Does the NRL's future lie in Super League?

Maybe just pull out the NRL rules book from 1989 - I might have one in the garage. You could add striking at the play the ball, ball has to leave hand at the tap, etc

You are a great revisionist Larry. I also lived through that period and watched several Sydney clubs being eaten piecemeal because they couldnt compete with Murdock money. And lets not pretend the real reason SudperLeague existed. Nothing benevolent here. It was about Murdock making money and controlling a cashcow he hungered for. He cut the game in half and caused crowds to fail for the next decade. As for preferential treatment to Sydney clubs at the expense of poor Brisbane, Brisbane came into the League in 1988 and in their first game slaughtered the previous premiers. They then made the semis six times in the next 9 seasons including two premierships before SuperLeague. Only four of those premierships between 1988 and 1997 were won by Sydney clubs, Canterbury twice, Manly once and Penrith with their first premiership, so it was hardly Sydney focused. The other three were won by Canberra. The ARL had introduced Auckland, North Queensland, South Queensland, Gold Coast, Western Reds (Perth) as well as Canberra, Newcastle and Brisbane over the preceding two decades. Hardly parochial to Sydney interests and might I add the present League still hasnt caught up with a second Brisbane side and Perth side, even now two decades on. The ARL had Melbourne coming into the comp in 1988-9. If anything the old ARL was far less Sydney based in 1997 then it is now in 2017. In fact since 1998 eleven premierships have been won by Sydney sides, and only six by non Sydney clubs officially. So SuperLeague has hardly benefited non Sydney clubs. In fact they've gone backwards. Like I said Larry old mate, you are a good revisionist, but perhaps you should research your stuff before criticising.

Just a few points to clarify the Superleague issue from one old enough to remember what happened before those days. QLD was pillaged of players for years by the pokie rich Sydney clubs (the establishment if you like). Eventually those clubs & the Sydney comp were going broke so they decided 'we'll invite a Brisbane team & others in to make money' but we don't really want them to be successful so let's keep control in the hands of the old establishment (looking at you Polites). Brisbane & expansion clubs plus disaffected Sydney clubs (Cronulla) thought we can do better. That was the catalyst, if expansion clubs hadn't come in, your old competition would be broke & playing in front of crowds around 1500 with no FTA. Superleague did Sydney a favour, cleaned out some deadwood like the Bears. Now the manufactured clubs like Tigers need to be rationalised, they're proving to be basket cases because of those establishment mentalities.

It's not a multi-tiered structure that's needed, but some changes to the rules. I suggest: 1. Get rid of Golden Point and revert to one point for a draw. 2. Scrap the scrums. 3. Bring back the five metre rule - less dummy half running. 4. Five points for a try. 5. Only one marker allowed. 6. Scrap the 40/20 and have a 50/10 instead. 7. Scorers kick off after points. 8. Stop runners/trainers from being on the field unless tries conceded or player injured. Langer gets more game time than any Bronco player. This effectively gives them 14 players on the field AND on-field coaching. 9. Salary cap issue: A player who debuts with a club or is a local junior should be exempt from the salary cap. This will foster club loyalties and encourage clubs to develop their local juniors. However, once that player leaves the club he comes under the salary cap of his new club. 10. Players who "jump ship" to another club mid-season or refuse to see out their current contract should be banned from playing in the NRL for the rest of the season. You sign a contract, you should be legally bound to fulfil it or the consequence will be no play-no salary. Let's see how these "highly paid" athletes will fair on "Struggle Street" with no income. 11. The Bunker should be allowed to rule on forward passes. 12. A Ref should be allowed to make one of three on-field decisions regarding a try when asking the Bunker: 1. I have a try; 2. I have no try; 3. I don't know! 13. Scrap giving two points for a bye. By season's end every team has played the same amount of games anyway, so two points for byes merely inflates their competition points. 14. Get rid of State of Origin and let's focus on what really matters - the Premiership. 15. Regarding Point 14, if the NRL will persist with SOO, change the eligibility rules so that you play for the state in which you were born, hence "State of Origin." If your birth certificate does not have either NSW or Qld as the state of your birth, then you cannot play SOO Ever! 16. And finally, and most importantly, bring back my beloved North Sydney Bears.

The only way promotion and relegation will work is we have a national Intrust cup competition with 12-14 clubs that are not aligned or are feeder clubs to NRL teams with a much higher salary cap. But who of all these clubs are financially viable to be able to do this - not many. That way we keep all those fringe players that are going to super league. And would the NRL give those clubs a grant from the current broadcast deal. I don't think so. It would cost them an extra $60-70 million dollars based on $5 million per club.

