In the late 90s, rugby league in this country went through the initial steps of what I like to call the game’s ‘rebuilding process’.
I’m sure if this article’s headline has caught your attention, you’re probably well versed on the events that led up to and defined this particularly cloudy period in rugby league’s history.
The birth of the NRL in 1998 was the initial step towards the game’s revival.
One of the first goals for the new league was to condense from the 20 teams that participated in the NRL’s inaugural season to a more manageable number.
The leagues two stakeholders agreed to move towards a 14-team competition for the 2000 season.
Part of the logic behind this was rationalising the overcrowded Sydney market that was home to 11 of the 20 teams in 1998.
To encourage this process the NRL offered money and a guaranteed spot in the 2000 season for clubs that decided to merge. Clubs that resisted this temptation ran the risk of being booted out of the competition.
What followed was a scrambling of size ups and negotiations as those clubs that were believed to be in the NRL’s firing line went searching for an appropriate partner.
Fast forward to the 2000 season and we had a 14-team league that included three merged clubs while foundation club, the South Sydney Rabbitohs, were controversially removed from the competition.
The Balmain Tigers and Western Suburbs Magpies became the Wests Tigers, the St George Dragons and Illawarra Steelers became the St George Illawarra Dragons and the Manly Warringah Sea Eagles and North Sydney Bears became the Northern Eagles.
Fast forward again, this time to 2013 and the Rabbitohs have been reinstated following a Federal Court appeal that brought them back into the competition in 2002.
During that same year the Northern Eagles merger fell over with Manly emerging from the ashes to claim the license for the 2003 season.
Ten years since Manly re-entered the competition on their own, some questions have arisen about the surviving mergers while serious questions still remain about the sustainability of what still seems to be an overcrowded Sydney marketplace.
Just recently some cracks have begun to appear at the Wests Tigers and relocation or some other form of rationalisation in Sydney still seems to get some airplay in NRL circles.
As the league seems to be closing in on new teams and the areas outside of Sydney calling out for NRL representation reaches an all time high, the NRL’s administration has no choice but to contemplate how to accommodate these regions at the next round of expansion and into the future.
Sydney gets zoomed in under the microscope even further due to the fact that legitimate New South Wales expansion options such as the Central Coast are being held back due to the log jam that exists 50 minutes down the F1.
Furthermore, other significantly sized heartland areas outside of Sydney like the South Coast are being underrepresented by a lopsided relationship that is clearly tilted in the way of a more powerful Sydney merger partner.
This article will argue that these issues could have been avoided if the NRL took more leadership and ownership of a vision for the game when rugby league was rebuilding itself in the late 90s.
Putting Sydney’s clubs in the position where they were left to their own devices to negotiate their futures with other clubs or risk being punted from the competition was a huge mistake.
This is where the NRL needed to establish a clear, ordered and strategically thought out vision for what the game should look like in and around Sydney.
Instead, those clubs that were clearly under threat went on a desperate search for another club that wasn’t going to strip too much of their existing identity.
Or as was the case with the Dragons merger, the powerful St George went after the vulnerable Illawarra in order to create an unbalanced merger that maintained as much of the Kogarah based club’s character as possible.
In such an important period of time in the game’s history, the keys to the asylum were effectively handed over to the loonies as the clubs were entrusted with the huge responsibility of sorting out the overcrowded Sydney market themselves.
Obviously the clubs are going to look after their own best interests which didn’t and doesn’t necessarily align with the game’s best interests in Sydney.
The NRL needed to step up and put forward their dreams for the game.
The end result of the Sydney clubs playing school formals was one neighbourly merger, two patchwork mergers and the removal of one team that found its way back into the competition to the detriment of the NRL’s goals of a 14 team league and a rationalised Sydney.
In my opinion these patchwork mergers are inefficient in that they effectively involve taping two small separate clubs together as opposed to developing one stronger club.
For example, your average Tigers crowd at Allianz isn’t going to get a significant amount of Campbelltown residents travelling up towards the city.
