The Super League Hypothetical
By John, 25 Jul 2012 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- ARL, David Gallop, NRL, Rugby League, Super League, Western Reds
Former chief executive of the Australian Rugby League Commission David Gallop. AAP Image/Dean Lewins
Related coverage
When David Gallop fronted the media at NRL HQ to announce his resignation, I realised that the last remnant of Super League was now gone from the top.
As the chief News Limited lawyer during the War, Gallop’s tenure was often marred by accusations of his favouritism to News Limited.
Favouring News Limited was regarded as detrimental to the game, because they have never and never will care about rugby league. They waltzed in with their ‘vision’ and destroyed the game for their own selfish purposes.
They destroyed the game at a time when it was doing so well.
Who didn’t love the era of the Winfield Cup?
The 1989 grand final, the advent of the three-game SOO series, Tina Turner’s ‘Simply the Best’, the introduction of nine new clubs, record crowds, wonderful football, and legends like Mal Meninga, Brett Kenny, Steve Mortimer and Wally Lewis.
What an era, what a time!
Recently, I haven’t been so sure.
If the game was going so well, how was News Limited able to entice eight clubs to their new competition, and many more close to signing?
If the game was going so well, why did some of the best players in the game sign with the new competition when there was no guarantee it would take off, when they would lose their privilege of playing for their country and their state?
As many celebrate News Limited’s exit from the game and herald a new era of independence, a couple of questions should be asked.
Was the Winfield Cup really the greatest era in rugby league’s history or has nostalgia set in because of the period that followed? And where would rugby league be now if it weren’t for the War?
The growth of rugby league under the leadership of Ken Arthurson and John Quayle from 1983 until 1995 is self-evident.
In 1983 when the two men took over, the average crowd in the 14-team competition was 7715. It was a very low and costly average.
Clubs were insolvent and the game’s reputation poor.
The game had to be cleaned up and it was. Players got heavily sanctioned for on-field flare ups.
State of Origin became an important rugby league fixture.
Tina Turner was introduced as the face of the game, with the purpose of attracting more women and children. It was a marketing ploy that worked wonders as more women than men began attending matches.
The 10-metre rule was introduced, as well as the interchange, which was designed to make the game faster and more open to scoring.
By 1995, the competition included 20 teams, boasting an average crowd of 14,642 people. It was a wonderful increase by the ARL.
When you crunch the numbers though, despite the spike in crowds, mass marketing and confidence in the product, the Sydney ARL clubs were still the ones struggling the most.
Wests, Sydney Tigers, Parramatta, Souths, St. George, Penrith and Sydney-City all averaged less than 10,000 people a game.
With the Sydney clubs struggling and the ARL keen to expand, they commissioned a report in 1992 that encouraged the league to cull the number of Sydney teams from 11 to 5.
Something the ARL were seemingly willing to do.
They kicked out Newtown and Wests in 1983 (Wests took the game to court and won re-inclusion), and in 1995 ARL CEO Ken Arthurson publicly admitted that the Tigers would have difficulty surviving in their present form.
What would the repercussions of such decisions be, especially considering what transpired when South Sydney were expelled from the competition in 1999.
Having said all that, and the ARL keen to go ahead with rationalisation, would the game have been able to maintain such aggressive expansion?
A common belief is that clubs like South Queensland Crushers and Western Reds would have survived had it not been for the Super League War. Perhaps the ARL would have had the patience to persevere with them if it weren’t for the distraction that was Super League, but in the case of the Western Reds they already had tremendous problems before the War.
The Western Reds joined Super League basically because they had to. With the ARL refusing to prop up clubs and the Reds swamped in 10 million dollars of debt, News Limited was perceived as the club’s saviour.
A mixture of poor results, a bad stadium and having to pay the air fares of travelling away teams contributed to the inflation of their debt. If there was no Super League, would the Reds have been able to survive?
And what about the South Queensland Crushers? They averaged a very healthy 21,000 in their first season, but they had to compete with the News Limited owned Brisbane Broncos, resulting in a significant drop off. Had there been no war, would Brisbane still have two teams?
This of course is just hypothetical, but who doesn’t like the hypothetical? Hypothetical debates are the lifeblood of sports fans. We love pondering the implications of events had they gone a different way. Every fan’s suggestions plagued by their inherent biases.
