Will Melbourne really embrace the Rebels?
Roar Pro
By Paul J, 13 Jan 2010 The Crowd is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- AFL, ARU, Melbourne Rebels, melbourne rugby, Rugby Union, Super 15, Super Rugby 2011
289 Have your say
Australian rugby did not have its finest year in 2009. It was a year that will not want to be remembered and celebrated like 1984 or 1999.
There was though one great announcement for rugby in Australia last year: the imminent introduction of the fifth Australian Super rugby team – the Melbourne Rebels.
Naturally with any announcement of a new sporting venture comes speculation as to the success that it may expect.
Predictions for the Rebels fortunes can not be based on the standard of the international game. Rugby is light years ahead of rugby league in representation overseas but this has never had a flow on effect here at home.
And nor can you predict that league will dominate rugby in Melbourne just because it has done so in Queensland and NSW.
It would seem the opinion of your average St George or Waratahs fan as to which rugby code is exciting and which is boring is redundant when discussing the Rebels.
We are talking about Melbourne here – the AFL capital of Australia, a giant fishbowl where AFL is a religion and the other codes exist only on the peripheral.
Well not quite = football does come in at a distant second. Then there is a further gap and you will find the rugby codes languishing at the bottom of the barrel.
Perhaps the Rebels will be able to learn from the experiences of the Storm when it comes to trying to crack the tough Melbourne sporting nutshell.
Swiping Storm CEO Brian Waldron is a great first step.
Waldron will not be able to give the Rebels the magic secret to profitability in Melbourne – unless he has kept this to himself during his time at the Storm – but he will be able to give a realistic idea of the monumental challenge facing the Rebels in AFL land.
It will be fascinating to see how the rugby codes go head to head on the relatively clean slate that is Melbourne, competing on an even playing field.
But one question is, is it an even playing field?
The Storm had to start from nothing; the Rebels will have the advantage of having the opportunity to build on the existing rugby community in Melbourne that has been in existence for a century.
However, this community is modest when compared to rugby communities in NSW and QLD. Victorians as a whole were not exactly crying out for their own rugby team.
The VRU was not even deemed strong enough by the ARU to run their own Super franchise and consequently the Rebels are the first Australian Super franchise to have private ownership.
Private ownership may be new to Super rugby in Australia but the NRL currently has six privately owned clubs. (Ironically it will soon be seven as the Melbourne Storm are in the process of changing hands from News Ltd to private owners).
Is reliance on private ownership of major consequence to the Rebels?
To answer this, we can look at the two main ingredients needed with a new team or franchise: time and money.
It will take time for the Rebels to take hold in Victoria, to form the own nice little niche.
The Storm are still considered quite young having been in existence for 11 years (although they were born out of adversary – the Super league war – and have been for the most part neglected by the NRL).
Importantly the NRL views the Storm as a long term work in process, in the same way that the AFL will view Western Sydney and the Gold Coast. The ARU will be no different with the Rebels.
The real challenge for the Rebels will be money.
Simply put, the ARU is not in the same league (excuse the pun) as the NRL and AFL in terms of popularity and therefore finances to support new teams.
The AFL wants $1 billion for their next TV broadcast deal and the NRL having slightly superior accumulative TV viewing figures this year means they will be asking for something similar.
The ARU are still fighting to get Super Rugby on to FTA.
A smaller ARU bank balance places more pressure on the Rebels to become profitable in the short term than will be placed on the Storm or Western Sydney.
And the Rebels private owners are not concerned with administering the game of rugby. They are investors and like any other investors their primary goal is to make money, pure and simple.
Another factor was the state of the games in 2009.
The two referee system in the NRL has cleaned up the ruck allowing a faster flowing game and the viewers have tuned in.
Rugby is unfortunately currently on an opposing trend with heated discussions between fans in regards to the game becoming too defensive, having too much kicking and too much power in the hands of the referee.
Where has the beautiful running game they play in heaven gone?
If these suggested problems facing the state of play in modern rugby are valid they will affect the Rebels fortunes as much as any other Australian Super rugby team.
