MASCORD: Clubs, not representative commitments, are to blame for overload

The reason to shorten the season by a few weeks in order to accommodate the international scene is to satisfy those who complain about player burnout. That's all. In anycase, I don't think the NRL is trying to destroy international league at all - their charter in fact supports it and their focus on the Pacific Islands is to be applauded. The international aspect of the code is worth leveraging and the domestic competition is integral to that. When the Super League eventually is on par with the NRL, then expanding it makes good sense but until then, I think the WCS is fine as it is, three NRL v three Super League - a single weekend is fine.

Sleiman - as always you put forward a logical, sensible, coherent point of view. The only thing I'd say is why do we have to shorten the season? WCS is a long way off being a viable tournament that you'd even consider expanding let alone shortening the NRL season for. We have international fixtures at the end of most seasons. Last year 4N, the year before a World Cup and it fits in fine with the NRL season as it is. I don't mean to always be sounding like I'm having a crack at international footy but it there's a lot of articles with this theme of "why NRL is ruining international footy" which I just don't think is fair or accurate. When you look at the list of players with the most test caps, players whose careers have taken place after 2000 feature prominently. Lockyer, Civoneceva, Cameron Smith are all in the top 5. Current players Inglis, Thurston, Gallen and Thaiday are top 20 and can add to their total. In NZ it's even more pronounced. Wiki, Jones, Kearney, Mannering, Cayless and Vagana are all in the top 10 most capped. This suggests there's more international games now than at any other stage of the games history. It also makes a mockery of the premise of this article that NRL is somehow damaging the modern players capability to play test footy.

Agreed. But my point stands that it was easier to play more games in a shorter period in 1908 than it is in 2015.

What many fail to realise is that, yes, it takes time to recover from a match. And the more intense the match, the longer it takes to recover. But it also takes time to recover from exercising.

Can't argue with that Barry. The only point that is up for debate, I think, is what you mean by 'flourish'. My only beef is the idea that the domestic and international scenes are somehow mutually exclusive. For example, many seem to believe that because Origin is the current hit that it is, then that is how it has to always be. I'm not sure why a statement of fact (NRL is stronger than Super League) somehow becomes a justification (NRL is stronger therefore there is no benefit in having a WCS). I know you are not anti-international but the reality is that once people's heads get caught in their suburb (or whatever) then they start to find fault with anything outside of it. Would it really destroy domestic rugby league if the season were shortened by a few weeks to accommodate a WCS, Four Nations or whatever? Anyway, just getting a few things off my chest.

NRL burnout? Because our season is too long! We want quality, not quantity. Is it any wonder NRL crowds are so tepid. Theyve been stagnating for years when compared to domestic population growth. Brisbane has 2.2 million ppl and yet only 36,000 attended the Souths game?!

Oh no, we finally agree on something and it's from opposite sides of the coin! Not the old "Dally M played so many games in 1908" argument. Rugby league has always been a hard game but the physical toll the game took and exertion it required in 1908 doesn't even compare to now. If you dropped 1908 dally m straight into a modern game he wouldn't last 5 minutes. Players are bigger, faster, stronger, hit harder, wrestle better. Training methods have improved but physiologically we haven't changed since 1908. We still have the same basic physical equipment meant to cope with forces, impacts and pressures many, many times greater than they were in 1908. It also takes longer and greater effort to prepare for a game and a season. Of course it takes longer to recover from games these days and the body can tolerate fewer games in the same period of time. That's not even debatable. The old "dally m played 60 games in 1908 so they should be able to do it now" argument is redundant.

"I think you're having an argument with me in an alternate universe" - meaningless. Yes these sports do have an international side. So does rugby league. The point I clearly made is that any international competition in these sports is very much second fiddle to the main event. Just like rugby league. What do you think tennis players would choose between winning Wimbledon or the Davis cup? Ditto golf with US Masters v Ryder cup? Ditto basketball with Olympics v NBA title? Horse racing, MMA, professional boxing, motor racing have little it no international representative angle and are among the biggest sports in the world. So clearly sports don't NEED an international side to them to survive and even flourish. And rugby league is no different to most of the other successful sports around the world where the main focus is the domestic season / tournaments with international competition as an interesting but secondary part of the season.

Yes absolutely RIGHT Bazz. The other day I looked up some history of our game and it makes interesting reading. If you want to talk about overload and burn out have a look at the schedule and number of fixtures played by The All Golds with Dally M in the side it's amazing and really puts most modern sportsmen to shame!

Dear The Barry I think you're having an argument with me in an alternate universe to this one and I wish you well in winning it! Your point about big sports relates to some world wide things like Basketball which does have an international dimension and American football which is desperately trying to get one as examples of doing fine? The other examples often have international sides and the Olympics as part of their pattern and that would give evidence contrary to your a argument. Aussie Rules is by both definitions doing fine and is a back water sport, like it or not! I hope you'll soon feel the force is with you again, all the best Russ. :-)

I'd campaign to get Glebe reinstated so they can take on Halifax in the World Club Super Series.

Sleiman, If you were the Souths coach, which approach would you take? 1) I understand if your tired boys, It's been a very long road and the travel abroad hasn't helped.Just go out and do your best.We've already won our premiership so it's not the be all and end all. 2) After what we've achieved and worked hard for, the extra little bit of travel is nothing.We have an opportunity to create history here boys and i strongly believe that we can do it.

Cam Smith, who has played in 3 of them, said it was a factor. Let's talk to Maguire at the end of the year. When he has actually witnessed his team tire. Cause right now he has no idea. It's not necessarily the sole factor. But it is a factor.

Just watched the press conference with Michael Maguire. When asked about the travel due to the WCS and Nines, Maguire dismissed its effects and claimed that the media were trying to make something out of it. May or may not be true but I thought it was worth mentioning.

I have nothing against domestic rugby league. Not sure where anyone gets the idea that I might be.

This "burn out" excuse is just that - an excuse. There's not one shred of objective evidence to back any of this up. Steve had a light bulb moment one morning while taking a dump and wrote and article. That's as far as any research into this matter has gone.

Sleiman, I'm happy to play fair. You can have the off-season but please allow us to enjoy the season proper. Betting ads and all. Deal?

I'm more than happy for you disagree with me but you're disagreeing with things I've never written. I've never once suggested abandoning or neglecting international rugby league. You have a habit for making grandiose but ultimately meaningless statements like: "There are very few people in RL who provide a counter argument to the flood of nonsense that parades as excuses and reasons for opting out." A flood of nonsense parading as an excuse makes no sense at all and everyone thinks they're the sole voice of reason in a sea of dissenting opinion. As for 'backwater' sports, you're leading with your chin here Russ. NFL, NBA, MLB are among the biggest sports in the world and none are based around meaningful international competition. Aussie rules doesn't have international competition and is doing fine. Then there's professional boxing, mixed martial arts, horse racing, tennis and golf off the top of my head where international competition is either non existent or very much in the background to the main event. Rugby league has a more prominent international competition than any of them. These aren't panda watching, backwater sports.

The Barry Oh dear! There are very few people in RL who provide a counter argument to the flood of nonsense that parades as excuses and reasons for opting out. And no matter what you call a sport that does very well without Internationals it still won't be anything more than a backwater after thought, and if that is anyone's ambition and vision for RL they are welcome to it! And eventually the market competitors will win because they have more to offer. BTW not reading and disagreeing are two very different things! ;-)

No but in the past the NRL has not been what you'd call helpful and this latest "burn out" excuse is part of a theme of neglect whether you like it or not! :-(