But the questions remain:
Where would rugby league be right now if it wasn’t for the Super League War?
And, was the game really in such great shape prior to it?
![]()
Passionate about your league? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily league email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby League articles
- How to increase crowd numbers in the NRL (181)
- All I am saying is give Pearce a chance (123)
- Why do NRL fans love empty seats? (115)
- Let me tell you why people don’t like Manly (110)
- Ease up on ASADA: NRL boss (90)
- It’s time for Channel Nine to get serious about the NRL (90)
- Six things that will improve the NRL (85)
- Wests Tigers vs North Queensland Cowboys: Live Scores (23)
- Canterbury Bulldogs vs Brisbane Broncos: NRL live scores, blog (114)
- The NRL’s David Smith declares war on drugs
- Your NSW State of Origin I team revealed! (12)
- NSW State of Origin rituals ready for game I (18)
- 2013 NRL season: Round 11 preview (9)
- Please Dave, leave the golden point alone (57)
- Wests Tigers vs North Queensland Cowboys: Live Scores (23)
- Canterbury Bulldogs vs Brisbane Broncos: NRL live scores, blog (114)
- The NRL’s David Smith declares war on drugs (1)
- NSW State of Origin rituals ready for game I (18)
- 2013 NRL season: Round 11 preview (9)
- Hot Roosters await Storm in a teacup (17)
- Broncos halves dramas continue (7)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- ARL, David Gallop, NRL, Rugby League, Super League, Western Reds


July 25th 2012 @ 1:48am
Johnno said | July 25th 2012 @ 1:48am | Report comment
-Super league war uncovered lots of things about rugby league.
-The story in here that Arthurson and John Quayle growed the game may or may not be totally true. They may of grown it a bit, but they sure could of grown it more. And Arko was a Manly man. Arko was not liked by any other fans other than Manly fans.
-Arko put rugby league backwards overall, and men like ex bulldogs head Bullfrog Moore on of the nice guys of rugby league did far more for the sport than Arko, and the rest of the Manly machine.
-Manly have doen more harm than good for rugby league, as shown by there defiance of progress and super league, and the way they had believe and fall for Arko’s croccidile public tears about where the greatest game was headed.
-Wow he had them all fooled while, in reality these tears during the the super league war just propped up Manly’s tv deal with optus with getting public support, so more fans would buy opts pay tv subscriptions over fox.
-George piggins and boz bob futon another manly man all just as bad.
-And reality is now super league won the war overall.
-news ended up running the game and for mine still do as foxtel and pay tv are vital. And with Manly we are still seeing the problems they have caused with the much talked about story of the problems of brookvale oval. They are geographically not central to any major stadiums in sydney and getting over the spit is tough for away fans. Do manly care if no one likes them no. If Manly signed with News and super league the ARL would of fallen over. But Arko and the boys at the ARL wanted a pice of th pay tv deal and signed with opts, that was what the war was about not about Loyalty.
-Loyalty to what. Manly’s bank accounts and the ARL coffers and bank accounts, and Optus. So much for the slogan by the establishment. For the people or the people’s game.
-At least news wanted to grow the game globally, and create thousands of jobs globally an in Australia by expanding the game eg Perth, adelaide rams, a 2nd brisbane team, and a newcastle team.
-In reality pay tv and capitalism won, not crhony capitalism and monopoly that the ARL and men like arko, george piggins, bozo, wanted.
-Foxtel ran the game rugby league was stalled in growing globally to the amount that news wanted to. Like John Ribot’s vision that rugby league would be played in Beijing and Beijing teenagers would be kicking around a rugby league ball.
-English super league went pay tv with sky another arm of Murdoch’s news limited. So in reality foxtel, and news limited, and BskyB won, and the ARL did lose overall.
-And now Australians realise pay tv is here to stay and the only way to make money and you have to do what makes money no 1. An example of this is south africans and kiwis acceptance of the currie cup and NPC having to be reduced and embracing super rugby as it is what pays the bills.
-Now aussies are more educated about the beinifts of pay tv. If Manly or cronulla or souths were kicked out of the comp there would be no big street protests like the save souths 1 in 1999 . People would accept it as economic rationalisation.
