Sydney media etc that push their case – particularly with refereeing & judicary decisions. If Manly get a couple of bad ref calls and Des Hasler blows up – you can count on all the Manly friendly media types to cry blue murder which just puts pressure on refs in the future etc etc… This example applies to a number of Sydney clubs and their media friends.
skull said | October 6th 2009 @ 7:31am | Report comment
You are kidding aren’t you. Manly friendly media types! There hasnt been one since Rex Mossop! Ever listen to Morrow and Ryan on the ABC when they are calling a Manly match. I would bet you cannot name one, except for Fulton if he is still on.
Bulldog said | October 6th 2009 @ 5:55pm | Report comment
Fatty Vautin
skull said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:37pm | Report comment
not after whatthey did to him. Fatty now lives on the gold coast and his son plays with the Titans. Try again
westy said | October 5th 2009 @ 4:44pm | Report comment
I always thought that the Storm was abit of ajoke. However I do respond to Waldron’s comments.
Unlike Aussie Rules in Sydney which has always had an underrated presence in Sydney and Southern NSw from the turn of the century rugby league started of a basically zero base in Melbourne and Victoria.
Waldron made clear without pretence rugby league would never be dominant in the southern capital. Storm’s aim has been to forge a niche with in the community .
I have to be fair that without any subsidy from the NRL as was the case with the Swans and the AFL the Storm may well find their niche in the southern capital.
They have done so on the back of astute recruitment , a brilliant coach and a sound culture. I was impressed with their junior development work small but effective run by Greg Brentnall.
i changed my mind when I saw their SG Ball squad U/18 make the grand final. with a contingent of lads who actually lived in melbourne (11). and further persuaded by the U/20’s win with 5 local lads in their squad.
Never number one not even in the top 20 but perhaps viable.
They deserve some credit off the field as well as on it.
I will tell you one thing Melbourne rugby franchise would do worse than getting a coach like bellamy an executive like waldron and players like Slater and Inglis
Redb said | October 5th 2009 @ 7:33pm | Report comment
Westy,
“I have to be fair that without any subsidy from the NRL”
I think its fair to say that News Ltd have covered the Storm’s losses to the tune of up to $5M a year.
Redb
Dogs Of War said | October 5th 2009 @ 7:38pm | Report comment
Difference is to the subsidies that AFL provide teams, is that they do it without having bonus draft picks or extra salary cap allowances. It is a level playing field, I am sure that is what Westy was alluding too.
Given that News Ltd is using the money they are owned to help develop the game in Vic, and eventually have to relinquish control of 1 of the 2 teams that they still own (Broncos being the other team), when they do sell the Storm, they will find it worth a lot more than they expected. Hopefully it is a shareholder type arrangement so the community can own the team.
As for how much money they lose, it’s hard to say given it’s not published anywhere. So it’s all just speculation.
Redb said | October 5th 2009 @ 7:48pm | Report comment
DOW,
The News Ltd losses have been reported in the newspapers, dont have a link at hand but i think it’s pretty close to the mark.
There has also been plenty of speculation of 3rd party payments to Storm players given the team is littered with Origin players, I think it was 9 last year.
Regardless they are very well funded team given News Ltd backing, the Broncos also havent been shy of success as they to are backed by a billon dollar corporation.
Redb
Dogs Of War said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:47pm | Report comment
So you are accusing them of salary cap breaches without evidence? Unlike the AFL, their is a cap on 3rd party payments.
As for the News Ltd losses reported in the newspapers, they are pure speculation. No financials for the club are published, so all they have to use is what sponsors may be providing as input, and then estimating what the clubs outputs may be. As the Storm are one of the highest sponsor generating clubs in the NRL, I doubt they are making losses in the region you suggest.
Many clubs like mine, are very well funded, but it takes more than funds to get success. Geez just ask Carlton who go way over the salary cap and still finish last.
AndyRoo said | October 6th 2009 @ 9:33am | Report comment
Redb
I am not a storm fan. They play boring football considering how good their team is and they just beat the Eels (who I support) in the Grand Final and they also encourage a bunch of vics to complain about perfectly fine commentary (it’s normal in NSW to support the underdog) but I have no suspicion that there cheating on the salary cap.
Their first team (1998) was put together when there was no salary cap as it was removed during the super league war. They are not a buying club they are always losing stars and replacing them with kids or unknowns. Michael Crocker stands out as the one player in recent memory with rep experience they brought.
Smith, Inglis, Folau (poached by Brisbane), Brent White, Dallas Johnson, Steve Turner, Bradley Blair, Ryan Hoffman, Cooper Cronk were all nobodies when they signed for the storm.
Brent Finch was released from his club and so wouldn’t be on much money this year.
The only way to get better players than your opponents with a salary cap in place is great youth recruitment, developing players and getting underrated players from other clubs (Bulldogs this year). It’s slightly easier in the NRL than the AFL to press your advantage because there is no draft limiting your talent spotting advantage.
The Storm are the best at this and it’s plain for all to see.
Tifosi said | October 5th 2009 @ 6:14pm | Report comment
Did anyone catch the sports section of Sydney channel nine news tonight?
Danny Wilder was at Princes Park with the Melbourne Storm fans etc, in the background there was a kid with a piece of cardboard that read ”
“Channel 9 You’re NOT Welcome ”
Sums it up perfectly how channel 9 treats the game in Melbourne.
westy said | October 5th 2009 @ 8:52pm | Report comment
Redb you are usually more objective than me . i mean this as a compliment. I in no way wished to detract from the ownership of Melbourne by News Ltd or its covering of losses. I think you are being a tad ungenerous re third party payments. Melbourne have been targeted heavily and passed . The knack they have devloped is to hold very talented spine ( 1/6/7/9) and a genious Inglis. It is like Scarlett/ Ablet/ best ruckman/ Riewoldtv throw in a Judd and building ateam around them. bellamy has the knack of getting more out of ordinary players and developing them than any other coach.
All I was alluding to is that very slowly I am coming to the view that Melbourne Storm may survive in a decade or so without NewsLtd subsidy when i thought it was impossible to do so.. There never will be two rugby league teams in melbourne but one may survive when i thought none could.
