Replace City-Country with Challenge Cup

The T20 analogy is a stretch. T20 was created as a response to a market wanting a form of the game that can be played within a more digestible 4 hour time period in line with most modern sports. If you could post even one market survey showing that rugby league fans want a knockout comp during the Origin period then you might have some validity but as it stands your cricket comparison is a bit iffy. As for the "34 players maximum argument" every club is required to play at least one extra game each season (the Round of 16 CC). Teams that make both sets of 8 teams finals - anywhere from 136 to 272 players would have to play at least 27 games a season before they get to play Prelim & Grand Finals. You could argue that Origin players do the same but like you said that's only 34 elite players. You're now expecting fringe players to increase their workload but it's going to have a negative impact on the quality of the competition. You could reduce the season 22 NRL games per team but you would have to convince every club that the reward of giving up one home game each is outweighed by the gate revenues of a Challenge Cup. They would obviously have to be shared revenues but you would need to convince the clubs that fans would show up and be interested in a competition that wasn't the NRL and which would also be missing star players (who would be playing Origin...). I think it's naive to think that there would be no impact upon the TV deal as the Challenge Cup concept is unproven. It will be hard to get networks to bank on an untested format even if it's a small difference in the total number of game but I am in agreement that a reduced season would need to be the answer, I said that in my original comment. For what its worth like I said if Origin was played on a Monday night with 4 games played on the weekend prior. At the moment 6 rounds per year are affected by origin. That would reduce it to only 3 and say 12 games max. I think that’s the better solution all round than cutting back the NRL season and introduced an untested competition. But if you really believe in your concept my suggestion for you is to actually do something about it rather than leave it at this. Do some market research and then take it to the NRL. You'd be surprised as to how receptive they are.

I get the reason why a Challenge Cup comp during Origin is an attractive idea - I've even raised it before elsewhere. But like I said then, when players get injured mid-season during Origin clubs cop it on the chin because they know they will never destroy the Origin behemoth (and let's face it, coaches wouldn't mind that). Whereas this competition is - let's face it - is a muck around comp with no history behind it. As soon as players started getting injured and clubs start pulling out their players and out of the tournament altogether, it will start to crumble. What's also important to note is - if you don't reduce NRL club games - then if you want to win both trophies you have to play 32 club games a season. Those 4 additional games during the season may kill a team's chances come NRL finals time - it is a massive extra work load. I also don't think you can cut back on NRL games. Every team should have 12 NRL home games simply to keep the current attendance and broadcast revenues. To be honest as much as it solves the problem of a minimal interest games during Origin it creates too many new ones. I'd rather see Origin played on a Monday night with 4 games played on the weekend prior. At the moment 6 rounds per year are affected by origin. That would reduce it to only 3 and say 12 games max. I think that's the better solution all round.

The 4th Rd. of the UK Challenge Cup was played only last weekend (The first Rd. where the Super League clubs compete) - Yes, I agree that there were some blowouts - but just ask Widnes, Huddersfield & London how relieved they were to come through against the lower league clubs : London 24 Featherstone 12 Widnes 42 Doncaster 28 Batley 4 Huddersfield 13 Amateur clubs play from October the previous year to get the opportunity to progress, and their goal is to play against the lower Championship clubs in later rounds, and the same with championship clubs who's goal it is to play against Super League clubs. - the revenue that amateur grass roots clubs gain in such a minor cup run match can usually sustain their survival for an entire year! Through a similar Knock-Out competition, the best 16 non-NRL clubs would enjoy their shot at fame, enjoy the extra revenue,and obviously NRL clubs would field weakened teams U20's in this Rd. - which effectively would level things up a bit, and maybe, just maybe there would be that small chance of a shock. - This is the spark that gives the UK Challenge Cup it's romance. I say, go for it !

Agree, and what they do is walk into these cites , sit down talk to the governments, tell them they are going to start juniors into every school possibly and either support or be shown not to support. You have to kick start this, and the governm,ents have to get on board as well. Yes, i like this idea Dogs. And this would work as well. I think trying to create a Challenge cup comp now might be a little late. And cost to much to run. Taking games at least 1 from each club can work wonders i think. The bush areas need help, but we dont want o bombard them, because if it all goes belly up, you will kill the bush. They are struggling now, and need help slowly, not all at once. I am going right outsdie the circle now, i am even startign to think maybe take the under 20's comp to the bush for a round or 2. Some kids come from the bush, so it might work well.