In fact, they will hurt the Rebels more as the Rebels will be relying on converting new fans, not testing the patience of the faithful.
The average rugby fan would feel far more confident in their predictions for the fate of the Rebels if rugby could be the running game again and the ARU had just signed a lucrative FTA TV contract.
This will most likely not be the case in the Rebels immediate future.
This is not a scenario that the ARU – or more importantly the private owners – can afford to imagine in the medium to long term.
Will Melbourne embrace the Rebels? The reality is that the future of the Rebels is not in the hands of your average rugby fan.
Its future lies in the hands of the good people of Melbourne and the patience of the private owners.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (198)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (172)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (61)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (28)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (18)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- AFL, ARU, Melbourne Rebels, melbourne rugby, Rugby Union, Super 15, Super Rugby 2011
rugbyfuture said | January 13th 2010 @ 1:42am | Report comment
i understand your point, but i do like to think that people are underestimating the popularity of rugby in victoria, Rugby has managed to survive in NSW and QLD and could survive if anything on JUST the private schools alone in terms of playability and a large percentage of fandom, melbourne is a different landscape yes, but rugby, as you said does exist their and has for a while, and thats including in the private colleges and the universities.
The ARU didn’t see the VRU as unfit, rather they didnt like the VRU (gary gray anyone?) but private ownership models are the way of proffesional rugby and sports in general. I do think however that there is still passion with private owners and profitability isn’t always the key, maintaining balance is and creating passion for the game the owners love is another, its something else to lose money in the long term however.
Rugby is at a changing stage right now, and hopefully it will change for the better, whilst maintaining its identity quite quickly after the world cup
Melbourne will have a big chance to follow the rebels, an they will embrace them.
klestical said | January 13th 2010 @ 1:47am | Report comment
great article.
Kurt said | January 13th 2010 @ 2:05am | Report comment
It’s certainly an interesting question. Personally I think the Rebels can be successful, but expectation management will be very important. As a product of the Melbourne private school system I can say that this idea some people have that these schools are a hotbed of rugby is very much mistaken. Yes a few schools have teams, but football and to a lesser extent soccer are invariably much bigger in these schools. So relying on Xavier, Scotch and Trinity to produce your next generation of stars just isn’t going to happen.
As for crowds, I would think 15K is a realistic & achievable target at the new stadium, maybe 20K for big games. Will that be enough for the owners to break even? You would certainly hope so, as if they are relying on 25K plus they will struggle – The Victory barely get that and soccer has a higher profile than rugby in Melbourne.
Redb said | January 13th 2010 @ 3:40am | Report comment
This article is filled with inaccuracies and tired old cliche about Melbourne.
Sydney is just as dominated by rugby league as Melbourne is by AFL. 9 teams in each respective competition.
The AFL out rates the NRL on TV by a considerable margin.
You cannot blame Waldron for Storm’s losses given the heavy investment in 1. Football Dept at Storm (success deemed critical) and 2. RL development funds in Vic.
As for the Rebels they will do OK if they handle the Melbourne market with respect and dont make the same mistake declaring their ‘greatest game of all’ will hold true in a city where Australian football provides the ultimate live sporting experience when combined with the might of the MCG.
Rugby has always been the tradtional of the two rugby codes in Melbourne. Getting Waldron is a good move he has the highest media profile of any in the ‘rugby’ sphere in Melbourne, that will continue. He says he wants to promote both codes, but his job will determine the commercial imperiative of looking after the Rebels first and foremost.
The low hanging fruit for a support base is the existing rugby community in Melbourne many of which support the Storm. I see parallels of splitting support with the intro of the new Melb A League team Melb Heart and GWS in the AFL in Sydney in the short to medium term. Do they have the funds to steer the ship through the tough times when success on the field maye some time away or post early success when the bandwagon drops away?
It will get supported but dont expect 30,000 packing out the bubble dome every time they play.