The same can be said of a crowd at a Campbelltown home game not involving many inner westerners.
St George Illawarra is at a similar disadvantage due to the significant amount of distance between their two core fan-bases in Kogarah/Hurstville and Wollongong.
Furthermore, having teams that have split homes that are separated by one or more rival teams is detrimental to the all important tribalism that rugby league (especially in Sydney) thrives on.
Clubs should represent a decent sized chunk of land and population with a home ground located within or very close to their masses of fans.
To maximise crowds, we shouldn’t have a situation where Sydney clubs have bases at opposite ends of the city or in another city altogether.
You may say that it’s ironic that the only failed merger is the one that existed between two neighbours but Manly did whatever they could to ensure that this merger wouldn’t succeed. Three years was hardly giving it a fair shot.
And the end result where an entire clubs worth of fans was isolated was hardly a favourable outcome.
If the NRL took control of the situation prior to 2000 with a well devised strategic plan for the structure of Sydney, there’s every chance that rationalisation would no longer be a topic of conversation and we’d be left with fewer but larger and more successful (off the field) Sydney clubs.
Below are my suggested mergers to fairly cut the number of teams in Sydney while creating teams that make more geographical sense for crowd purposes.
Northern Eagles- Give them another proper shot. Playing at a renovated Brookvale.
Eastern Jets – An attempt to link Newtown fans (I’m told there’s still quite a few out there) to Sydney’s truest ‘inner city’ club, playing at Allianz.
Southern Dragons – The Rabbitohs and Dragons join forces to represent Sydney’s southeast. Playing at Kogarah and/or Allianz.
West Bulldogs – Yes, similar to another code but work with me here. The Maggies link up with their western Sydney neighbours at Canterbury to represent Sydney’s southwest. Playing at ANZ.
Parramatta Tigers A Balmain and Parra merger to represent Sydney’s west. Playing at Parramatta Stadium.
Penrith Panthers – The one Sydney club to remain untouched. I promise I’m not a Panthers fan! This locks out Sydney’s west by taking care of the northwest. I know the Panthers haven’t exactly been pulling huge crowds to Centrebet in recent times but this is an important area due to the size and ongoing growth of Sydney’s northwest.
They’ve also had crowd averages in the high teens during some more successful years. Playing at Centrebet.
I am actually a Sharks fan and due to the Shire’s isolation from the rest of Sydney, I believe there is a case to include the deep south as well, however I’m not going to put them forward.
The area and growth isn’t as large as what the Panthers represent and seven full time Sydney teams is starting to creep up to the status quo which is too many.
Around Sydney, I’d have a full time presence in Gosford and Wollongong. These cities are far enough away from metropolitan Sydney to justify their own NRL teams. Both have stadiums that would be among the best rectangular venues between 20 to 25,000.
They’re both rugby league heartlands with immediate populations of over 300,000 and regional populations that are double this and as Sydney continues to crowd and become a more expensive place to live, Wollongong and Gosford will grow.
Six teams within metropolitan Sydney that represent six individual and united areas will create a more sustainable situation in the game’s greatest heartland.
Then a full time presence in two of New South Wales’ largest regional centres will ensure that these important areas get the representation they deserve moving forward.
Such a model is an example of what the NRL had the opportunity to move towards back in 2000 and I believe the game would be in a better place now if it had.
TheBigCat
Guest
I have an easy and simple answer to the too many Sydney Clubs. Reintroduce Newtown Jets first. Then tell all current Rugby League teams in Sydney, any club formed after St.George Dragons, should be dismantled to the NSW 2nd Rate Division. Penrith Panthers, Cronulla Sharks, Parramatta Eels, Canterbury Bulldogs & Manly Warringah Sea Eagles gone. The remaining 1908 established teams. Eastern Suburbs Roosters, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Western Suburbs Magpies, Newtown Jets, North Sydney Bears & Balmain Tigers, retake their rightful & entitled positions. Now we will have sorted the too many Sydney team crowd. All teams go but my team remain. My argument is we return to 1908 teams & that’s final. Because without 1908 teams, their is no Rugby League.
peter hincks
Guest
Get rid of kiwis'
peter hincks
Guest
As an ex St George fanatic who now only watch's the Sydney Swans a perfect example is ; Balmain , West's Magpies Wests who never rate a mention have bailed out Balmain twice , wests 5 on the board Balmain 2 ;Wests own 75% Balmain 25% that was an attempted take over no merger.