They still have along way to go but they definitely move in the right direction.
Melbourne Storm currently have I think 5 SOO players Slater/ Inglis/ johnson/ White and Smith. You are being less than generous in not recognising the outstanding recruitment of melbourne in such players as neilson/chambers/Tolman/Hinchcliffe/Finch/Tandy/ at well below market price salaries. There is something at melbourne a culture of development. Players go there and leave better. It is ungracious not to recognise this . You know as well as i some AFL coaches are better at developing players than others.
I think this has much to do with a long term talented coach ( 7 years) and a down to earth captain who despite not being victorian are happy to live in melbourne and enjoy it.
Dogs Of War said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:06pm | Report comment
I think that last line is the best one for the club. Like the Swans players in Sydney, the players can walk around in relative anonymity, and thus live their life off the field. It must be a big plus for the Storm, compared the reception players can get when having a night out in Sydney.
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:48am | Report comment
Westy, DOW,
As I said there has been speculation and given that Melb Storm from zero player base has made 5 grand Finals out of 11, I think there is rightful cause for suscipion. Not that I disagree with the rationale given success creates bandwagons which build support for teams in expansion markets.
In answer to DOW, who has investigated the Melb Storm’s salary cap and 3rd party deals?? – who is objective enough when News LTd owns 50% of the NRL and 100% of the Melb Storm and has been saving the ARL the trouble of investing development funds into Victoria?
It would be like a tobacco company funding a study into the effects of smoking.
Redb
The Link said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:07am | Report comment
Something that is frequently overlooked re the Storm is that they are a product of the compromise reached at the end of the Super League war – not RL’s finest hour. From memory they pretty much had free reign to pick the carcass of teams like the Hunter Mariners that were extinguished via salary cap exclusions.
From these less than humble beginnings the Storm seem to be building a nieche, albeit a small and dedicated one, which will hopefully be entrenched with the new stadium coming on line next year. Its hard to think of how RL could be in a realistically better position in Melbourne with the onset of the Rebels in 2011
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
The Link,
I agree with your last paragraph.
There has been a noticeable improvement in communtity engagement and media. Cameron Smith has done good job as Captain of the club.
Waldron has carefully steered the Storm away from its early arrogance of “we’ll give them a game to watch” to a more inclusive “we love AFL too” and want to be part of the fabric of Melbourne. Although the Ch 9 Sydney commentary may have undone some of their work.
Storm have also benefited from huge migration into Victoria from NSW and NZ/Pacific Isles in the last 5 years.
Melbourne is bursting at the seams, public transport stretched, roads clogged, water supply under significant pressure. Population now over 4 million and increasing at about 90,000 per year, up from 50,000 2-3 years ago.
The upside is a stable economy that weathered the GFC pretty well with a little belt tightening.
Redb
Brett McKay said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:18am | Report comment
actually Link, that’s not quite right either – SL were going to bring Melbourne into their ‘98 comp regardless, and News Ltd made their inclusion into the NRL merger a non-negotiable. They essentially dropped Adelaide and Perth to get Melbourne in, which is why a lot of Perth players went to Melbourne on start-up.
(They also forced Brett Kimmorley to renege on a deal to go to Illawarra after the Mariners were cut, and “strongly encouraged” him to go to Melbourne too…)
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:23am | Report comment
They also bought Glenn Lazarus ( the brick with eyes) , won a premiership in 99 and then went back to Canberra.
The Link said | October 6th 2009 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Funny a Rugby competition shafting Perth for Melbourne…….
Redb – I think the Brick retired after 99? I remember his post GF speech as one of the best and most humble in memory, mentioned troops in East Timor etc…
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
The link,
The Brick was always good value on radio in Melbourne they would interview him regularly on 3AW,etc.
Redb
keeper11 said | October 5th 2009 @ 9:30pm | Report comment
Perfect reminder of the provincialism reigns supreme in the NRL and in much of australian media…
the so-called ‘NRL’ is national in name only….its still a sydney centric suburban comp and the NRL and its sydney media mates #9 and Tele were desperate to hype up every last ounce out Parra for sole benefit of boosting interest and ratings in sydney….
the irony is parra v melbournwe was the least desirable grand final;
th script writers at the NRL would have preferred:
parra v stgeorge- sydney trditional rivalry- ‘good for the game’
parra v brisbane – state of origin in the grand final- ‘good for the game’
i can’t think of another national competition in the world that would have carried on like that…
the NFL trumpet a new york or LA team in the super bowl ?
can you imagine ever the FA and the english media unashamedly barracking for eg Arsenal..
over Man U or Liverpool just because the former was from London…???
Mr cheese said | October 5th 2009 @ 11:51pm | Report comment
Manchester United is not literallya based in London, but its soul lies somewhere around there. Kent, I think.
The Link said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:09am | Report comment
keeper11 – save your trolling for another thread.
enjoy your 6k crowds at Skilled, there’s plently of room for you to babble on there without annoying anyone around you.
Jimmo said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:55am | Report comment
Don’t you mean 4k?
Tom Alexander. said | October 5th 2009 @ 10:15pm | Report comment
I think the difference between Bellamy and Ricky Stuart as coaches maybe found in the fact that Bellamy before he went out on his own, learn’t a lot of his trade under Wayne Bennett. He seems to be able to motivate/get the best out of his players without the intimidation. Like Bennett he seems to transform ordinary footballers into much better players. When the Rugby franchise is given the go-ahead in Melbourne, in terms of relative success in a tough marketplace, there’s probably no better template than the Storm at the moment. Could you imagine the reaction if the AFL Grand Final coverage (in QLD and NSW) was to be cut straight after the final whistle with no Medal and Cup presentation. Call it what it is an absolute bloody disgrace.
westy said | October 5th 2009 @ 11:40pm | Report comment
But keeper 11 did you enjoy the game? keeper I note your relevant comments but seriously you never have anything positive to say. I agree with the gist of what you say but 82500 is not a bad crowd.There was genuine passion in the parramatta supporters. this was tribal the media rode its back true but they did not create it.
I enjoyed the game.
Football now takes over so relax.
Personally i was surprised the Storm had at least 15000 /20000 genuine supporters.