Redb
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 5:55am | Report comment
the biggest rugby union attendance ever in australia were in melbourne..the super 15 will be an international tournament unlike the nrl, apart from the warriors..like every other sport, if the rebels perform well on the field, the crowds will turn up, knock on wood
Dogs Of War said | January 13th 2010 @ 7:12am | Report comment
What was the last crowd like in Melbourne? Not a great one, don’t over-estimate the support for Union. Many of the saffa’s and kiwi’s will turn up for one off events, but week to week? It will be interesting. They will need to play entertaining Rugby, not just win if they want to see crowds.
By the way, the largest crowd was in 2000 at stadium australia. I was at that game (cracker of a match, that is how Union should be played!).
Justin said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:00am | Report comment
Thats a fair point, it was just over 20k against Italy.
Both teams had many top players missing so I think it was reasonable. Melbourne knows when they are getting a dud and dont like watching something seen as second rate.
I think the Rebels can average close to 20k with bigger matches getting into the late 20s.
There are many people down here who played the game at school and for a few years at club who will come back to the fold. For instance I follow Esssendon in the AFL but they will take a backseat once the Rebels start.
What will be interesting is which time and day the Rebels target to play their matches. The one slot underused is Sunday arvo. I think the other Aus sides have used once or twice.
Angus Boyle said | January 13th 2010 @ 10:25am | Report comment
Hard to beat the 119,000 that turned up th watch the Wallabies and All Blacks in Sydney in 2000.
Siva Samoa said | January 13th 2010 @ 10:30am | Report comment
i think it was 109,000 . best game international game ever.
Joh4Canberra said | January 14th 2010 @ 11:16pm | Report comment
109,874 to be precise. I was there and for some strange reason still have the crowd figure stuck in my head; I don’t normally remember precise crowd figures — but that one’s not only an Australian record but also a world record crowd and since I was part of it I suppose I can be excused for remembering it in such detail
Melbourne held the Australian record until Stadium Australia was built. 90,119 people turned up to the MCG to see Australia lose to NZ in 1997. (I had to look that crowd figure up!)
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 10:40am | Report comment
gee, me bad..forgot that un..but all good..we all union peeps..
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 5:59am | Report comment
and more, the real prob for rugby union in sydney and brisbane is that the reds and warratahs were not doing too well the past few years..everybody supports a winning team, especially when they play international matches..something the AFL and NRL cannot provide..
Kurt said | January 13th 2010 @ 6:27am | Report comment
Melbourne Victory gets their best crowds for their ‘traditional’ rivals (Adelaide and Sydney) and their worst crowds for Asian Cup matches. Don’t over-estimate the desire Melburnians have to watch rugby teams from NZ and Sth Africa, I suspect the match against NSW will be the marquee game of the season.
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 7:02am | Report comment
soccer is not rugby..the 100,000 kiwis and pi’s will turn up in force to watch a crusaders-rebels or blues-rebels fixture..waldron is not stupid, he knows very well the rebels will be eons bigger than the storm..
Mr Real Australian it's called Football Man formerly known as Kurt said | January 13th 2010 @ 7:17am | Report comment
OK, but you might want to re-read my post about expectation management.
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 10:15am | Report comment
think big..
Jay said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:32am | Report comment
why didn’t these kiwis and saffas turn out in force for the tahs games last season?
Justin said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:38am | Report comment
Maybe its down to transport/costs, who knows.
I think this being a start up team that anyone in Melbourne can call their own will make a difference too. Quite a number of the better players in Melbourne at junior level are Islanders/Kiwis and if some of them come home (Horua, Leafano) then it may garner support from their community as well.
There are enough smart people involved in this team to get things like ticket prices right, ie make them very affordable, fill the place and make it something that others want to be a part of.
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:57am | Report comment
dunno..mebbe its coz the waratahs were half decent crap last year..mebbe coz the tahs have never won a super rugby title..they start winning and the crowds will turn up..same with every other sport..
Dean Pantio said | January 14th 2010 @ 8:51am | Report comment
Probably because they support their own historical allegiances and only turn up to those games where their team would be playing the Tahs.