James
Guest
Whoever wrote this does not understand the difference between joint ventures and mergers. St George Illawarra is NOT a merged entity in any way, shape, or form. It is a joint venture. While it may seem a case of semantics, it is not!
81paling
Roar Rookie
Nuttyboy you must understand that no club that was financially insolvent would be granted an NRL license in 99. When Manly received the money from the NRL for the merger they were 3 months away from insolvency. The difference between them and the Bears was that the Bears were under voluntary administration. Therefore if the Manly plan for merger had not gone ahead Manly would not have been granted a license in 99 and in fact the Bears would have been due to the "Save the Bears Group" who had raised the $4 million required by the time the license was due.
Nuttybott
Guest
Yes, but that was at the insistence of the NRL. Manly would have ditched the "Northern Eagles" identity in 2002, had they been allowed to. I was told that by insiders at the club itself - the NRL insisted on this totally arbitrary rule whereby clubs had to give 18 months' notice to change their name...which Manly did as soon as the merger collapsed at the end of the 2001 season. THAT is why manly were still (officially) called the "Northern Eagles" in 2002...although the name quickly became a bit of a joke among fans, the players and most media commentators.
Nuttybott
Guest
@Rob9: "You’re kidding yourself if you think Manly was guaranteed a spot in the NRL beyond 1999: Actually, Rob9, they WERE...Manly qualified in 11th spot out of the 14 clubs for a stand-alone licence under the NRL's criteria. The place in the 2000 competition and beyond WAS guaranteed for the Sea Eagles. The decision to merge was purely and solely a financial one. The club didn't believe they could survive by themselves in the longer term. Fast forward to 2001 - the Northern Eagles merger had proven to be a total fiasco from day one, and failed on every conceivable level, from irreconcilable boardroom squabbling between the Manly and Norths factions, to indifferent performances on the field, to the mutual antagonism between Bears and Sea Eagles fans (were there ever REALLY any Northern Eagles fans?). Exit one failed shotgun marriage. In 1999 Manly were convinced they couldn't stand alone. By 2002, the club realised they HAD to stand alone...there was no alternative. And somehow, the club survived...despite the machinations of the News Ltd-run NRL, who seemed determined to get rid of them, even to the point of insisting that the club keep the now-worthless "Northern Eagles" name, and continue playing half their home games at Gosford where the public clearly didn't want them. If it weren't for the arrival of a financial saviour in the form of Max Delmege, the Sea Eagles probably would not have survived the failed merger at all, much less enjoyed the decade of virtually uninterrupted success we have seen...
Jeffery
Guest
Roosters and Sea-Eagles have a strong hold on politics within NSW and Australian Rugby League so therefore the chance of their image being eliminated is not going to work. Rabbitohs have a strong brand that saw them fight back into the league. Rugby League use to have a boundary basis to it and Manly needed Norths permission like Cronulla needed St George and Penrith needed Parramatta. The Shire and Kogarah is too close so by stating St George and the Rabbitohs is a joke! Sorry but it is. With a Kogarah base and a Cronulla base, fans would travel between Kogarah and Cronulla. But that means South Sydney should be managing a solid home base and not out of Stadium Australia (Olympic Park). Rugby League forced Illawarra as they fought to state they were a region on their own and that was Rugby League's fault. The aspect of a relegation and promotion would have seen all teams with the lowest teams dying out in which then the clubs remaining could take a stronger hold.
