More people watching as the NRL crumbles at the top

By apaway / Roar Guru

If there were any celebrations at the National Rugby League headquarters over the news of the television ratings figures for the year, they were understandably muted.

For the first time, rugby league drew higher television numbers nationally than the AFL, a hefty percentage increase giving the NRL a much-needed boost after another bout of bad publicity.

The news came just a day or so after Jake Friend used up his last strike in another alcohol-fueled incident which ultimately cost the young player his job with the Sydney Roosters. Friend’s name can be added to the rugby league dishonour role of 2009 which includes Stewart, Watmough, Mason, Myles, Fittler, Bird, Seymour, Gallen and Johns, all of whom committed infractions, alleged or proved, of varying degrees of severity but with the common denominator being over-consumption of alcohol.

Add to that the police drug squad hauling Danny Wicks away with subsequent serious allegations levelled at seemingly half the Newcastle Knights team, and league CEO David Gallup could be forgiven for breaking into a cold sweat every time he opened the newspaper.

This litany of bad behaviour doesn’t seem to be affecting league viewership at the top level. In many ways, rugby league is a perfect TV game. Almost all the action takes place in the 10-20 metres between the attacking and defending teams, and that action can be fast, hard-hitting and breathtakingly skillful. The camera misses very little. In comparison, so much happens in an AFL game a long way from the ball, scintillating marks and great goals notwithstanding, that it is a game best viewed live at the ground.

But the adverse publicity is almost certainly hitting the game at junior level. Participation rates in key areas are low, with football proving up to five times as popular in a number of Sydney LGAs, and Aussie Rules, basketball and rugby union drawing kids in greater numbers. While parents haven’t been surveyed en masse, it would be foolish to assume that the image of the NRL isn’t a factor in them steering their kids away from the game. It mightn’t be the only reason, but it is a reason. And this is despite the NRL pouring a lot of money into junior development and keeping registration costs close to nothing in many cases.

Why does the game seem beset by these problems? Other codes have had their issues without doubt, but the sheer volume of League incidents outweighs Union, AFL and football combined. It can’t be the scrutiny – all sports stars live in fish bowls these days, more so in overseas sporting competitions. There have been allegations of a drinking culture in League, given it is a game played predominantly by young men between the ages of 18 and 25. But young men play other sports. There have been suggestions that the NRL’s issues are simply a mirror of society. Perhaps, but they would seem to be a magnifying glass more than a mirror.

Consider this scenario: Many NRL teams enforce total drinking bans during pre-season training or at significant periods in the year. Players are breath-tested every day and train hard to attain an elite level of fitness for 8-10 weeks. They are then rewarded with a weekend off, and are told to let their hair down. They go out for a night on the drink, are in peak physical shape (and alcohol affects fit people a lot more quickly than those of lesser condition), are largely or completely unsupervised, and are caught up in the heady mateship of bonding with team mates.

Why not provide a loaded gun, too?

It doesn’t mean players shouldn’t take responsibility for their actions, not at all. But the scenario described happens frequently, and it would only take three or four standard drinks in this situation for a player to be intoxicated and unable to make rational choices for themselves. Before long, the group is binge drinking. Consider that many young players at NRL clubs are living far from home, without parental supervision, and may have done so since before they were of legal drinking age.

Perhaps it would be healthier and safer if clubs allowed players to have a couple of drinks a week, in line with medical guidelines (and all clubs have doctors on staff who could inform players what the guidelines are). It wouldn’t affect fitness levels and would eliminate the pattern of binge drinking that seems to lead to most of the trouble in the game.

As well, maybe clubs should be ensuring that any team bonding session involving alcohol include officials or senior players who are able to monitor players and give them a tap on the shoulder when they’ve had enough. Bar and hospitality staff are now required to complete a course in Responsible Service of Alcohol; perhaps it wouldn’t be a stretch if players did the course too. Self and peer-monitoring might work better than getting into an argument with a bouncer, fueled by VB courage, notions of invincibility, and not a thought for the headlines the next day.

The Crowd Says:

2010-01-11T21:24:18+00:00

Crosscoder

Guest


Siva Samoa. Wrongs as per usual.You completely misunderstand the choice/option concept.The sort of thing that exists under the free enterprise system.The sort of system that is ingrained in those schools;freedom of choice to be what you want to be. Dont know what you ar smoking.I was one of the little kiddies who attended one of these schools.I therefore had mates at these schools.I therefore knew there playing interests.I had a couple of mates who attended Newington,Grammar and Sydney High in addition. Who do you think actually makes the decisions for a group of schools to play a certain code?.It is the sporting councils. The parents and the kids have to go along with what is in the sporting curriculum. The councils only have one code of rugby in the system and that is ru.The councils have many old boys operating under tthe traditional set up.So who do you blame the Gaelic football influence? Geez I will give mine to the cat. Who the hell is blaming ru for EVERY decIsion by the schools councils.Please refer to where i made that statement.I am simply blaming the influence of ru inclined member of the councils.That is the difference.if you can't see that I am sorry. You denied what went on in 1941,you just can't bring yourself to admit things happened. Matt S is correct about Roach's son.And is correct about parents being able to afford to send sons.However my experience and i know of many examples including my situation,where both parents battlers worked to send their kids to these schools.1) For the academic/prestige/discipline aspect.RU in most cases well down the pecking order as to why. You also Matt reaffirmed my point on the Old Boy aspect.If you have ever attended the OBs reunion,you would know what i mean.Yet Siva thinks it doesn't exist LOL LOL.