-So in reality i am happy news limited won the super league war, and Manly and Arko and George piggins and the ARL were reduced in influence and the NSWRL , and the NRL was formed for the better. Also the ARL stuffed up in my opinion the brisbane rugby league scene and should of done more when the broncos came in to help keep that comp strong.
-So to dinosaurs from a different generation like Arko and George Piggins, i am happy they no longer have any influence on the great game of rugby league, and i wouldn’t as would most rugby league fans shed any tears if Manly were kicked out of the comp or re located. Brooky is too far and Manly only care about Manly. And it was shameful what Manly did to the much loved North sydney bears, with the Northern eagles merger too.
-But super league won the war overall and rugby league was modernised with pay tv and the NRL formed for the better for the sport overall. Tv ratings have never been higher far higher than in the 1980′s and early to mid 90′s 90-95.
-Rugby league overall has been far more profitable and players wages went up with news basically in reality winning the super league war. Just like world series cricket gave a better deal for the players, so did news limited overall victory in winning the war and foxtel coming into rugby league help player’s right and a bigger piece of the profit.
-And the IPL cricket to is another example of a win for the players not the establishment. Player power is strong in rugby league now coz of the super league war, hearing Laurie Daley during the war saying super league offered him a better deal made me so happy . As it showed players come first and making money for there hip pockets and bank balances and people like Arko come 2nd and Manly to and souths types like George piggins.
-And the crocodile tears of loyalty made me laugh. Once again loyally to what establishment. The ARL and NSWRL and clubs like Manly who did nothing for any other club in there history of to grow rugby league.
July 25th 2012 @ 3:12am
Gremlin said | July 25th 2012 @ 3:12am | Report comment
Your last name isn’t Ribot per chance Johnno.
July 25th 2012 @ 8:53am
oikee said | July 25th 2012 @ 8:53am | Report comment
I thought i was the only one with a cob on about Manly, gee whiz Johnno, you really sinking the boot into them today.
Just dont mention the war.
July 25th 2012 @ 2:00pm
Johnno said | July 25th 2012 @ 2:00pm | Report comment
oike i’ll get stuck into Manly too mate they in my view have held the game back and had to much influence in rugby league.
July 25th 2012 @ 9:24am
sheek said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Johnno,
Your comments on Ken Arthurson are totally out of line. He was an outstanding administrator, & it’s YOU who is showing the bias & blinkered reasoning.
Unfortunately for Arthurson & Quayle & the ARL at the time, their grave mistake was trying to expand the game TOO quickly. Introducing all 4 new teams – Auckland Warriors, North Qld Cowboys, SQ Crushers & Perth (Western) Reds – into the comp in 1995 was admirable, but also inadvisable.
The Super League (News Ltd) model of 14 clubs (minimum 6 from Sydney) was sound business practice, but poorly implemented. Greed & egos on all sides ensured neither party was going to get their way, & they all collectively nearly killed the game. Don’t blame one side, because they were ALL equally culpable.
Nothing was more laughable that John Ribot’s claim that the Changs of China, the Manfreds of Munich, etc, etc would all be following rugby league by the end of the century (1999).
Still waiting………………..
July 25th 2012 @ 1:16pm
Johnno said | July 25th 2012 @ 1:16pm | Report comment
But sheek it is undeniable ark was a manly man. The most hated club maybe in Australia rivalling collingwood. I wouldn’t trust anything collingwood has done for aussie rules other fans teams hate them. And you have wached rugby league for years sheek and manly have been hated by other rugby league fans. Heck brookvale has a stand named after Arko.
So for me during the super league war Arko did what he thought was best for Manly no 1and 2 for all other teams. It was as you said about greed and egos on both side yes true. But Arko took a lot of players from west sydney and brought them too manly. They Manly got the majority of favourable ref decisions in the 70′s and 80′s, and Arko was hardly a battler he made good money out of the sport. What got me about Arko was the croccidile tears when many of the Manly team that signed up for the ARL were hardly on peanuts they got good money a lot more than the so called people’s game the fans. So much for the players being in touch with the people and Arko when they were on big money. It makes mockery of the statement the people’s game when they are on big money.