Eeler2
Guest
Nobody mentioned New Zealand having a second team. Send Melbourne or Manly to New Zealand. Makes sense? Talking about expansion, Melbourne sent to South Africa would be even better. Get rid of them out of our game.
League_coach101
Guest
Not sure what all the Gallop bashing is about. David Gallop took over as NRL Administrator in February 2002. You can accuse him of many things but being responsible for the amalgamations is not one of them. He wasn't in charge at that point.
81paling
Roar Rookie
Does anyone know if Andrew has any clue about how or why Melbourne received their funding, Long story short it was not about spreading the game it was about getting subscribers and the Foxtel marketing at that time was aimed at cash rich time poor people of which the Central Coast and Western Sydney were not but, a portion of Melbourne was. So after the war they screwed the broadcast price down to free up cash which was then poor'd into their Melbourne plan to the tune of around $18m a year via a small private NEWS owned subsidiary named Valimandra. To add to this NEWS was also paid an $8m dividend every year from the NRL of which it gave $5m a year to Melbourne. The NRL also gave the Storm the right to own their own logo (only 2 clubs in the NRL own their logo and therefore r paid royaltied directly for its use) aswell as other unique sweeteners. Therefore Andrew when you add the $26m that the NRL gave Melbourne earlier this year to ensure it's financial stability you will note that the cost of this Melbourne expansion has been over $350m directly. This Money would have been far better spent keeping a 2nd Brisbane team in the comp like the Crushers who in their 1st year had a home crowd average of over 20,000 people in attendance (a figure that Melbourne have never even come close to). I was at a Swans match a few weeks ago before heading off to a Bears match and I was wearing a North Sydney Bears Jersey and the amount of people in the members stand at the SCG who came up to me and told me they used to support the Bears (now not knowing they still even exist) was huge. So Andrew the game has paid a massive financial price, reseeded in it's heartland and lost the obvious increased expansion and interest that a 2nd Bribane team would have bought to the game. Over a million people from North Sydney to the lower Hunter are without an NRL team and many have drifted or are currently drifting to other codes and all this not to expand the market for Rugby League but to increase pay TV subscription. Now that Melbourne is sold in a few years they will start to lose because their owners don't own the game, their fan base will collapse and it was all for nothing. This Melbourne stunt has damaged the game when they took the license from Perth and it is to late to really capitalise on it's onfield success as the Victorian rugby league scene is poor at best. We must curse the devil for the day he made the franchise of the Melbourne Storm that has weakened the game imeasurably and though we can try to breath life into this doomed curse and pray that it does survive their can be no more sacrifices or resources afford to it for the fact that crowds still struggle year on year to get above what they were in 1995 can be partially laid at the feet of that cursed franchise. It is only due to the greatness of the game that it has been able to survive the costly disaster that has been the Melbourne Storm.
david duckerson duckworth
Guest
actually manly had no money, they decided for their survival, theyd pray on the bears, and then betray them.
Rob9
Guest
Johnno, this article isn’t about Dave Smith in 2013 looking at google maps and creating mergers. For this proposal, the ship has sailed and it left about 14 years ago when mergers were the ‘in’ thing. And if you can think back to the late 90’s, they were well and truly ‘flavour of the month’ for a year or two there. Fast forward to now and have mergers got on top of one of the key issues that they supposed to achieve (that of course being a more rationalised Sydney)?? No, not exactly. So why this idea may sound a little strange (e.g. demerging and remerging certain clubs and breathing some sort life into the Jets at the NRL level again) in this day and age, many of these mergers were actually being touted in the late 90’s. And merging based on geographical surrounds, making it easier for fans of both clubs to attend all 12 home games a year sounds a lot more logical and beneficial for all parties than mergers based on colours etc.
Johnno
Guest
Nope, bloody terrible idea. The idea that you merge a few clubs with their own histories, rivalries and idiosyncracies and expect that people will simply follow them because they live in that area is a stupid idea at all levels. People will have zero investment in these new franchises and you will find that no-one will go to games, no-one will want to buy the cack-merchandise and everyone will pine for the simpler times of the mid-2000's when merged teams and Billy Slaters constant cheating ruled the game.