I have been only to one Melbourne Storm game in Melbourne . I was surprised 14800 quite genuine fans. They were in the team colours and from my conversation with some of them appeared to be regulars.
I am not an apologist for them. I write only what i have seen. Unlike the other codes the storm had no underlying juniors in Melbourne.
let us say the jury is still out whereas once i thought they were no hope.
westy said | October 6th 2009 @ 12:00am | Report comment
I think the greatest hypocrisy is shown when people ignore the NRL average 3.490 million television audience across the capital cities and regional australia . Sydney 1.16 million audience was matched by over one million in regional Australia . The average television audience in melbourne was 685000 up from 492000 last year. The melbourne audience exceeded brisbane’s 582000.
The only way the NRL gets anywhere near the AFL grand final is because there was a Melbourne team playing and nine fed it in live. The average 685000 audience in melbourne is the difference. anyone who ignores this lives in noddy land.
It is a fundamental misnomer to underestimate the national television audience for NRL with a Melbourne team involved.
Karlos said | October 6th 2009 @ 12:40am | Report comment
Westy you are right in saying Melbourne is pushing the GF TV ratings up quite a bit. Even so, I think you will find that Melbourne’s NRL ratings without the Storm playing in 2005 (In Melbourne, an average of 514,000 tuned into the 2005 NRL final.)surpass the AFL ratings in Sydney without the Swans. This year only 309,000 Sydneyites watched St Kilda and Geelong do battle. Last year The Swans only managed 19,000 to their semi-final in Sydney without competing against the NRL Grand Final as Melbourne Storm did against the AFL decider last week, yet manged 27,000.
It would seem to me that RL is making good progress and consolidating very well in Melbourne and thier new stadium next year is going to see a boom in thier gate attendences and popularity. I have not seen the regional figures for the RL GF as yet, but Broncos/Storm preliminary final was only 28,000 short of what watched the AFL GF. Where did you get your 1 million from? I know over 1,119,000 watched SOO 1 this year in regional centres and expected similar for GF.
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:40am | Report comment
Karlos,
your numbers are not correct.
http://www.talkingfooty.com/tv_ratings_2009.php
AFL ratings in Sydney were an average of 331,000 and 2,880,000 nationally for 5 capital city market. This is still about 300K higher than the NRL GF.
Regional figures are questionable due to double counting – plus did you know that all of regional WA and SA are excluded? I bet not.
The last time a Sydney team was in the AFL GF in 2006 the ratings were 765,000 in Sydney. It makes a HUGE difference to the ratings as Westy suggests above. In 2005, the AFL Sydney ratings were over 900,000.
Notwithstanding that both cities watch Grand Finals to some degree without their teams, the timeslot in 2005 heavily favoured the NRL when it was played at night (7pm) basicially prime time against the AFL’s Sat arvo timeslot which is undoutbtably a poor TV timeslot especially in Sydney where Sunday and evenings are football times.
These ratings comparisons have to be considered a bit silly as both GF’s are well supported.
If the NRL, journos and fans want to claim a ratings victory over the AFL from time to time – and it does seem more important to them given the TV friendly timeslot,etc then so be it. Competition is healthy for the AFL it needs to be kept on its toes to curb arrogance.
The AFL will hopefully retain its sat arvo timeslot which is the most fan friendly.
For clarity, the Melbourne ratings for the AFL GF this year was 1,502,000 average, peaking at 1,700,000.
Redb
Jimmo said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:58am | Report comment
“plus did you know that all of regional WA and SA are excluded?” – Oh right, then we can add the 30 odd people that live in regional WA and SA to the AFL ratings then.
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 9:39am | Report comment
look I know you are pretty insular but heres the stats.
WA total pop 2.2M , Perth 1.5M
SA total pop 1.6M, Adelaide 1.1M
Regional WA and SA population is over 1M – very strong AFL area excluded from the regional ratings.
you were saying 30.
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:04am | Report comment
As i mentioned Redb, the Grand finals of both codes are big accausions, no need to start a war on regionals. AFL had 2.8 million, NRL had 2.5 million. Whats 300 thousand between friends.
The Storm did well, People love that club, and who could dought their passion for this great club. They had 27 thousand turn up during AFL final, i am sure that most of them would have another look now, at the new stadium i would think many would commit.
They are a wonderful team with some exciting players.
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:11am | Report comment
oikee,
yes both GF’s are well supported.
However, Storm v Bronc did not play during “the AFL final” it was played 2-3 hours afterwards. 27k is Ok, but down on the 33K last time in a Prelim.
I guess some people struggle with the time-space continuum.
Redb
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:19am | Report comment
True, but as you said, it was after a grand final which made travelling for Broncos supporters vertually nil, so most of them were Victorians. Which to me is very impressive.
As i mentioned, on the storm site, the passion these guys have for their club is fantastic.
You should go to the 1st game at the new stadium Redb, if you can get a ticket.
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:26am | Report comment
Oikee,
One day you’ll go to the MCG and see the panoramic feast before you – the AFL.
Just dont support Carlton and we’ll remain on speaking terms.
Redb
Michael C said | October 6th 2009 @ 5:44am | Report comment
Westy -
it can’t be ignored that the NRL GF into Melbourne was the week AFTER the AFL season had concluded,…..and Storm were playing, …., and starting at 5pm….or was that 5.30 pm, on a Sunday – that’s a pretty friendly slot to pull in casual tv dinner viewers.
that’s a perfect recipe for maximising Melbourne viewership.
As distinct to the AFL GF on a Saturday arvo during NRL prelim final weekend, with no non-Victorian teams competing and the NRL prelims including teams from Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney.
No one in their right mind could claim a reasonable/worthwhile comparision. After all, what would an all Sydney NRL GF pull if broadcast into Melbourne on AFL Prelim final weekend???
Dogs Of War said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:25am | Report comment
So smart marketing by the NRL to have the game at 5:30pm? Helps that we do have to consider NZ as well, which is one of the reason the 7:30pm timeslot didn’t work as well (Starts way too late in NZ).
As for your other argument, it doesn’t happen so how can we assume anything? It’s not like the 2 games ever go head to head during the finals except possibly week 1 of the finals, but even then it would be a minimal cross over.