July 25th 2012 @ 2:51pm
sheek said | July 25th 2012 @ 2:51pm | Report comment
Johnno,
You’re falling to the trick of criticising Arko because he’s a Manly man, & Manly is the most hated club, etc, etc. Forget that, & just concentrate on what he did or didn’t do while he was at the ARL.
For heaven’s sake, back in 1995, every club & almost every player did what they thought was best for themselves. Doing what was best for the game didn’t come into it. You can’t critiicise Arko for what he did or didn’t do, without tarring everyone else with the same brush.
Just about everyone, & I mean just about everyone, was running for the money trough……….
July 25th 2012 @ 1:26pm
NF said | July 25th 2012 @ 1:26pm | Report comment
Sheek being a union man I still recall you saying there be one rugby code in one of your articles and you talk about taking the league ‘icons’ branded into a rugby union competition.
July 25th 2012 @ 2:47pm
sheek said | July 25th 2012 @ 2:47pm | Report comment
NF,
We all make mistakes…..
July 25th 2012 @ 4:58pm
tonysalerno said | July 25th 2012 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
Johnno on fire!!!
July 25th 2012 @ 5:06pm
Johnno said | July 25th 2012 @ 5:06pm | Report comment
Thanks Tony i love sticking the boot into the most club in Australia manly, and maybe collingwodd is as hated. But Manly have done a lot of bad stuff for the games development in the 70′s and 80′s i could write an essay on that club. And now with the stadium problems at brookvale too.
July 25th 2012 @ 4:06am
MG Burbank said | July 25th 2012 @ 4:06am | Report comment
This is a worthy article. People forget that Arthurson and Quayle were keen to rationalize Sydney but just didn’t have the guts. They wanted to create a 12-team competition with News Ltd director Ken Cowley, but Packer scared them from doing it.
League cannot hope to expand in Australia while retaining 9 teams. 11 was ridiculous- the 20-team comp was a farce, with as many as 6 reserve grade outfits running around at any one time. Once again, we’re faced with the prospect of expansion- a prospect I welcome- without any thought or action put into reducing the number of Sydney teams. How can a Perth team prosper when a Sydney player, looking for a new club, can just walk down the road to another team?
We need no more than 6 Sydney teams. Penrith and Cronulla are the obvious choices for relocation/relegation to NSW Cup. One more could be eliminated with a merger, the most obvious being between Souths and Easts, which will never happen.
The ARLC has some big decisions to make.
July 25th 2012 @ 7:38am
DamoS said | July 25th 2012 @ 7:38am | Report comment
I can’t see Sydney ever losing Penrith or Parramatta. When the mergers of the late 90′s took place the Tigers and Parra should’ve merged as should have Canterbuy and Wests however at the time they would’ve been seen as take overs. There was talk of a Dragons/Roosters merge which would have been very successful and a few whispers of a merger to create the South Sydney Sharks.
Mergers may have had their day, I’m not sure but relocation should be looked at. The fans don’t loose their team and they would be in Sydney at least 8 times a year so plenty of time to see you team in action while building a new base in another location. Cronulla comes to mind and would be perfect for a relocation to Brisbane and within 10 year would have a healthy following and corporate dollars behind them, an ARLC carrot to relocate would assist in the short term.
July 25th 2012 @ 8:52am
Rabby said | July 25th 2012 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Tried that, carrot of $1m + has been dangled in front of Cronulla to move to Perth on more than 1 occasion and they have flatly refused. They don’t deserve another bite at that particular cherry.
July 25th 2012 @ 1:00pm
DamoS said | July 25th 2012 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
It’s going to have to be way more than $1M, probably looking at $8-10M. If Cronulla’s development fails (and I’m not sure what chance it has) then they can’t be bank rolled by the ARLC as Cronulla has been bailed out 3 times before.
July 25th 2012 @ 1:07pm
dishes said | July 25th 2012 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
Cronulla was open to merging with Souths, even though they would probably have lost their identity. That way there would have been games played at Toyota Stadium. The carrot would have to be a lot bigger than $1 M for them to even seriously consider relocating.
July 25th 2012 @ 5:42am
steve b said | July 25th 2012 @ 5:42am | Report comment
MG why would you want to relocate Penrith,,, their population is going to be huge in the next ten years,, a huge JNR league so whats so obvious ?
July 25th 2012 @ 8:42am
solly said | July 25th 2012 @ 8:42am | Report comment
I agree.