81paling
Roar Rookie
Surely the most sensible merger was always Wests and Parra. Parra was born from Wests twice. Wests put forward the recommendation to form a Parramatta League's district club and then their secretary seconded the motion made by their president to allow the district club to form. Since that point they have lived ib harmony side by side. Reality is that Ricky needs to sign a new deal with the clubs to sort out a team in 2 years with bonuses for him and then Jason Taylor take over as head coach. Ricky can shake things up and put the right team into place for the Wests Parra merger and then a legend for both clubs takes the helm with their reserve grade staying as the magpies. It is just an idea but, it seems to make sense.
81paling
Roar Rookie
Manly fans have already told NRL officials that they refuse to move from Brookvale, therefore trying this stunt again is a ridiculous waste of time and money as the people of Gosford hate them and their club and have done so forever. That is the reason Manly don't want to go to Gosford and the fact that they love Brookvale and will never leave no matter what.
fishes
Guest
Actually relocation to Perth is possible. Tony sage has already said he would support a relocated team (and the nrl has said they are open to private ownership)
fishes
Guest
I think we need 3 more mergers- Penrith/Parramatta and Roosters/Sharks and Northern eagles try again or manly just move to Gosford. (and I'm a sharks fan so I hate the idea of it, I'm not biased). That way there are 2 more spots, Perth and Brisbane 2. Then we could add 2 more (Melbourne 2 and Adelaide or NZ 2) and we would have an 18 team competition.
fishes
Guest
Totally agreed. The nrl is a mess, because there is 3 obvious and urgent expansion areas- Brisbane 2, Perth and the central coast- and only 2 spots available (for an 18 team competition)
Rob9
Guest
Hey EJ, look I’ll concede, when it comes to the dismantling of the Northern Eagles all we really have to go off is the scuttlebutt that came out from both sides of the coin when Manly took over the reins. But the whole shemozzle that was the Northern Eagles doesn’t paint the Manly Warringah club (and even more so, the NRL) in the best light. The Bears were doing the hard work to relocate to the Central Coast, a large, heartland area outside of Sydney that had and has a legitimate claim for full time NRL representation. The relocation had earned them an NRL guarantee of a spot in the competition in the new millennium. Unfortunately for the Bears, their move up the F1 was delayed by a year and this pushed the club to the wall. Meanwhile their neighbours Manly were in a similar predicament financially and in order to survive the NRL’s cut they jumped into bed together. The merger that followed was one that was clearly weighted in Manly’s favour. The new club adopted their mascot, the location name was seen by Norths fans as a reference to the Northern Beaches and the kit (most of the time) was far closer to Manly’s original. As an outsider and a fan of neither club, I didn’t think too much about it but you can definitely see how Bears fans could feel a bit hard done by. What followed was 2 seasons entrenched within the bottom half of the competition. This probably hurt the club more than anything. If the Dragons didn’t experience success so early in their new life, they very well could have gone the same way. Their 99’ Grand Final appearance helped cement the clubs 2 original fan bases as 1 and unfortunately the Northern Eagles didn’t give their fans much to cheer about. The club bled money and the license was taken over by the Sea Eagles during the 2002 season. This despite the Bears half of the merger having the financial backing of John Singleton and a clear vision to take the club to an area outside of the cluttered metropolitan Sydney market (something the NRL previously valued). Furthermore, Northern Eagles crowds in 2000 and 2001 were a good bit larger on the Central Coast than those rocking up to Brookie. I know the whole fiasco wasn’t helped by a stubborn Norths faction but the merger was by no stretch embraced by Manly’s dominant board. As an outsider, it was disappointing watching the makeshift club effectively squabble its way to an early suicide instead of giving it a chance and working towards some on field success to help bond the two fan bases together.