It’s finals time and we should all just enjoy the fact that September is all about watching the best teams that year slog it out.
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 9:02am | Report comment
Those veiwing figures for Melbourne are very good, never would i have thought that Melbourne could outrate Brisbane.
Anyhow, as i mentioned not long ago, the Storm will be a powerhouse club. I read some comments on their site about farewelling the graveyard,(olmypic park). What really struck me on their comments was the love they held for the ground.
Also the passion and comradery the supporters feel for the club and the team and coach.
Not to mention the exposure they received playing the grand final. The Storm are well and truely on the map in only 10 short years, nice work.
westy said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Michael C/Redb for once you miss the point. if you read my post carefully I said “get close to the AFL”. I at no time attempted to turn it into an AFL/NRL athon.
I was trying to make the point that for once the NRL timetabling was good. They were able to get close to the AFL because melbourne were in the grand final and obviously there were no conflicting VIC AFL games. To be fair this was good timetabling by the NRL.
melbourne’s 400000/500000/600000 tuning in is critical to NRL’s figures
I do think it helped melbourne was playing.
I was merely pointing out unlike crowd attendances the NRL “strikes” well in national television audiences. melbourne is critical to those figures. 10 to 20% of the melbourne television audience is imperative.to get close.
Television audiences put the national into the NRL. There is some evidence to support that contention.
I did not offer any opinion on regionals. Gee the regionals of south Australia? and not many more in WA. your assumption the mining boys are all Aussie Rules boys may also be misplaced. This was not astrong point of your argument.
Michael C said | October 6th 2009 @ 11:20am | Report comment
No worries Westy – - I hope I didn’t come across as overly combative.
re the regionals of WA and SA, more so in recent economic boom times, they’ve come from far and wide…so, a bit of a watering down similar to the northern Australian military ‘towns’.
However, the more recent nature in some cases and the established ‘cultures’ have seen as an example the local ‘established’ footy clubs have been specifically advertising and luring ‘players/workers’.
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 1:35pm | Report comment
Westy,
WA is a very strong AFL footy state and country towns are probably stronger than metro areas with players and footy fans. They would watch the AFl Gf in big numbers.
As an example:
I visit the Eyre Peninsula (South Aust) on a regular basis, approx 60,000 people on its own, they dont just talk AFL footy they talk local footy, Cummins vTumby Bay, v Port Lincoln v Cleve v Ceduna, etc.
The thing about country towns in both AFL and NRL heartlands is the dominance of the local codes, there is often little soccer or the ‘other’ code played by the locals/cockies , etc.
Exceptions for AFL/NRL cross-over include Albury-Wodonga, Wagga, Cairns.
You can dismiss 1 million regional folk from WA and SA but i think given the AFL’s popularity there would be a very high percentage of viewers.
Redb
AndyRoo said | October 6th 2009 @ 1:37pm | Report comment
There are a lot of NRL heathens in those mines though. I have to talk to them at work.
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
of course there are , but living and working in Western Australia they would also watch the AFL GF along with their mates, or would you suggest they are too biased to watch the biggest game of the year in AFL?
i know a few expat Vic’s on the Sunshine Coast, they’re AFL through and through but still watch RL’s State of Origin – when in Rome,etc.
Redb
AndyRoo said | October 6th 2009 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
Good point
Although the ones I talk too tend to be kiwis (that’s how I know they aren’t locals). They don’t always follow the NRL though (especially if they are from the South Island) but I can’t imagine too many of them watching the AFL grand final. It’s very odd (but does happen) too see a kiwi converted too the AFL but the switch to NRL isn’t hard for them.
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:08pm | Report comment
AndyRoo,
You cant seriously suggest though that Kiwis make up a significant (say more than 10%) of the regional WA and SA population? We are getting down into too much detail.
keeper11 said | October 6th 2009 @ 11:28am | Report comment
Westy….Chill man
I said nothing negative about the GF whatsoever..
I caught some of the second half… it was a great occasion in front of a packed stadium…
enjoyed by you and many Sydnesiders..
now back to the topic ..the obvious sydney centric bias of the coverage…..cheers
macavity said | October 6th 2009 @ 11:34am | Report comment
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/05/nrl-grand-final-out-rates-the-afl/
I will just leave this here….
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
The Crikey numbers are wrong!
The AFL GF Tv ratings for 5 capital cities was 2,878,000 for starters. Heres the numbers from the offical ratings:
http://www.oztam.com.au/documents/2009/E_20090920.pdf
The regionals for the AFL (not incl all of regional WA and SA) was 969,000.
http://www.agbnielsen.net/search/search.asp?src=404&txtQuery=uploads
Grand total for AFL GF is 3,847,000.
——————-
Redb
Michael C said | October 6th 2009 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
Good work Redb – beat me to the punch on that one.
Crikey should stick to what it knows best……….no much of anything really.
What’s a joke though is the Daily Telegraph language
“In figures that will have Andrew Demetriou choking on his next footy frank,”
“Melbourne footy fans in particular appear to have finally seen the light on league, with the AFL stronghold thunderstruck by the Storm and Parramatta Eels decider.”
etc etc
They’re blowing hard up there.
Gee – you’d think there was AFL on up against it!!!
Matt S said | October 6th 2009 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
RedB, the NRL beat the AFL in TV ratings overall by about 2-300,000 so unless every single person in regional WA/SA were watching the AFL, it is game, set & match. Plus there would have been at least some in those regionals watching the NRL, so that would have still pushed them ahead!
Wilba said | October 6th 2009 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Gold macavity. I just mentioned this article in a Melbourne CBD lift and received quite a hostile reaction… followed by jokes about how it is surprising that so many league supporters had TVs.
This is about more than numbers, it is cultural, and league is doing well in Melbourne in spite of CH9 not because of it.
macavity said | October 6th 2009 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
aaah I get it
both crikey and the news ltd papers got it wrong, but RedB is right.
969,000 out of 1.2mil people (your numbers) in regional WA/SA watched the AFL GF?
I call B.S.
Michael C said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
macavity -
did you read what Redb wrote?