Penrith ought to stay in Penrith.
They are a future powerhouse of rugby leauge.
July 25th 2012 @ 6:37am
Robert said | July 25th 2012 @ 6:37am | Report comment
Got a problem with Manly hey Johnno?Let it go,they are the defending premiers after all
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
July 25th 2012 @ 8:32am
solly said | July 25th 2012 @ 8:32am | Report comment
Was it really a delay in the construction of their stadium that forced the Bears out? That seems a poor reason for their exclusion from the competition given the efforts they seemed to be making for inclusion. Whether it is true or not, it is hard not to imagine a Manly hand or two nudging them over the edge.
The rally supporting Souths was not simply about rugby league; it was about the average person’s concerns over globalisation & corporatisation and the way these things were moving faster than the average person could comprehend or accept. Souths exclusion from the competition was the spark that lit the fire.
While I supported their inclusion in the league, I did not support Souths management and the waythat they did not understand the forces moving around them. That is a sign of poor management. They weren’t the only ones though to suffer from this though.
I’m a Bulldogs supporter but if they were to eventually merge or be excluded from the competition, I wouldn’t worry much.
The world is bigger than any one sport and the whole ‘Super League’ episode simply highlighted that.
July 25th 2012 @ 8:33am
Rodney McDonell said | July 25th 2012 @ 8:33am | Report comment
Are you serious?
“If the game was going so well, how was News Limited able to entice eight clubs to their new competition, and many more close to signing? ”
“If the game was going so well, why did some of the best players in the game sign with the new competition ”
You don’t have to be a genius to realise it was money!
July 25th 2012 @ 8:55am
Ian Whitchurch said | July 25th 2012 @ 8:55am | Report comment
Its Roy Masters, but he’s citing that News Corp lost $560m on the Super League War – losses they apparently crystallised and used as tax deductions.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/league/how-news-ltd-sunk-its-claws-in-league/2007/03/09/1173166982379.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2
$560m buys quite a few league players and quite a few clubs.
July 25th 2012 @ 9:05am
oikee said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:05am | Report comment
We seem to be having alot of stories lately about Sydney teams moving and Manly.
The commission was formed to make hard decisions, and by pandering to Sydney clubs is not why they were formed.
Yes i rant and rave and carry on like a pork chop, but the simple facts are the game cant keep being played in fron of 10 thousand crowds or, at suburban grounds with terrible facilities. It is just not going to cut the grass when more and more international and billionaires are introduced into the game.
Put it this way, do you see Union playing at muddy grounds with no seating. ?
Do you see soccer doing likewise, imagine having Beckham turn up to Leickart and having to stand in a cue to wait to use the toilet.
AFL, they have already started to only use new or big stadium. They have already beaten us to the punch again, while we wallow around refusing to change. Well i am sorry.
I dont like me, you dont like what i say, i am trying to soften the blow for you. It will happen because it has to happen for the game to grow. For the good of the game.
Sydney teams need sorting out, the commission has to make changes, be prepared for this, all i do is tell it like i see it, it really does not mean i like it either.
I still think the suburban grounds can play a roll, ever it be so small.
Rugby league’s new motto should be, “think big or get out”.
July 25th 2012 @ 9:50am
Von Neumann said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
this. think big or get out. accept as few suburban ground-games as possible.
I am tired of this talk about suburban grounds. Its a joke. The stadia is junk and the clubs as backwards as the fans.
The good thing with backwards people is, you tell them where to go, and eventually, like silly cattle, they will go.
Not a pretty description, but probably apt – so far as the logic I have applied to it goes
July 25th 2012 @ 9:16am
solly said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:16am | Report comment
The biggest mistake is to not put more resources into international league.
There is more momey floating around internationally than in Australia and the best way to tap into that money is through international league.
Play a 15 round competition, followed by State of Origin and then finish the season with a Four Nations tournament.
In recognition of the attraction of State of Origin, play internationals between the lower-tiered nations as warm-up matches and use those matches to help decide on the fourth Four Nations team. That way, fringe players are not enticed to give up their nations in order to play State of Origin.
I think that a structure along those lines (no doubt with a bit of tweaking) would be best.