One thing I did notice during my years in Brisbane was the astonishing number of Kiwi supporters turning up to watch a Kiwi team play against the Reds. Far too often they outnumbered the Reds fans, or at the very least were vastly more vocal.
As ricardo states, if the Tahs were playing attractive (or at least winning) rugby, the crowds would be much larger.
sheek said | January 13th 2010 @ 6:23am | Report comment
The Rebels will be successful, if for no other reason than two names – Brian Waldron & Rod MacQueen. You couldn’t ask for two more powerful names in starting up a new sporting franchise.
Union has always had a stronger local profile in Melbourne than league, which actually helped the Storm. And now ironically, the Rebels can piggy-back on the success of the Storm. How the Rebels might affect the Storm into the future is pure conjecture at this point.
There is tremendous goodwill for success of Victorian rugby, which is not seen as a threat to AFL. NRL & football/soccer each pose threats in different ways, league for national profile & football for players (& being the world game). But union is viewed as complementary to AFL – a good, safe, second sport to support. At least that’s how I read it.
There was always going to be a Victorian rugby provincial team sooner or later. Private equity merely helped accelerate the process.
The introduction of the Force & Rebels, & Brumbies before them, is forcing the established provinces, Waratahs & Reds out of their traditionallly dominant complacency. This has to be good for Australian rugby as a whole. Opening new markets will help revitalise & invigorate the game.
Lazza said | January 13th 2010 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Yes, Rugby is not seen as a threat to anyone but that just shows how low it’s stocks have fallen in recent years. When you get Kurt, Redb and others complaining about it like they do with Football then you know it’s going places.
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:32am | Report comment
dunno..if union is so bad, then how come all these league stars are so ready to jump ship..
Dogs Of War said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:34am | Report comment
Which League stars are ready to cross ship? Please do tell Siva/Ricardo.
Which ones would be going not for the money, but because they want to play Union.
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:43am | Report comment
if its for the money makes you happy, then so be it..but we all know they all wanna play in a bigger sport, with wider options and at a bigger stage..
Dogs Of War said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:45am | Report comment
C’mon name them Siva! Who is coming across. You made the statement.
ricardo said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:52am | Report comment
i can name a few running around the rugby paddocks across europe..
Siva Samoa said | January 13th 2010 @ 9:53pm | Report comment
wtf dog of war ? or should i say westy ?
Brett McKay said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:07am | Report comment
Quite right Sheek, the Rebels despite being at near-breaking point not two weeks ago (or so we were led to believe) have hit the proverbial ground running since with some real heavy-hitters: Mitchell, Waldron, and probably now McQueen. Smart men all of them. If Melbourne don’t take to the Rebels, it won’t be because of a lack of awareness..
On a personal note, it seems ‘Rebels’ is a done deal, but I’m a little disappointed that they seem to have gone with ‘Melbourne’ rather than ‘Victoria’. Mitchell told us in his article last week that “Bill the Gardner” from Geelong told him this would be the rugby team for all of Victoria, yet they’ve named it for the capital city only. I understand why they might have decided this, but it seems Mitchell has had contradicting thoughts in coming up with the name.
Just to finish Paul, and this is a very interesting article you’ve penned, I’m just wondering about your comments regarding the next TV deal for Super rugby, and particularly securing a Australian FTA component, about which you wrote “This will most likely not be the case in the Rebels immediate future.”
Unless you were or are part of the dealings and know something you’re not telling us, how do you know that a FTA component will not eventuate??
Paul J said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:28am | Report comment
Brett
No i am not part of the dealings in regards to any TV rights agreements (although i could be argued most fans couldn’t do much worse that some negotiators in the past).
I do not know that a FTA component will not eventuate (I hope one day it will), I’m only giving my opinion that it probably won’t be in the immediate future for the Rebels which will be the crucial stage.
The NRL ratings are going very well and they can not get Storm games on prime time FTA in Melbourne with any consistency; I think the ARU will have at least as difficult a time of it as well.
Perhaps the new HD channels or the preposed changes to the anti siphoning laws will help both the Rugby codes?
An increase in viewing numbers would certainly help the Super comp get on to FTA.