Food for thought is true, although there are some large holes in that idea. The primary one is money. The game is not big enough to have a quality 2nd tier between the NRL and Intrust cup/s. Nor, I believe, do we have the talent. Occasionally a Leicester style team may pop up but I think your examples of Knights and Wests highlight the lack of high quality talent waiting to play NRL. That said, Wests or Knights would most likely dominate any Intrust team which shows they are better than average but not quite NRL standard. TV pays for games that attract viewing audience. Not just team supporters but those wanting to watch a quality game. More eyes, more sponsors, more revenue. Diminish the quality and you diminish the revenue.

"some new ones like Redcliffe". Funny

I believe the problem with the NRL is that the SOO which is fantastic messes up the regular Competition. That needs to be fixed in some way Then.... you have NRL playing in suburban grounds that are years past their best days date. On top of that the atmosphere at most games doesnt "cut it". Go to an AFL game and the atmosphere is electric - why? They play up to the audience. The winning team's song comes on at the end and the crowd loves it. Its just more polished in so many ways. There are just so many things the AFL does better. Sorry I love NRL first but while the product itself is very good the way it is marketed etc is very poor.

That's right Mark, no doubt the Wolfpack will do well in the English third tier. They are fully professional from Head Coach to the boat cleaner. Not hard when when you are playing semi-professional sides. Next year will be tougher, they will need to make the top 4 in the second tier, for a chance to get to Super League. It is very hard for established professional clubs to get to Super League (one in two seasons has got through, Leigh at the expense oh Hull KR).

What rubbish. Newcastle and the Hunter is Australia 7th largest city, slightly bigger than the ACT, and much larger than the Sunshine Coast and... Townsville.

Yes Bearfax is on the mark here and Dogs Boddy has a very poor understanding on recent historic facts. Manly didn't survive SuperLeague, they were never in it, and they held the NRL licence for the Northern Eagles. North merged with Manly, they had no choice, they were not going to get an NRL licence due to the fact they were teetering on voluntary administration (the same time Souths weren't granted an NRL licence) and didn't make the cut. The merger between Norths and Manly was dissolved after a couple of seasons as Norths couldn't afford to pay their fair share and Manly started covering their costs, the NRL saw the writing on the wall. Add in John Singleton having the ownership rights to the stadium at Gosford and telling people not to turn up to games wasn't that smart either. (Note: When John Singleton wants to get involved in your rugby league club (or area), tell him non-politely to go away, ask any Newtown, Wests, Norths or Central Coast league supporter). Manly happily went back to Brookvale and became the most successful team over the next decade. Free of Norths, Singo, the Central Coast and other dead wood. PS: Penrith were another financial strong Sydney team that joined Super League. The Sharkies went as well to somewhat secure their ongoing financial situation.

Wolfpack (WP)are a stacked side in a weak 3rd Division Comp. They should not be used as an example of how great the Super League is and how the model applies to the NRL. Let's see if WP is still around in 3 years once they start getting belted by English Championship and possibly also Super League sides.

Newcastle Knights were getting massive crowds when they came into the comp from 1988 to Super League war.

I would love that and there must be enough money to make a profit from a 2 tier after the NRL for a NSW comp and QLD comp with promotion and relegation to NRL.

Like the idea, but much like with soccer, promotion/relegation isn't something that is part of the culture of Australian sport where in England it is. I fear that a relegated team in a championship would struggle to attract healthy crowds. As for the Wests Tigers, their on field issues coincide with off field, you only have to start by looking at their training base.

In what way are the tigers essential in the NRL??? one of four western sydney teams and ironically enough the last time any of them won a title was the western sydney era of dominance in the early 2000s. Penirth 03, Dogs 04, and Wests 05. The tigers have not done a damn thing since. So yet again what is thier essential part of being in the NRL????

The Knights are too important to the game to lose. Big local support, strong League comp. if they were kicked out of the comp that would be bad for the game. It's hard to quantify just my gut feeling

Bar the ten a side that actually makes alot of sense

No doubt with parachute payments like in the English Premier League. For example, and I'm putting these numbers out of the air for the sake of the argument( I realise these are or probably never be the real numbers . If the salary cap was as follows: NRL Cap: $10million p/a 2nd division: $6 million p/a On the first year going down from NRL to 2nd division, that club's cap would be something like $8.5 million. It gives the clubs a chance to offload some players but keep the majority of the squad. If they don't promote after that first season, their new cap will be $7 million in that second year in the second division. The majority of players are on 2-3 year contract (except the stars) so if the team doesn't promote at the end of the second season, a lot of players getting NRL money will now be off contract and clubs can better plan for their financial structure. The third season the club is on $6 million like all the other 2nd division clubs. It's not good for club loyalty but then again you will see how loyal players are to clubs as well.

oh dear...