The regionals all up was 969,000 – - – NOT including all of WA and SA.
Regionals…i.e. outside the ‘big 5 Metro’ markets…i.e. regional Vic, QLD, NSW, all of Canberra-ACT, all of Hobart-Tassie, all of Darwin-NT.
Now – with respect to credibility of sources……AGB Nielsen are the people contracted to do the OzTAM ratings that OzTAM publish.
So,….let’s balance this up, Redb quotes OzTAM and AGB Nielson,….and you’re going to back in Crikey and the Daily Telegraph……..give us a break!!!!!
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:05pm | Report comment
Yes that’s right, you can see from the 5 captial city number which is quoted as 2,704,000 for the AFL by Crikey/Daily Telepgraph when Oztam clearly shows it is 2,878,000 – a difference alone of 175,000. (the Australian also reported the Oztam number)
969,000 is for all of regional Australia (which includesTas, Vic, N-NSw, S-NSW, QLD, ) not including regional WA and SA – read it again.
The Link said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:49pm | Report comment
Is Oztam even out for the NRL figures? If not then perhaps therefore we should wait to compare apples
macavity said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:54pm | Report comment
apologies, eyes playing tricks on me.
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
no worries.
cheers
Hoy said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:04pm | Report comment
This was never meant to be an article about AFL vs NRL in Melbourne. That seems to have taken a life of it’s own. I am sick of the damn code wars on this site. Can’t everyone just support sport and see each code as different?
What Keeper 11 said is correct. I originally wrote the article in response to what I perceived was a very, very Sydney centric support of the Eels that Channel 9 put through on match day. I was writing to discuss how national the NRL/Channel 9 thought the game was when the free to air national carrier of the sport so heavily, and almost unashamedly supports one team over the other. That coverage on Sunday, along with the long held disgruntlement of Canberra fans, QLD fans, and now Melbourne fans after being cut off from coverage after the game, all lead me to believe there is still a very much alive NSWRL view of the game.
Art Sapphire said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
Richard Hinds also summed it up very well in the Fairfax press today.
http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/lhqnews/coverage-was-brilliant-in-its-bias/2009/10/05/1254700978267.html
“Grand final coverage was brilliant in its bias”
IN THE past, some have accused Channel Nine of not doing its best to promote the NRL’s attempts at expansion beyond its safe northern boundaries. Of refusing to take the odd hit in the ratings to show Melbourne Storm games in reasonable timeslots.
Despite the howls of protest from Storm fans that Nine’s grand final presentation – also known as A Tribute To Our Mighty Eels – made Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will seem like an even-handed account of 1930s German politics, this time the NRL’s free-to-air partner deserves our staunch support.
The feeling of those Melburnians whose plasma screens were shattered by a fast-flying remote control was that Nine’s commentators had been beguiled by a week of Sydney-against-the-rest rhetoric and were root-root-rooting for the home team. Even harder, that is, than you might reasonably expect former Eels great Peter Sterling to do so.
Clearly, this was a ruse. So comically biased was Nine’s presentation that it can only be assumed the network was doing a Baldrick. This was a cunning plan – and gullible Victorians fell for it.
Usually deprived of rugby league, these johnny-come-latelys do not realise that, when they are not up to their grand final high jinks, Phil Gould and Sterling are the best one-two punch in Australian sports commentary. That they are reasonable, measured and, when they can be heard above Ray Warren, enlightening analysts.
So, under normal circumstances, there is no way either would suggest, as Gould did, that it was perfectly OK for the Eels defence to cut down Greg Inglis when he put up a high ball because the usual rules don’t apply in grand finals and you can’t just do a legitimate kick and charge and expect to get away with it. Or that the video referee should just award Fuifui Moimoi’s try without a second glance and just get on with the game.
No, ”Gus” and ”Sterlo” would do this only if they were part of a plan carefully crafted in the Nine bunker and eagerly supported by the NRL. These otherwise exemplary commentators had clearly agreed to be so ridiculously biased and parochial that even thick-skinned, league-resistant Victorians would be outraged. So outraged that they would get behind the Storm and embrace it as their own.
It was a plan brilliant in its simplicity and wonderfully executed. From the distress in Warren’s voice when the Storm threatened to score – ”oh no, there’s trouble here!” – right to the final minutes when, rather than a celebration of the Storm’s achievement, we were given an Eels post-mortem.
There were a few moments when the Nine team got squeamish. After the inevitable hand-wringing about the late penalty against Moimoi – apparently, at some stages in grand finals, the rules should apply – Sterling was moved to suggest these things tend to even up. But cheerleading is a relentless job. Even the Dallas Cowgirls have to put down the pom-poms sometimes.
The production team also played its part. Ending coverage of the Storm’s celebrations to Melbourne viewers just minutes after the hooter was brilliant. After all, there is a golden rule for big-time entertainers. Always leave the audience wanting more.
So what that Melburnians did not get to celebrate an extraordinary achievement. Big deal that they didn’t see Billy Slater presented with the Clive Churchill Medal. The commentators were mostly talking about the Eels’ chances next season anyway.
Some may quibble that a league that is in a nationwide fight for exposure deserves a broadcaster that caters for its entire audience. That such Sydney-centric bias betrays a mindset that will limit, not enhance, the game.
I prefer to believe this was a first-rate piece of promotion. By yesterday morning, Melbourne was galvanised. Talkback radio was flooded by callers outraged at the cut-off presentation and seething about the biased commentary. It was a city united behind the Storm.
Or was it just united against Nine’s coverage?
AndyRoo said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:56pm | Report comment
Totally reeks of someone who never watches the NRL.
Gould often just calls for the try to be given, and does so frequently.
Didn’t he want them just to give Hodges effort in state of Origin a try?
He also called for Haynes try (where he stepped out) to be allowed.
He is clearly having a laugh at the Inglis matter. Everyone knows that’s a penalty. He does the same joke during origins about letting stuff go.
Also ignores that he said the same thing when Blair (A storm player) hit someone late.
Chip removal surgeons are going to be busy in Melbourne
Brett McKay said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:58pm | Report comment
Art, check out Patrick Smith in The Oz today – takes a similar aim at biased commentary, but for some reason gives it to Sterlo, the most balanced of them all!!