July 25th 2012 @ 9:51am
Von Neumann said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
true, the worst thing about then to now is the “nrl-centric” nature of the sport.
July 25th 2012 @ 12:22pm
Go warriors said | July 25th 2012 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
You are right Von Neummann the success of the NRL and state of origin is making it difficult for the international game to grow especially in this part of the world. Overseas the game is going great but in Australia state of origin is considered the pinacle and a higher honour than test matches. Somehow this needs to change for the better of the game.
July 26th 2012 @ 10:18am
Renegade said | July 26th 2012 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Here, Here!
I read in the paper the players are putting forward an increase in pay that equals to $40,000 per origin and $25,000 per test match…..which honestly makes me sick – how can representing your state be more valuable than representing your country….it’s the most backward thing i’ve ever heard!
July 25th 2012 @ 9:41am
sheek said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Oikee,
It’s interesting that the AFL being Melbourne-centric hasn’t hurt the development of their game. There were 12 clubs who came together in the old VFL who are all still there in the AFL, albeit two have relocated. That’s a seamless traditional continuation of 87 years.
I’m sure that in their quieter moments, rugby league folk would cast envious thoughts about another comp that has managed to preserve the history & tradition of 12 Melbourne clubs for 87 continuous years. And that’s not including the 9 clubs that kicked off in 1896.
Yet here’s the AFL with an 18 team comp in 2012, with 9 clubs from 1897, another 3 from 1925, & 6 introduced since 1987.
Done differently, the NRL could have forged a similar history. Let’s talk a 20 team strong NRL – 10 clubs from Sydney, 10 from elsewhere. Two Sydney clubs would be relocated, but I won’t go into who or where.
The 10 non-Sydney clubs would be 2 from Brisbane, 2 from NZ, & one each from Canberra, Newcastle, Gold Coast, North Qld, Melbourne & Perth. Then perhaps you could have two further Sydney clubs relocate to Illawarra & central Coast.
Anyway, it is what it is, & now it’s up to the RLIC to sort it out……….
July 25th 2012 @ 9:49am
solly said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:49am | Report comment
You’re right. Melbourne could do it. Why not Sydney?
The reason is that everyone is out for themselves in Sydney.
July 25th 2012 @ 9:59am
Ian Whitchurch said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
It’s more than that.
If you look at a map of Sydney and Melbourne, Carlton, Richmond, Collingwood and so on are the equivalents of Glebe, Newtown and Annandale.
In it’s earlier phases of expansion, the NSWRL brought in new teams from the fringe suburbs – Manly, Penrith, Cronulla, and then later Newcastle and Woolongong. The VFL didnt.
In the modern era, Australian Rules has gone down the ill-starred path of killing and merging clubs, notably with Fitzroy and the aborted Melbourne-Hawthorn merger.
Dont kill clubs, its not needed. But grow the code, and help them find a home away from home.
July 25th 2012 @ 10:10am
solly said | July 25th 2012 @ 10:10am | Report comment
I don’t understand.
Are you saying that because the NSWRL brought in fringe suburbs teams that they have the problems that the AFL don’t have?
July 25th 2012 @ 1:34pm
Australian Rules said | July 25th 2012 @ 1:34pm | Report comment
If anything, one might think that the closely proximated VFL clubs should have eaten into each other or merged. Historic suburban rivalries ensured that never happened.
But inner-city vs fringe-suburbs are not the reason the 2 competitions are in different positions today.
30 years ago, there was a clear and deliberate decision to expand the VFL into an AFL. State rivalries and Origin had been going for 100+ years. The WAFL wanted in. So did the SANFL. The formation of the AFL Commission in 1985 allowed a designated body to look after the best interests of the code nation-wide.
League remained locked down in NSW. The fact that there was no ARLC until 2012 is frankly staggering. In the intervening years, League has been fighting with itself constantly. Not just the Superleague war, but constant in-fighting between the NSWRL, QRL, ARL and its other affiliates.
Conversely, Australian Footy has grown via a single streamlined direction from the AFL Commission. There’s an AFLQ, AFLNSW/ACT, AFLV, NEAFL etc…in other words, everyone’s singing from the same songbook. That’s a key difference between the two codes.
