A couple of things there:

1) The Tigers, as bad a season as they had, didn’t come last.
2) They were only one game behind four teams who ended up on 22 points.

Who are you going to replace them with? Wentworthville?

Again, they had a pretty abysmal season, but two or three results go their way and they are pushing for a finals spot or playing in them.

It’s hardly a massive gulf that you’re making out. If you continue to cut cellar dwellars you’ll end up with a two team comp.

So you don’t know who it is, so it must be Farah?

Mate, there are plenty of people at the Wests Tigers, any one of them could be leaking. If you want my opinion, it is someone on the board given the infighting that constantly goes on.

Dean Richie broke the story about Potter’s sacking, and has now put the boot into Robbie Farah in an open letter published in the Telegraph. Clearly Farah isn’t the leak.

Nobody said they shouldn’t be allowed to earn as much as they can – quite the opposite.

It’s just that the club that develops them should have the best chance of being the one to offer them the best salary via cap concessions.

I also absolutely refute the idea that clubs “don’t develop players”. Some clubs spend a hell of a lot doing it. What I am proposing would mean that all clubs are forced to spend more money developing juniors, which leads to a strengthening of the player pool.

How is that a bad idea?

I disagree.

Cooper Cronk, Israel Folau, Billy Slater, Cameron Smith and Greg Inlis (to name a few) all made their NRL debut at Melbourne.

The reason that the Storm have been so successful is that they have identified juniors early on and them brought them through. Sure, they have complemented these players with buys from the market from time to time, but the type of player that they have generally bought have been journeymen who are often discarded from their club contracts.

To be clear, I’m not advocating that once you have a junior gow up in your district he’s yours for life. What I am saying is that there needs to be reward for developing a player. There is a big difference. If, for example, the Storm (or any other club) picks up a junior player and them puts that player through their development system, then they would get the same benefit.

So the idea is not to hoard players just because you have a large junior district, it is to be able to develop players to NRL level, and then receive salary cap concessions from there. Obviously the cut off age can be discussed, perhaps it could be once they hit NRL, or perhaps you could have a sliding scale of concessions for however long you had them before they hit NRL (that is open for discussion), but the idea is that once a player hit NRL level, the developing club get the best shot at retaining that talent via salary cap concessions.

This system would have assisted Melbourne as much as any other club.

Did you have any comments on it?

As a Wests Tigers supporter, I don’t begrudge his move to the Canberra Raiders or the Raiders themselves.

But I am extremely disappointed and believe that the system needs to change.

Where is the incentive for clubs to develop players, only to have them poached? If the poaching of Canberra’s team by various NRL clubs hadn’t been so aggressive, then Canberra wouldn’t themselves be forced to poach James Tedesco. The problem is that there are certain NRL clubs who aren’t pulling their weight from a junior development perspective, and this has knock on effects into the rest of the NRL.

Whilst I appreciate that some clubs have much larger junior districts, and therefore a much larger player pool to draw upon, it should be incumbent upon those clubs with smaller junior catchments to scout young players and draw them into their own development systems. If a cut-off of, say, sixteen years of age were introduced where you could get a salary cap discount for developing a player it would make the system a whole lot fairer for those clubs who spend large amounts of resources developing players, and act as an incentive for those currently not doing their share.

Nobody would begrudge a talent scout from another district picking up young players and giving them an opportunity at development through to the NRL. Nor is anyone suggesting that you must play the rest of your life at the club that represents the district where you played your junior footy. But there has to be some sort of protection for clubs that take the time to develop players. Losing players can have huge impacts on a club. Who doesn’t think that the Tigers might now not only lose James Tedesco, but potentially also a lucrative sponsor who was interested in James and could see the potential of the team with him in itl? Who doesn’t think that if the Tigers had been able to offer James Tedesco a contract competitive with Canberra’s offer that he’d probably preferred to stay at the club? Again, I don’t blame James at all, the reported difference of between two and three hundred thousand a season is too much for any reasonable person to pass up, particularly for someone who may well be at the peak of his life’s earning potential.

As I said, I don’t begrudge Canberra, they have suffered probably more than anyone by losing players to other clubs.

A system of salary cap concessions for developed players, and loadings for poached players would seem like the simplest solution. Implementing such a system would force clubs that currently do very little to invest in junior development to divert funds towards bringing young players through, thereby increasing opportunities for young players and increasing the pool of NRL class players.

I fail to see how that wouldn’t be a beneficial outcome to the game in general.

Furthermore, clubs would have more stability within their playing group, there would be less “upward pressure” on player salaries, and clubs could spend more money on development and less on poaching or defending their roster from poachers. Sponsors could get with a club knowing that highly bankable star is probably around for the long haul.

Again, that would be a better outcome for everyone in the game.

Ted,

That’s a ridiculous statement.

Apart from the aqueducts….

Sounds dangerous!

Players of vastly differing skill level on the park at the same time is never a good idea. I can’t see too many clubs willing to risk their million dollar investment on some park in Bathurst to a 40 year old Lionel whose only goal is to take off someone’s head so he can tell his mates down the pub…

Ha!

You got me Curtis. I thought for sure that this was another hair-brained scheme to win the errrr….. millions of AFL supporters on the Apple Isle over to the NRL.

Completely agree with you Curtis. It’s time for the NRL to look out with the confidence that the game deserves.

I know you’re a “Maggies” supporter, I’m a “Balmain” supporter, now a Wests Tigers supporters. I can honestly say that after a few years where it felt “not quite right”, I’d actually be disappointed if the club de-merged. It would be a huge step backwards. I think that’s the attitude we all need to have as rugby league supporters.

Let’s stop worrying about our own narrow interests in our own team, and worry about the future of the game.

Ian,

“Getting reliable crowds of 12 000 out of that is a pretty big ask, especially if they are playing, say, Melbourne or Townsville”

I’m not sure I agree. I think that fans would be interested enough in having their own team in the “top flight” that their opposition would be largely an irrelevant factor in determining crowds.

Fair point but there’s a couple of things to consider. I’m not proposing to just plonk a team into the bush and hope for the best. This expansion team would be one that is aimed at development of the game in the bush. To that end, some of the grounds on which you intend to play would need upgrading. We’re not talking state of the art facilities here – erecting a couple of stands to get the capacities up to around 15,000 would suffice. I know my original article stated 20,000 and I reckon from time to time that would be possible if the conditions allowed. That said, I’m not sure that crowds of even 10-15000 would be a disaster nor, if consistent, would they make such a venture non-viable.

With regards to a home base, I’m not sure you actually need one in the bush. I think it would be naive to suggest that even the biggest regional centres could sustain a full-time team, and I think that would be recognised by the fans. You’d need to make each game an “event” in the week leading up, but I’m certain that, with the will, it could be done.

I don’t think that you can deny that there is significant support for the Central Coast Bears across the rugby league community. Beowulf and others have made the point that RL is a game that thrives on tradition.

And therein lies the rub.

Think about it. Where do you reckon these polls are being conducted?

– The Daily Telegraph
– RLW
– Various League websites

Of those various publications, how many readers do you reckon are in Perth? Very few I’d suggest. The argument could well be made that the lack of readers/respondants in Perth indicates less interest. I disagree with that argument. Few would disagree that there are probably more “ready made” fans on the Central Coast, but few would also disagree that there is more growth potential in a city of 1.8 million than a region of 600,000. You’d need a far smaller fraction of the population supporting the team in Perth

If we assume that the polls are legitimate and representative, it’s also pretty safe to argue that there are a lot of non-Central Coast people, and a lot of non-Bears supporters who would be keen to see the Bears back in the competition for purely nostalgic reasons.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, there’s no future or growth potential in nostalgia.

DISCLOSURE – I have just moved to Perth from Sydney so, like Beowulf with the Bears, I have some personal interest in seeing a team established here.

Anyone who trusts anything published by the Telegraph has rocks in their head.

Rabby,

I’m not sure there’s anything wrong with Beowulf putting across an argument as an unashamed interested party. Although I actually disagree with Beowulf, I think he makes some good arguments that deserve discussion.

turbodewd,

“Quality gentlemen – not quantity”

It’s a shame that doesn’t apply to posts in this forum….

I can’t see the AFL moving into the Central Coast any time soon.

Why is it that we seem to think that not having a team in a particular league area means that people will start following AFL, while at the same time arguing that moving RL teams into AFL territory will never work because it’s…. AFL territory?

Did the people of Fitzroy and South Melbourne all of a sudden become RL fans when their respective teams moved away?

I just don’t get the superiority complex of your average AFL fan, and the inferiority complex of your average RL fan. The games have coexisted for over a hundred years and there’s absolutely no reason, with good management, why they shouldn’t continue to coexist for the next hundred…

This forum is going on as it started.

Weird.

Silly.

Johnno,

Then you have your own forum dedicated to your own sport and you can have your own discussion about how that sport keeps you together with your own fellow fans….

B.A,

Thanks for replying, you raise some excellent points. I thought that this deserved a discussion of it’s own.

Watch this space!

I agree Nathan.

I don’t think the CC has much of a hope to be honest.

Time will tell.