2010-01-10T22:40:03+00:00

Matt S

Guest


I think it has more to do with former league players, a result of their professional playing days, being able to afford private school education for their kids, the right of any person (with an income to match). I'm sure they'd be delighted if the majority of private schools played league. Take Steve Roach's son, he played union for Riverview and club league, and I'm sure he now plays league. Others stick to union, maybe it suits them better. The good thing is these league dad's aren't brought up with all this bias and allow their kids to explore other options. In fact, I remeber Marist Ashgrove in Brisbane played 1 year in the Broncos development cup a few years back and had 65 studetns trial for 1 team! With pressure from the school's Old Boys Association, this was stopped.

2010-01-10T21:46:53+00:00

Siva Samoa

Guest


so it has nothing to do with the parents of this league kids sending their sons to a school they knew only played rugby union. when are you going to stop blaming rugby union for evey decision made by the gps school council ?

2010-01-10T20:27:40+00:00

Crosscoder

Guest


It has little to do with demand,and more to do with tradition and animosity to a lesser degree toward rl,courtesy of the Independent GPS and Assoc sporting councils.If St Stans Bathurst can do it,it stuffs the "not interested" theory. You cannot gauge real interest unless the options are there in the first place.When I attended my school,we all just accepted that ru was the entrenched code and that was it.Given another option I know the school could have established at least one rl team,judging by my fellow students who had either played the game as juniors or followed a certain club. And the no of students with a rl background that attended Waverly probably could have made up more than a handful of teams.

2010-01-07T23:38:56+00:00

Mick from Giralang

Guest


So when the local samoa international rugby union team is playing they are all rugby league players?

2010-01-07T23:17:26+00:00

Dan

Guest


This is a disturbing trend in Sydney's private schools. It's that kind of elitism that actually stifles the spread of Union in my opinion. I went to a public school in Randwick that decided to play Union and dumped League because that way it could pool its resources and send the team travelling to the UK, France, Japan etc. However, we were never taught to be "disdainful" of Rugby League... in fact we all supported a league team along side a union one.

2010-01-07T14:49:43+00:00

Siva Samoa

Guest


you might wanna know that when the local samoa international rugby league team are playing they are all rugby union players who played for their village/clubs teams. i bet you didn't know that either.

2010-01-07T12:44:34+00:00

Springs

Roar Guru


Since when did junior league teams have clubs? I have seen Leagues clubs, like Parramatta Leagues, but never junior clubs, Parramatta Junior Leagues? In all clubs (bars and such, not Rugby League clubs) alcohol/gambling comes first, that's what makes money. Really? Alcohol/gambling leads to problems? So Leagues clubs should get rid of alcohol and pokies, gee, they'll stay alive for about... a week. Last I looked kids weren't allowed in the bar/gambling sections of clubs. Mate i've seen what happens to some kids when they've been exposed to a bad lifestyle. One of my old team mates is now in jail. There were some bad people at my old club, but there aren't many at my new club. This stuff ain't exclusive to Rugby League. Get it through your head.

2010-01-07T12:31:37+00:00

Springs

Roar Guru


Good points rugbyfuture, I agree that it is doubtful that the test teams of 1978 that beat Australia were not remnants of the game in its height of popularity in the late 30s... I do blame Union for League's banning during the War and for stunting its growth afterwards, but I can't say that French League almost died out in the 80s because of Union. I think the fact that League was constantly changing from the late 60s to the present day was the reason for the decline in French League and indeed International League. The French teams of the 50s actually lost many of their tour games against sides like Newcastle and North Queensland but were able to beat Australia largely on the back of Puig Aubert. The 55 team actually had not won a tour match before facing the test side. The 54 WC had large crowds of 10-30,000, while the 68 (or 72, can't remember which) had small crowds for most games and even the French games struggled to pull 10,000. League and Union were a lot more similar in the 50s and I think the introduction of limited tackles and the 5-10 metre rule gave an advantage to Australia and a disadvantage to the game in smaller countries like France. Even now growth in countries is being stunted by the game's similarity to Union. In a 2006 WC qualifier Georgia RU team played the Netherlands in a RL match in front of 10,000 people. the RLIF found this out and Georgia were banned from International competition and the game is no longer played there. And finally with Union going pro there was less incentive for players to play League, with more money being offered by Union. Only now is French RL starting to rebuild.