Art Sapphire said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
I make it a point never to read Patrick Smith.
Thanks Brett for comfirming to me why I made the right decision
Brett McKay said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
Art, I know he’s been known to go off half-cocked at times, but the whole basis of the article was just wrong. Interestingly, suspiciously, The Oz decided not to open it up for comment as they sometimes do…
Michael C said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
I thought the RIchard Hinds piece was really just a satire piece. Completely tongue in cheek.
Art Sapphire said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:23pm | Report comment
Brett, now you made me read the thing. I can see what Patrick is trying to say but he should have taken out the Sterlo bashing in the first 3 paragraphs. It was not necessary.
AndyRoo said | October 6th 2009 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
Hinds yes but Smith no and many other people on this thread have made the same argument about the same two points.
captain nemo said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:56pm | Report comment
Sterlo would be the most respected of them all without a doubt. If this Smith gives it to Sterlo, then he is just craving attention.
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:59pm | Report comment
The issue is as follows, if you played the game on TV, would you be able to grow your fan base as the Storm have done, its only averaging around 12-13 thousand, rugby league in QLD had the same problem, if the game was shown live the fans would just sit at home and watch the game, so they had to make sure that they had as our melbourne friends tell us, rusted on Fans. Niow the games can be played at any time for Brisbane, because they get good crowds regardless.
I can see what they are doing, it takes time, remember, the Storm are only 10 years old, and the juniors are still coming threw. Next tv deal should nearly be ready to show the game at better times. The new stadium will keep the fans turning up at the games. The titans lose support also from being shown live on TV.
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
Hey Hoy, Queensland has put up with NSW biase for decades, only recently have i heard Gus Gould telling us that Queensland is the new capital for League. The Melbourne Storm has carved their way into being accepted, obviously not by all the Melbourne public, but hey, who cares, if they are that ignorant then its no skin off my nose.
The AFlL has been in the other states for a very long time now, i think they get their fair share of support, the veiwing figures make sense, not everyone cares about AFL up here, we support our team, and watch the final. We dont carry on like frigthened rabbits because we might think the AFL is bigger than league, in which crowd figures it is, but we do support our planted teams, like the lions, and the Swans, gee damm, even the roar got 40 thousand to a final a few years back.
The Melbourne public is to busy patting themselves on the back, at least the Storm have genuine supporters. And they only have to fill a stadium of 31 thousand now to be a sellout, imagine that fact hitting the Melbourne Public over the next 5 years, get over it Melbounre. Sit down, shut up, and enjoy your sport, stop worrying about bloody nuimbers.
Everytime i read about a story about Melbourne, its a smart arse comment about rugby league, your not doing yourself any favours, i dont even read Roy Masters, only the comments poeple on here bring up. I thought he was a tennis player. ;(
Michael C said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:53pm | Report comment
Oikee -
mate – who put forward the numbers in the first place? Westy, Karlos, Macavity.
Don’t blame AFL folk for that. What are you going on about the Melbourne public??? Leave that aside. Hoy’s tried to get this back on topic and look what you’ve gone and done.
We’re just trying to make sure the right one’s are put forward, and the appropriate context applied. No big deal. Nothing to do with frightened rabbits………hey, we even got 50K to a H&A HAL game once, and 50K twice to HAL GFs, and 80K to the ‘G for a SoO and etc etc ……
Redb said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
“i dont even read Roy Masters, only the comments poeple on here bring up. I thought he was a tennis player”
Gold.
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:27pm | Report comment
Like that one Redb,
Well its probably true to most young league fans, if you mentioned Roy Masters, they would think he was a tennis player, or golf player.
Michael C said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
Hoy –
Main thing – NRL GF is scheduled on the very NSW-Sydney centric Sunday evening/night before a NSW public holiday.
That’s not very friendly outside of NSW – and leaves the Storm supporters having to take time off work to head to Princes Park on a work day Monday arvo to ‘welcome home’ the victorious few.
Re coverage – let the NRL negotiate with their broadcast partners,…..and let’s get it straight – variously different references list the game as a 5pm start vs a 5.15pm start. Poor channel 9 in Melbourne was perhaps left in the dark….so to speak….about what amounted to a very late start.
[e.g. NRL.com lists the game as 17.00 start on the 'Telstra Premiership' tab match summary, and yet on NRL.com via 'NRL Home' tab and finals series information lists it as a 5.15pm start. And what time did it actually get underway anyway? That was nearer to 5.30pm. b/w that an J.Hayne and his boots - - it came across as amateur hour.]
It is pretty apparent and has been for some time that the N(SW)RL has it’s blinkers on whilst attempting to proclaim ‘National’.
Presently are not all fingers pointed towards an independent commission to run the game. Without that, there’s not really much hope?
AndyRoo said | October 6th 2009 @ 4:29pm | Report comment
Because the Australian FL is so democratic. Just signed a deal to keep the grand final at the MCG until 2032 was it.
The reason it’s 5:30pm instead of 7:30pm is becasue of NZ.
The old traditional time for a game of Rugby elague is 3:00 pm sunday. Moving it by two 2 1/2 hours for TV purposes isn’t that much of a sell out.
Michael C said | October 7th 2009 @ 5:46am | Report comment
I thought the reason it’s 5.30 instead of 7.30 was a whole lot of public reaction, including NZ, but also on behalf of the little kids and the afternoon BBQ folk that resisted the TV ratings being put ahead of the little people.
The move to 5pm or 5.30 or 5.15pm…..I’m still confused about when it was meant to start…….and so it seems was GTV 9…….but, in reality, the move by 2.5 hrs is not so much a direct move from 3pm, but, it first pushed out to 7.30 so moved by 4.5 hours and then got pulled back……..after the ’sell out’ which was the 4.5 hr shift.
Mick from Giralang said | October 6th 2009 @ 4:31pm | Report comment
Michael C: You hit the nail on the head there. At the moment rugby league is not master of its own destiny unlike the AFL. An independent commission runningthe game would be a huge boost for the future of the sport.
Mick from Giralang said | October 6th 2009 @ 4:43pm | Report comment
I should have added there are strong forces within the game working towards a commission-type set up.