What do you think are the chances of the Super games getting on to FTA prime time, and not just the Rebels in Melbourne?
Brett McKay said | January 13th 2010 @ 9:01am | Report comment
Limited, admittedly. Initially, I’d be happy if even just the local games were shown, and even on accepatable delay if needed (I could live with a 8:30 delayed telecast, for eg), and ultimately, the dream would be that these games been shown live.
I think the one- or two-hour highlights show as menntioned elsewhere might be a decent first step. John O’Neill is known to be very keen (in much the same way Frank Lowy is very keen for the A-League) to get a FTA component in the S15 deal.
I do recall reading before the Melbourne/Port Elizabeth decision that Ten (presumably for ONE HD) were allegedly very interested in Super 15, and while we assumed at the time it would just be the local games, it seemed they were keen for the lot. That obvioulsy would be all-Christamses-at-once for rugby fans in Australia, but unfortnately, the story’s gone quiet for a few months now…
I don’t care which FTA channel makes the move, I just want it to happen. From memory, Nine have the 2011 RWC, so you couldn’t even rule them out. I keep hearing and reading too that more digital channels are on their way too (from Ten and Nine, from memory), so maybe there’s room in there somewhere.
Thanks for clearing up your comments too, by the way..
Roger said | January 13th 2010 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Do we know who has rights to the next RWC? I though it was 10; if so, it would seem logical that they chase and get S15 rights…but nothing ever makes sense re TV sport rights so shouldn’t count on it.
Brett McKay said | January 13th 2010 @ 9:15am | Report comment
Ch9 Roger, from memory..
Roger said | January 13th 2010 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Bugger, i really really dislike Ch9′s ways (although Ray Warren calling union would be interesting)
So with NRL on 9, either S15 footage goes elsewhere or Ch9 shows rugby on a digital channel.
Angus Boyle said | January 13th 2010 @ 10:31am | Report comment
Let’s hope Gordon Bray doesn’t get the offer to switch channels again and become the voice of Ch 9′s Rugby World Cup coverage.
He was fabulous in the 80s but tiresome and ,unfortunetly, one-eyed in recent times.
Which is a shame because his passion and love of the game is unquestioned.
M1tch said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:14am | Report comment
Ray Warren said he might retire after the 2012 NRL season, as he would have done a olympics..Vossy probably will be the caller
Bay35Pablo said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:24am | Report comment
I absolutely loath Ray Warren as a caller. He is garbage. I usually sit there going “How about that Ray?” for 30 seconds before he starts mentioning something. He’s too bucy listning to his own voice.
Voss is decent as a league commentator.
Using league commentators for union would be insulting. How are they going to comment on anything properly. Imagine if Seven got league and used union commentators?
Roger said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:43am | Report comment
I certainly agree as “interesting” was as high as i could put the idea, but do note that Union will need to pick up its game re commentators if it is to appeal more.
True Tah said | January 13th 2010 @ 12:31pm | Report comment
Ray Warren is way too old to be commentating, he’s forever getting names wrong, and has a lot of problem pronouncing non-anglo surnames, I can’t image him commentating if the Georgian rugby team was playing in a World Cup!!
Plus he had a habit of making random crap up about things, like the Papuan player who went fishing with a rod and threw it at a fish like a spear, or Danny Nutley’s favourite food being rock cakes.
Timmypig said | January 13th 2010 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
In addition, ‘Rabbits’ has a hatred of rugby that he barely tries to conceal. Most of the Ch 9 team are too ‘old RL’ to be considered a viable option for rugby commentary.
We aren’t very well served for commentators, are we? Jim Maxwell on the ABC is pretty good, but I think he’s pretty much an ABC ‘lifer’, isn’t he? Hard to see him going to commercial television.