July 25th 2012 @ 2:06pm
Ian Whitchurch said | July 25th 2012 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Australian Rules,
The SANFL and WAFL are still fighting a bitter rearguard action against the AFL – note for example the refusal of SA clubs to play in the Foxtel Cup, and the resistance by the WAFL to the WA AFL teams having stand alone reserves teams in the WAFL.
July 25th 2012 @ 3:24pm
Australian Rules said | July 25th 2012 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
Those state-body examples are true and they continue to run grassroots footy in each respective state, but overwhelmingly, Australian Footy across the country is governed by a single, unified body…esp when it comes to the national competition.
July 25th 2012 @ 1:36pm
Ian Whitchurch said | July 25th 2012 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Solly,
Imagine a NSWRL without Penrith, Cronulla and with Western Suburbs playing in Ashfield, but with Glebe, Annandale and Newtown still in it.
Imagine the NSWRL had built Parramatta Stadium *right*, with about a 60 000 capacity.
Thats basically where the VFL was circa 1980.
July 25th 2012 @ 3:01pm
sheek said | July 25th 2012 @ 3:01pm | Report comment
Ian,
Your observation of Melbourne AFL clubs being mostly inner-city is correct. But rugby league developing clubs in outer areas doesn’t really explain why their fans haven’t traveled as well with their love of inner-city clubs in the same way as Melbourne families have.
As cost of living has forced families out from inner-city Melbourne suburbs to outer districts, they have carried their love of their favourite club with them, in a way that hasn’t translated with rugby league. I’m sure a lot of Melbournites move from the city to Geelong & along the ocean beach belt, but they don’t become Cats fans.
They still follow the Demons, or Tigers, or Blues, or Pies, or whoever. But you don’t see this to the same extent in Sydney. One reason I think is the culture of club membership. Melbourne clubs made this a key ingredient from the early days, while Sydney clubs were less zealous in promoting club memberships.
Consequently, Australian football fans become rusted-on diehards for their clubs, while rugby league fans are more casual in their commitment.
July 25th 2012 @ 3:21pm
Australian Rules said | July 25th 2012 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
I think that’s true sheek.
People down in Melbourne travel over an hour every week to watch their team. Travel is the reason given by most Sydney NRL fans as to why they don’t attend games in larger numbers.
July 25th 2012 @ 3:47pm
clipper said | July 25th 2012 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
Sheek, maybe one of the reasons for the less zealous promoting of club memberships in Sydney was the easy money the pokies afforded to the extent that there was enough money in the kitty without having to get money from memberships, which is the harder route.
Since the pubs now have the pokies and all the negative publicity they receive (which is a warning for AFL clubs – especially Brisbane and Collingwood), the case for membership has become stronger and more clubs are pushing this angle.
July 25th 2012 @ 9:57am
sheek said | July 25th 2012 @ 9:57am | Report comment
It’s interesting to see the models adopted by the various sports In Australia. Most sports began national club comps in the 1990s, & almost exclusively they have followed the A-League model, rather than the AFL or NRL model.
As we know the AFL model is Melbourne-centric & the NRL model is Sydney-centric. However, the A-League model dictates that each city should have one team each, with the exception of our two biggest cities – Melbourne & Sydney – which have two teams each (or will).
The NBL started with 3 Melbourne clubs, & eventually added a second Sydney club, before suffering financial problems & contracting. Both the ABL & AHL both had two teams in Melbourne & Sydney during the peak of their comps. The NNL actually had 2 clubs each in Sydney, Melbourne & Adelaide.
A template for any national comp, outside of AFL & NRL, would suggest the following: Sydney x 2; Melbourne x 2; Brisbane; Perth; Adelaide; Canberra; Newcastle; Gold Coast. That’s a core of 10 clubs from our 8 largest cities.
Others for consideration, depending on the sport, would come from Central Coast, Sunshine Coast, North Qld, Illawarra, Geelong & perhaps Tasmania.
If ever the ARC gets up & running again, I would envisage 3 clubs from Sydney, & one each from Brisbane, Gold Coast, Canberra, Melbourne & Perth. At a later stage you might hopefully add Newcastle & Adelaide.
Going into the future, I guess the RLIC would have to look at a national model that was somewhere between its current Sydney-centric NRL model & the A-League model. They say history repeats, which then would bring us back to the Super League 14 club (minimum 6 from Sydney) model…..