AndyRoo said | October 6th 2009 @ 4:37pm | Report comment
And it’s not that I have a problem with Victoria being the centre of our “Great Australian Game” (TM Pip) but the hypocrisy is what does me in.
Art Sapphire said | October 6th 2009 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
Who cares what the viewing figures are. All things being relative, they are always about the same.
Who knows how many people watched the GFs. The stats don’t include people at BBQs, parties, pubs, clubs.
AndyRoo said | October 6th 2009 @ 4:24pm | Report comment
Yes, really it should be mandatory that people watch both
Must admit though I often miss the AFL one but I would obey the law if it was passed.
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Oh, and another thing, someone keeps banging on about K-Hunt being worth 7 million dollars in Promotional value for the gold coast team, big deal, the Storm not only Promoted Melbourne with a win for the city, it also was shown live around other countries and on top of that, they get to promote Melbourne in the World club challenge, ? Whats that worth for Melbourne, maybe you had better throw them some loose change for promoting your city to the world. Cheers.
No matter what happens, The Storm are a sponsers dream.
Michael C said | October 6th 2009 @ 3:26pm | Report comment
Oikee – why do you wish to always try one-upsmanship?
The AFL GF was shown live too around the world etc etc. K.Hunt as having promotional value has nothing whatsoever to do with this thread.
What are you on about??
Karlos said | October 7th 2009 @ 12:13am | Report comment
Oikee, K-Hunt is free promotion for NRL. Same mistake the ARU has made time and time again. The hardest, toughest, most skillfull and athletic footballers play NRL. The game demands it.
oikee said | October 6th 2009 @ 4:30pm | Report comment
Someone keeps mentioning this M.C, Yes but your geelong and St kilda dont mention melbounre in the name. Hence the Storm is worth more to Melbounre. Anyhow, you can argue the toss about that.
Sorry, nearly went into a coma. Not that i am bragging, 
I will just say this, ITS Official, League has outdone the AFL in veiwer figures. Yippppeeee!!!!! Story about it on the backpage tonite. Whoaaaaaa hoooooooe…
All those people in Melbourne , hehe trying to pump up the veiwers ratings, hehe. We beat you, hands down.
Take your medcine. As Rabbits would say, blue tablet.
Timmuh said | October 6th 2009 @ 7:16pm | Report comment
Of course Nine were behind Parramatta. They knew nobody in Melbourne would be watching, so they played up to their viewer base.
Boris the Mudcrab said | October 6th 2009 @ 8:28pm | Report comment
League has made some decent inroads into Melbourne although we all know that it will never be the No1 sport in Vic. League’s best hope is to emulate the Swans and find a comfortable niche in the Market.
It seems to me that the market is being squeezed and Soccer & Union in Australia seem to be suffering.
westy said | October 6th 2009 @ 9:07pm | Report comment
Michael C i only put forward some television ratings not to begin some comparison but simply to address the central issue of the article. The NRL has a better case for the “national ” in its name on the basis of its Australian television audience then any other measure.
Redb I am quite prepared to acknowledge the regional viewers of AFL in WA and SA . This is relevent to a comparison between AFL and NRL. This was not my premise nor did i think I made it one. The national television audience give the NRL more credibility on the “national ‘ than anything else.
Comparison of regional audiences between codes was not my intent.
To Keeper 11 thankyou for your response. Noted.
Michael C said | October 7th 2009 @ 5:42am | Report comment
The case for ‘national’ is biased by the NRL being strongest in just 2 states that happen to comprise over 50% of the national population.
This then becomes a matter of demographic semantics I guess, a bit like Foxtel ratings where the NRL is strongest – - in no small part due to NSW being the biggest state, an NRL state and having the deepest penetration on real and relative scales of foxtel subscription.
Given all the points of distinction – - i.e. the NRL GF being played at a much more ratings friendly time slot and on a weekend with no other sport up against it – - the galling thing is people trying to read too much into the figures.
oikee said | October 7th 2009 @ 7:46am | Report comment
M.C why is it every time you mention league its only 2 states? You know and i know its also Victoria and Perth, yes they dont have a team yet , but to get 15 thousand to NRL games played in Perth gives them More credit than Melbounre.
Look, the Storm are going to be a powerhouse club, you cant stop this, juniors coming threw the system will keep rising those figures. You, your dad, your grandparents all loving AFL has nothing to do with it, kids playing league now and their parents are the base for the strongest club in the NRL .
You my friend, and your one-eyed supporters cant stop that now. You can all be ignorant, and say you dont know who the storm are, as some folk do down their, but it only shows how ignorant some people are. I am not singling out you.,, I know you know differently, but come on, some of the biase down their is just pure stupidity. We dont carry on like that up north.
Michael C said | October 7th 2009 @ 8:55am | Report comment
Oikee -
please – - how many people refer to AFL as ‘Vicball’, or try to push the ‘only one half of the country’ line claiming that NSW and QLD can’t be counted and so AFL isn’t national.
If you reckon a team of NSW and QLD lads in Melbourne and about 20 junior teams equates to being a RL state, and even less so WA with 1 ‘exhibition’ match and a handful of junior teams fits the bill too – - – then, sure as heck the AFL IS the supreme national code.
Again – re juniors – let’s avoid the propaganda and wait and see how the under 16s/18s develop – - for now, there’s 1 guy in the Toyota Cup/Senior squads combined to show. Keep your feet on the ground a tad.
btw – remember back in 1979, the then VFL had 2 ‘exhibition’ matches at the SCG, a total crowd of about 48K……did that make NSW a ‘footy’ state?? Hardly!!!
Until the NRL can run a fair dinkum State of Origin carnival with more than just NSW and QLD ……then you do realise you’re on thin ice.
The AFL could manage a pretty damn good QLD side presently, and a full NSW squad but with a lack of depth. What can the NRL patch together for Vic,WA and SA? (I bet the best you could manage is the ‘emerging states’ junior squad…..but….hey….we’ve all seen Zimbabwe do really quite well at the Under 19 cricket world cup……).
So – I’m still curious why you keep trying to claim greater than 2 states. Really, who is the one eyed supporter here???