Joh4Canberra said | January 14th 2010 @ 11:27pm | Report comment
In theory there’s no reason why you couldn’t have commentators capable of calling both RU and RL. The problem is that in Australia I don’t really think there are obvious candidates who would be good at both and — perhaps more importantly — who would have the respect of both sets of fans (hardened RL fans and hardened RU fans). In the UK Jonathan Davies commentates both RU and RL for the BBC. He’s played both games at the highest level and knows both games well. But he’s definitely the exception. There’s no-one else I can think of who commentates both games. And there isn’t really anyone in Australia who would fit the bill to commentate both. Yes, there are people like Davies who have played both games at a high level, but I’m not sure they’d make good commentators or whether they’d have the respect of both the RL and the RU constituencies.
Jannerboyuk said | January 15th 2010 @ 12:26am | Report comment
@joh4canberra The problem with jonathon davies is that he is so fully integrated back into the rugby union culture of wales, living and working here, that he has lost touch and it shows that its hard for him to keep up with how things have changed in rugby league. he is professional and i like his rugby union commentary, but its hard to switch to another sport and he doesnt really manage it. i think thats a problem with any commentator although there pros that do whetever sport that they are asked to do the best are always those who are steeped in that particular sport.
Paul J said | January 13th 2010 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
No worries.
I’m a bit of an optimist but i am putting a lot of faith in the new HD channels. With analogue extinct in a few years everyone will have access to HD.
I’d love to see Super 15 and NRL games on One HD. One recent Saturday night One HD prime time showed Xtreme Paintball followed by Pro Bull riding!!
The two problems i think will be can the networks afford to get that much content on the air (will they still rely on the cheap stuff like Xtreme paintball) and will Foxtel buy the content and then not allow replays to be shown on HD channels.
sheek said | January 13th 2010 @ 9:25am | Report comment
Brett,
I remain to be convinced Melbourne has been bedded down as the primary name ahead of Victoria. Doesn’t make much sense to me…..
But then neither does the reddening of the Qld maroon jersey; Brumbies dropping the ACT; & WA abandoning both the Swans nickname & traditional yellow & black as their primary colours.
But great to see they’ve gone with Rebels, which now seems likely!
Brett McKay said | January 13th 2010 @ 9:51am | Report comment
Sheek I would have thought you of all people would know not to go looking for logic in anything SANZAR related!!
btw, you might be pleased to know (or not) that the Brumbies look to be moving back in the direction of their roots. The new collarless strip for this year includes “CANBERRA” under the ACT Coat of Arms, as a recognition of Canberra’s Centenary in 2013.
It’s a token effort, for sure, but people seem to be happy about it…
btw #2 – the Force’s alternate strip this year is white and blue – they’ve got rid of the balck and gold strip completely.
sheek said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:05am | Report comment
Brett,
Well, that’s clever isn’t it?
From 2011, we’ll have Victoria/Melbourne playing in navy & white; WA playing in what they describe as ocean blue & black, with ocean blue & white the alternate; ACT/Canberra playing in navy, white & gold; & NSW playing in sky & navy.
Qld have gone against the blue trend by abandoning their navy shorts. Methinks there is a lot of stupidity here. But then again, maybe it’s just me……….
Brett McKay said | January 13th 2010 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Sheek I’ll just refer you straight back to the first line in my previous post!!
Matt S said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:07am | Report comment
RedB, just to pull you up the NRL beat the AFL in overall TV ratings mate! “By a considerable margin…” nice try.
Bay35Pablo said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:11am | Report comment
“The VRU was not even deemed strong enough by the ARU to run their own Super franchise and consequently the Rebels are the first Australian Super franchise to have private ownership.”
The VRU was about as strong at RWA in 2005, if not stronger. The reason was JON wants private equity in the game, so it became a requirement.
If the Rebels had won in 2005, and it was the Force this time, the RWA would be charing the gig with the WA private equity. JON would be looking for the next Firepwoer to buy into the team …. whoops.
Paul J said | January 13th 2010 @ 8:37am | Report comment
Bay
I’m sure you know more on the reasoning behind private ownership instead of the VRU than I.
Do you think that the Rebels would be more secure if they had the equivalent of the NSWRU or the QRU backing them as opposed to private owners?
The QRU are never going to stop fighting for the Reds in good or bad times, i do not imagine any private owners having that kind of passion.