Soccer and rugby league/union are different sports. This year there has been some blowouts in the UK challenge cup, . Sides outside the top flight ESL , have been getting thrashed. Maybe a knockout as suggested with a big prize pool for the winner would be lucrative. But a Melbourne Storm VS Newtown Jets, would be a 60 point thrashing every time if it's played during the season. A waste of time that is, plus the safety player welfare issues (pros/ vs semipros amateur) -Soccer is non-contact sport, so safety issues are not an issue. And the nature of soccer is very different to rugby league/union -It's harder to score goals in soccer etc. And anyway in soccer , in the English FA cup there has not been any miracles of late, when is the last time a 3rd division side made it as far too the semi-final's of the FA cup. The Wimbeldon sides of the 1980's int he FA cup are long gone. A few streaky wins for some team's int he 90's and now, but along way from the final day at Wembley. And same applies in rugby league, your not getting a semi-pro team from the local Bradford comp or leeds comp, shaking things up on grand final day of the challenge cup at Wembley either. Almsot a pointless exercise, much like city VS country. And Manly are not shaking in there boots by the challenge of the mighty Umina Bunnies lol.

The Challenge Cup is something that must happen in Australia at some stage, and hopefully in the not too distant future. But of course we're dealing with bunker laden league administrators and dictatorial Sydney Clubs whose say is the ending point of all good ideas to grow our game. Hopefully this Welshman can lead the changes the sport desperately needs and end the rule of self serving Sydney. However after sinking to the lows of appearing on Nine's headline piece of garbage last night, being interviewed by one of the sport's biggest despots, simply to appeal to the clearly bored, sensationalism beat up media driven Sydney press, is a very worrying sign. On this topic, why is everyone acting so smug, with their “welcomes to rugby league” for Dave Smith after this treatment by this press? There’s clearly a state of denial going on that the press around rugby league is not a toxic problem for the sport. Instead we act like get use to it and cater for them or they’ll be your biggest nightmare. This hypocritical press is one of the most negative factors facing league in Australia. Anyway, the Challenge Cup as a substitute for City Country is a pointless exercise. Either the City Country is something that is required/wanted or it isn’t. If it offers nothing to the sport, get rid of it. Roarer’s obsessions for catering of issues in NSW based league is tiresome. Why must we always propose ideas to fix NSW’s problems? Such as the popular one being ”move the Sharks to Perth!” Why would Perth wish to be burdened with the failings of the Sharks? Why are they not allowed to have their own team and history? Of course they should, and not be the solution to one of Sydney’s blights. This goes for the OZ Challenge Cup. Let it happen on its own merits, and not as a filler, fixer or substitute. It’s a highly successful competition in the UK and has been so for over a century. There is no reason it wouldn't work in Australia and create a whole new element to the sport in this country.

I think this is a nice idea but may prove logistically difficult. The TV deal is dependent on x number of NRL games per week / year. Would the networks be willing to replace NRL games with knockout games with the majority of big names missing ? I doubt it. There's no way this could be done in addition to the current NRL quota of games.

Something I have been wanting to say about 'City vs Country games for a long long long time is that once upon a time 'City vs Country' games were a highlight of the Rugby League season because THEY WERE JUST THAT -actual current country players showing their wares against the professional players in the city league -it was seen as a chance for Country NSW players to vie for selection for rep squads and for contracts with city clubs -also Country NSW took great pride in the occasion -NOW it's just 'country-origin against city -origin ' -largely meaningless in today's sporting landscape -so I'm not surprised that there was a low turnout -who wants to turn up and pay good money to see a game that means virtually nothing ?

Player welfare issues, rugby league had evolved too much now. I know the NSW/QLD cup teams play the NRL sides in trials and don't always get smashed, but seriously mid-season, and fully prepared, Brisbane Broncos would smash the Newtown Jets. Or if Paramatta play Tamworth , it would be a smashing. The full time pro, vs the semi pro or amateur player, the gap is too big now, there would be player welfare and safety issues, and just thrashings pure and simple. It would be too uneven.

England's Challenge up has a HISTORY, it is viewed to be as important to win as the Premiership, I doubt that we could replicate that interest by starting from scratch. BUT, I may be wrong. I look at the knockout competition that AFL uses pre season , Clubs do not take this too seriously, I can't help but think that we are too entrenched in our belief in The Premiership and SOO being what our game is about and will not commit to another 'CUP Comp" -- Aussies can be very single mindfed about change, when it challenges what they like.

I don't know if the Challenge Cup is still run to the same format, but when I was in England, the rounds of the cup started early in the year, with non league Clubs and youth league , then the lower leagues joined in, then the senior teams (I think for the last 4 rounds. This would be a brilliant idea if we didn't have so many home and away games. Although I love the idea of a Challenge Cup Comp, I cannot see it working fairly under our current structure. HOWEVER, this is not to say that it shouldn't be considered, - it would be great to se these games played in Rural centres instead of that 'silly, meaningless CvC game, (Laurie Daley has destroyed any credibility that this game ever had).

DH, great idea. I would love to see this. Imagine seeing the U/20s blokes go out there ripping and tearing; great experience for them, great spectacle for us. I just wonder what it would cost the NRL to instigate and organise such a competition, and whether they could actually afford it. Particularly in the first years when sponsors might be a little thin on the ground due to the unknowns of its success.