Dogs Of War said | October 7th 2009 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
The NRL can make teams from other countries quite easily, and they would all be somewhat competitive. Could the AFL do that?
Unlike the AFL, Rugby League still continues with the 4 Nations coming up. Something most of us League lovers are looking forward to. It’s things like this which should see the NRL get a lot more money next time around.
oikee said | October 9th 2009 @ 10:54am | Report comment
Just keep sending those one-eyed victorians up to QLD M.C. We will keep converting them to league.
Ok league is only 2 states, so we have 3 to conquer, or are you claiming NT as well. ?
Mate, Origin is the Number 1 sporting contest. Why would i want to include Vistoria. If you ever get a player able to play NRL, then he will get a choice of electing to play for QLD or NSW. just like that young Victorian you have down their. Widdop, yes he is a pom, but they moved to Victoria , you claiming him?, or isn’t he a aussie, even after he gets his citizenship. ?
M.C, league is coming to Melbourne, be a bore and get left out, i dont care, us Queenslanders and the Storm supporters over the next 5 years will gladly fill your numbers, just like your 1.6 million Vics watching the final filled your ratings . Thats only just over 1 million watching from over half the population in all main cities.
Your expansion is into areas where the game is already played, and watched. League is a expanding sport, we have new states to conquer. And we will, once we take origin to perth.
Its not about where the people come from who play the game, its the quality of the contest, you should know that. Either way, both codes are safe. The other 2 are a little shakey.
Working Class Rugger said | October 6th 2009 @ 10:17pm | Report comment
Here we go. Another GF viewership war. Maybe the NRL and AFL should settle this once and for all. I would suggest that next year both hold their respective GF’s on the same day and at the same time that way everyone will know and this arguement over.
Karlos said | October 7th 2009 @ 12:10am | Report comment
Hey WCR, not a debate ARU fans need to concern themselves with for the foreseeable future. Didn’t 440,000 watch last Wallabies Test?
Billo said | October 6th 2009 @ 11:12pm | Report comment
There seems to be some fairly pointless debate about the size of the TV audience watching the respective Grand Finals.
In AFL there is a case for saying that the TV audience was particularly high because the GF was clearly going to be played between the best two sides all year in the comp. It was a real showdown.
In the NRL the audience was clearly helped by having Melbourne in the GF, as the figures show.
In both codes the audience size will vary, depending on the two teams in the GF.
Sharks v Roosters, in the NRL, or Kangaroos v Demons in the AFL, probably wouldn’t rate quite so highly, for example.
What is really interesting, from the NRL point of view, is that the Storm finally seem to have some degree of grudging acceptance in Melbourne, and a significant number of AFL fans are prepared to watch and admire them, if only on TV.
The previous outright hostility seems to be abating.
It bodes well for them when they will at last have a stadium worthy of their playing standards in 2010.
Karlos said | October 7th 2009 @ 12:05am | Report comment
The figures for both AFL and NRL are reported higher or lower depending on where you get them from (i.e. 7 and 9 seem to up thier numbers and quote Oztam and Oztam seems to change its mind occasionally). I have grown to trust Free TV Australia for my ratings as they show top 40 Metro, Regional and Combined ratings and don’t appear to have any bias. I did a count of week 2 and 3 of the finals series ratings for AFL and NRL (AFL Regional scores were too low in regional Aus for week 1 to make top 40) with the NRL coming out on top with an extra 738,000 viewers. They however do not include Tasmania and Northern Territory.Tasmanians obviously are going to favour AFL and NT would be about an equal split. I cross reference with Media Spy and Ratings TV Tonight to get a fairer overview and dig deeper if there are discrepencies between those 3 sources.
I have yet to get the NRL Grand Final figures from Free TV Australia, but believe from my other 2 sources that the metro figures are 2,416,000 (which is lower than quotes elsewhere). I think we are squabbling about a few tens of thousands here or there when it comes to facts and figures, but most NRL supporters are sick of the headlines each year about how the AFL GF is the biggest football code sporting event Australia wide and dwarfs the NRL GF and yet only talk about metro numbers when many of the NRL teams are from regional Australia. It is only recently journos started talking regional figures at all (metrocentric) and that is only because they were enlightened by grassroots bloggers.
So my Metro ratings for AFL GF are 2,704,000 and for NRL at this point 2,416,000. BOTH codes and channels have upped their ratings in other publications. To quote The Australian is a big mistake. Thier attitude to Rugby League was clearly shown with no mention whatsoever at the top of page 1 of the last Weekend Australian. Plenty the week before for the AFL and that has gone on for years. Sorry if I am repeating what someone else has already said.
Michael C said | October 7th 2009 @ 9:05pm | Report comment
Karlos – the numbers are all Oztam numbers. The 2,704,000 is the preliminary figure, NOT the official figure. Normally this figure varies just a little by the time Oztam are ready to publish it once validated.
However, on that weekend, the NRL PF 2 was initially reported at 1,353,000, but, the published figure now on OzTam is 1,254,000.
The AFL GF prelim figure is now reported as 2,878,000 official. The Pre Game also was initially 1,505,000 and is now reported officially as 1,697,000.
It’s ALL Oztam data.
Normally the change from Preliminary figures to final figures is just a couple of thousand. It’s quite odd that this particular week there are variances up or down of 100,000 to 200,000.
It’s ALL Oztam data. That’s the only PeopleMeter data. Any other ‘polls’ such as Roy Morgan will tend to be relatively minute samples and often simply ask “Did you watch” the show/event.
Peter said | October 7th 2009 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
Rugby Leagues NOT national, never was or will be. The NRl is the just the NSWRL with a few interstate sides.
Same as the AFL. Greatert vfl, nothing more.
George said | October 7th 2009 @ 3:48pm | Report comment
The sad thing is channel nine Melb chose to cut off coverage as soon as game was finished just after full time. There were numerous Melb player interviews that VIC viewers didn’t have a chance to see. Many in VIC rang and complained. So it’s a mess presently.
chris said | October 24th 2009 @ 6:19am | Report comment
To do a true comparison of TV audience you’d need the NRL to return to a day telecast like the AFL – if that happened the NRL would be even further behind.