2010-01-07T12:12:16+00:00

rugbyfuture

Roar Guru


just a side note that, as i have said previously and proven by another blogger, the "discrimination" found in private schools is an effect of return on demand and also is very similar to the "discrimination" found within RL schools. it is up to dedicated officials or administrators to penetrate a market that is otherwise not interested, and for one thing, getting rid of practically the only representative side in the area, stretching half of sydney probably wasn't a smart idea.

2010-01-07T12:08:21+00:00

rugbyfuture

Roar Guru


i appreciate that it was banned and as such probably was effected by that, but the facts of RL being under strength post war because of it are defeated through statistics, the war did last many years and many years past the vichy coming through, there is no way that it was only echoes of the past going through the test side. on the name i really shouldnt comment because i have strong feelings about the name of rugby, i wrote an article on here which was pulled after two hours about how RL didnt really qulify for the name of rugby as because of the origins of the term rugby came from a private school and the fact that originally Rugby was pretty mucha giant scrum and the fact that RL was always the exception being called Rugby, not RU as for RU not in GPS or CAS or ISA or AS schools you'll find that RU actually still serves in many rich northern suburbs and north shore and northern beaches public schools, as it was the catholics who developed the game, but i do see and understand your point, but as i said above, there is no possibility that they were all simply echoes from 10, 20 and 30 years earlier. there was an obvious effect from the Vichy and SOME of the RU fraternity, but this could not have had as great an effect as many people have put out, especially since it has had plenty of time, albeit as the game of thirteen, to redevelop

2010-01-07T03:43:31+00:00

Jay

Guest


Its easy to justify RU's structure in Australia looking at their success in that period. However, the game has changed and come a long way since professionalism. Unfortunatley, RU's structures have not and you're kidding yourself if the ARU would love to have another tier between club rugby and S15's to fill some of that gap.

2010-01-07T03:18:39+00:00

BN

Guest


Next you will be saying Samoa RU forwards do more work on the field then their RL counterparts. Oh thats right, you already did ;). And here I was thinking you Union players where a Smart bunch who like to read books.

2010-01-07T03:15:20+00:00

hutch

Guest


im not disputing the fact that it is a massive event, is extremely well run and a significant world sports competition, but the old lies that it is the third biggest sporting event in the world and that the cumulative tv viewers of over 4 billion people are total nonsense. i know its been described that way for ages, by rugby union types blowing their own trumpet, and if they say it enough (which they have) people like you start to believe it. the rugby world cup is not the 3rd biggest sporting event on earth, and the overall tv figure would be lucky to be over 250 million, not 4 billion. the final only attracted 33 million, which are great figures for a sport of its size i think.

2010-01-06T23:33:48+00:00

Siva Samoa

Guest


Do you want to see the trophies won by the same teams from 1900 to 1987 Foxy Loxy ? From school 1st xv or amateur club level to super 14 level is not an ideal structure is it ? they need to have a national club/provincial championship and a national under 20 as well. in brisbane kids coming back from the australian under 19 and under 20 rugby world cup aren't allowed to play premiership club if they are under 18. that's like coming back from the wallabies and then asked to play club level but not super 14.

2010-01-06T23:19:09+00:00

Foxy Loxy

Guest


"There is enough players coming from schools and clubs to make Australian rugby competitive" Oh that is GOLD! Competitive?? Please list here for us all Siva the 21st century trophies won by the Wallabies and Waratahs, REds, Force & Brumbies!!! What's "structures" got to do with it? If you're any good you get into a Super 14 team and then the Wallabies. That's THE structure! It works fine! The problem is the lack of quality and number of players, not the pathway.

2010-01-06T23:01:00+00:00

Siva Samoa

Guest


there is nothing wrong with kids watching their parents drink at home or at other peoples houses. what im saying is that most junior rugby league clubs with pokie machines and bars encourages parents to spend their money on alcahol and gambling. rugby league probably comes distance third to this clubs behind pokie machines and alcahol. when you mix acahol and gambling there is a cocktail of disasters which could lead to domestic violoence, homeless, divorce, physical violence and so on. the kids will witness all this and think its ok and part of society which gets them into trouble at a older age.

2010-01-06T22:44:55+00:00

Jay

Guest


You're forgetting about the private school system, who produce fantastic rugby players or corporate leaders who will support rugby.

2010-01-06T22:43:35+00:00

Siva Samoa

Guest


Australian rugby doesn't need to still league players from any level to stay competitive at the highest level. The majority already playing now all agme from rugby clubs, schools and juniors. There is enough players coming from schools and clubs to make Australian rugby competitive but its the rugby structures in each states that fail them. The ARU has got to have third tier competition or a national competition for under 19's or 20's to give this kids experience.

2010-01-06T22:33:09+00:00

Dogs Of War

Roar Guru


Union would never die, at worst, just return to an amateur only game. But even that is inconceivable, as League tends to build off Union, the reverse would be true in Australia, in that Union can steal League players (even at a junior level like U20's) to stay competitive at the higher levels.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar