NRL Times

follow this blog

11 followers

103 daily readers

rank of 923

E-mail Subscription

Receive an e-mail notification of new posts on this site:

Spotlight Posts

Irony Profound as Sea Eagles Boost Central Coast Bid

The Legitimacy of the Cap

Souths - Smells Like 1971

NRL: A Blueprint for the Future

Super League – 10 Years Too Soon: Part 1 - The Beginning

Top 10 Worst Teams In Australian Rugby League History

Top 10 Greatest Australian Rugby League Teams of All Time

Melbourne Storm - Team of the Decade

Canterbury Bankstown Retro

The Tale of the Old Pot

Operation Expansion: NRL (part 3)

Operation Expansion: NRL (Part 2)

Operation Expansion: NRL (Part 1)

A game for the working class, run by lawyers and video refs

[ more ]

Irony Profound as Sea Eagles Boost Central Coast Bid

July 29th 2010 10:49

Irony Profound as Sea Eagles Boost Central Coast Bid

In what can be only described as a bizarre case of irony, this past weekend has seen Manly-Warringah give the Central Coast Bears a massive boost in their NRL admission proposal. Taking their home game against the Wests Tigers away from Brookvale Oval, the Sea Eagles were able cram Bluetongue Stadium in Gosford with 20,059 fans; a sell-out.

Bluetongue Stadium, of course, is poised to be the Bears’ home ground if they are successful in their re-admission bid to the NRL. The sell-out crowd that turned up to watch the game on Sunday, including the many fans that were turned away, will now be a tremendous selling point for the Bear’s proposal committee.

The irony was that it was the Bears’ rivals, the Sea Eagles, that orchestrated it.

Still fresh in the minds of the Bears faithful is the way that their beloved team was axed from the NRL, with the Sea Eagles playing a notable role.

The tale of this starts back in 1999, when the NRL devised a ‘selection criteria’, designed to reduce the competition to 14 teams. Most notably, its aim in achieving this was to vastly reduce the number of Sydney teams. Up until that point, the future of the North Sydney Bears, as they were then known, looked bright.

Despite largely languishing at the bottom of the Premiership table for much of their history, the Bears managed to find considerable success in the 1990s. With the likes of Greg Florimo, Jason Taylor, Gary Larson, Billy Moore and David Fairleigh, among others, the Bears went within one game of reaching the Grand Final in both 1994 and 1996.

The Bears club itself was always considered to be one of the richest in the league, going so far as acquiring the Seagulls club in Tweed Heads and the Burleigh Bears on the Gold Coast. Building on this, the Bears planned to avoid the dreaded NRL selection criteria by relocating to the Central Coast.

Being a rugby league heartland, Gosford seemed like the perfect fit for the Bears. Still out of Sydney, Gosford is within reasonable distance to North Sydney and the location of their historical fan base.

Funded by media magnate, John Singleton, the Bears proceeded with the construction of Bluetongue Stadium to cement their relocation to the Central Coast. It was to be their strategic focal-point for survival, but the construction of the stadium ultimately proved to be the noose that lead to the Bears demise.

Marred by construction problems and setbacks, mainly due to long spells of rain and inclement weather, the completion date for the stadium was delayed to early 2000. This was detrimental to Norths in the extreme as the Bears were left without a home ground in 1999.

With no home ground, the Bears were the nomads of the NRL, playing all away games and thus receiving no revenue from home gate takings. The result forced the Bears into insolvency. Most damaging was that the insolvency automatically excluded the Bears from the NRL’s selection criteria.

Without any chance of standing alone, a merger became the Bears’ only option for survival. That reality did not set well with Norths fans though, especially since the most likely merger would be with their fierce rivals Manly. Furthermore, despite being a foundation club, Norths were viewed as the ‘junior’ member of the merger, with Manly appearing to have most authority.

The animosity towards the merger was so ripe with Norths fans that the club actually removed the rights of members to veto the decision to avoid an embarrassing ‘No’ vote. Without much fanfare, the Bears practically fell on their sword and the Northern Eagles were born.

Despite many Bears fans feeling that the Northern Eagles’ name and colours bore no relevance to Norths 90 year history or traditions, the new club battled through 2000 and 2001 with little success. Worse still, factional in-fighting between the two clubs exposed the hastiness of the merger.

Ultimately 2002 saw the collapse of the merger, with the Manly board maneuvering themselves with the NRL to gain control of the Northern Eagles license. The move saw the end of North Sydney’s involvement in the top flight competition since the foundation year of 1908.

Most alarming was that the Bears demise gained little attention amongst rugby league fans or media. Still to this day, negative sentiments towards the Sea Eagles are more directed towards their Fibro/Silver-tail feuds with Wests than for practically cutting the throat of the Bears.

This might be due to the apparent attitude of Bears fans and faithful. Instead of complaining and whining over their exit from the NRL, the likes of Greg Florimo and David Fairleigh have sought to fight for readmission. Instead of focusing on the negatives, the members of the new Bears push have promoted the positives of having their team on the Central Coast.

Let’s remember that the Bears have given up a lot to survive; but they are one of the few teams in the NRL that acknowledge that their days in Sydney are over. More importantly, the club realises that adaptation, and not clinging to threads of tradition, will be the key to their future.

With Greg Florimo and other Bears board members meeting with the NRL today, most rugby league fans would overwhelmingly support their readmission. With that said, it is certainly ironic that Manly may have inadvertently given the Central Coast bid its most valuable bargaining weapon of all.

126

Vote

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Steven Tripp - Category: No Category

Email this Post to a Friend

The Value of Cronulla

May 31st 2010 05:19

The Value of Cronulla

Over the past week, more turmoil has engulfed the Cronulla Sutherland Sharks as both their coach, Ricky Stuart, and club CEO Richard Fisk have resigned. With Stuart being linked with the Wests Tigers and Fisk sighting difficulties with club chairman Damian Irvine, there is said to be a sea of bad blood and unrest flowing through the corridors of the Sharks club.

As Fisk stated in an interview with the Daily Telegraph on May 29, ‘Damian and I had very different views on a lot of things’. He went on to say, ‘It disappoints me immensely to be leaving but sometimes it's just time.’

In regards to Stuart, it has been claimed that he has been at loggerheads with Irvine for some time now and that their relationship is ‘fractured beyond repair’.

This of course comes off a horror 2009 season for the Sharks. Coupled with narrowly avoiding the Wooden Spoon, the club had former CEO Tony Zappia resign in disgrace after sexual harassment claims. Furthermore, players Brett Seymour and Reni Maitua were outed for off-field digressions.

More serious than that though, the club was said to have almost gone under altogether, following the revelation that they were unable to repay their debts owed to the St. George Bank.

Of course this is nothing new to the Sharks however, who have faced financial instability at numerous stages in the past. As stated by former Sharks great Gavin Miller, when interviewed by the Sydney Morning Herald; ‘We went from the '70s, when we had players collecting money in buckets at traffic lights to help the football club survive, to the '80s, when they cut the players' wages by 50 per cent’.

He went on to say; ‘Then the club went through the lucrative Super League times - and Cronulla were part and parcel of that - to now, in 2009, and they're broke again’.

Financial woes are not the only reason for concern at Cronulla though. Throughout their entire history, way back to their inception in 1967, the Sharks have always underperformed on the field.

Their few accomplishments include three Grand Final appearances, in 1973, 1978 and the Super League Grand Final of 1997 and two Minor Premierships in 1988 and 1999. A victory in the Amco Cup of 1979 remains their sole first grade tile. Other than that, the Sharks have consistently been lackluster.

With the club currently sitting at second last on the 2010 Premiership ladder (they would be last if Melbourne had not been stripped of all points due to salary cap breaches) their future does not look very bright either. As each year goes by, the Sharks slowly build on the demoralising record of being the club that has existed for the most number of seasons without ever winning a Premiership.

With the club more than likely going to miss the Top 8 this year, it will mark their 44th season without a Premiership. In this regard, their only rival is the Parramatta Eels, who went 34 seasons without a Premiership before winning four in six years.

Also, with each season that passes, the more Cronulla can be likened to former clubs, the Newtown Jets and North Sydney Bears. The only difference being that those two clubs actually won five Premierships between them.

In particular, Cronulla’s current state is becoming strikingly similar to Newtown’s as each season passes.

Like Newtown, Cronulla has always faced financial woes and their on-field performances have consistently struggled against more prominent clubs. Likewise with the Jets, who faced a reduction in their talent base due to the industrilisation of their area, Cronulla’s home district of the Sutherland Shire is miniscule in comparison with larger, city-based clubs such as the Brisbane and Melbourne. Even more so, the Shark’s district looks even smaller when compared to the whole country of New Zealand that the Warriors represent.

Unlike Newtown however, who sustained an image and club culture of being battlers and underdogs; Cronulla is almost laughed at when, or if, they are considered to be a serious Premiership threat. This is best summed up by the late great, ‘Super Coach’, Jack Gibson, who famously stated; ‘Waiting for Cronulla to win a Premiership is like leaving the porch light on for Harold Holt.’

So with no success to hang their hat on, crippling financial worries, no evident club culture and an current state of unrest amongst the players and coaching staff, one question must be asked; ‘What is the value of Cronulla?’

More importantly, does Cronulla have anything left to offer the NRL when compared to potential entities such as the Central Coast Bears or WA Reds? Surely the re-inclusion of the Bears as the Central Coast would be a massive boost to that area, which has long been considered at ‘Rugby League heartland’. In the case of the WA Reds, along with other potential locations for teams, such as Ipswich, Central Queensland, or even Papua New Guinea; their inclusion would contribute greatly to making the NRL truly ‘National’.

Moreover, if the Sharks were to be removed from the Premiership, it would solve a number of problems, or ‘issues’ for the NRL.

By axing Cronulla, the NRL would be able to remove a club that could quite easily be viewed as a liability. In its place would be a fresh new club, one that would contribute to the overall expansion and appeal of the game.

Also, it would also contribute to the reduction of Sydney teams, which has been a major topic of debate for the past 30 years.

In regards to district, the NRL would not be giving up Rugby League territory by removing the Sharks. St. George Illawarra, whom already span over their area, could quite easily consume the Sutherland Shire into their overall sphere.

In defense of Cronulla, the best thing that they have going for them is their brand. The Sharks name should be easy to market and merchandise, and undoubtedly is their greatest asset. However, I feel that the club has been unable to take full advantage of this ‘asset’ over the years.

Obviously, a new fan of the game, who is unaware of its history, would consider a Shark to be more imposing and appealing than, for arguments sake, a Rabbit. Despite this though, the Rabbitohs have been able to market their brand extremely well in recent years. So much so that their Rabbit logo is iconic, somewhat restoring its image from the club’s last golden era of the 1960s and early 70s.

At the end of the day, the decision to remove Cronulla from the Premiership would be an extremely difficult one. But the decisions to remove Newtown and North Sydney; and to have Balmain, Western Suburbs and St. George merge were difficult as well. Notwithstanding the argument that those mentioned clubs contributed a great deal more than the Sharks.

With that said, if Cronulla were to be removed, they surely would remain and survive in some regard. Like Newtown, the Sharks could still represent themselves in the NSW Cup or another feeder competition. Also, the ever possible potential of re-admission into the NRL would always linger, either as the Sharks or as a relocated entity, much like what the Bears are proposing.

As each year passes though; and even with every game, the future of the Sharks seems to mirror that of Newtown, which may spell the fate of the club from the Shire.

153

Vote

Comments (2)

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Steven Tripp - Category: No Category

Email this Post to a Friend

The Legitimacy of the Cap

May 1st 2010 12:56

The Legitimacy of the Cap

A lot has been said about the Melbourne Storm over the past week in regards to their Salary Cap breaches and the resulting penalty imposed upon them by the NRL. Almost five years of Premiership success has been stripped away from the Storm as the club tries to rebuild from this scandal.

Despite all the attention on the Storm though, little has been said of the Salary Cap itself. What role does the structure of the Cap have in this whole issue? Obviously the Melbourne Storm are to blame for the rorts in which they contrived. But in essence, this issue comes back to the structure of the Salary Cap itself.

Surely, some criticism must be placed on the institution of the Salary Cap system for allowing these rorts to be facilitated in the first place. To look at this issue in simple terms, the events of the past week, along with previous rorts, would never have been scandalous had the Salary Cap not be in force.

In the aftermath of this scandal breaking, Alan Jones of radio 2GB debated the legitimacy of the Cap. In basic terms, Jones argued that having the Cap only exposed the game to rorting and blatant breaches. Furthermore, in his view, Salary Cap rorting was abundant throughout the League and he stated with certainty that it was in practice at other clubs.

What he proposed was intriguing however. Instead of having a Salary Cap, Jones proposed a system of player rankings to replace it. The fundamental element of his proposal was that each player would be bestowed a ranking. For example, a player of Johnathan Thurston’s calibre; that is someone who has represented their Country, played State of Origin and who is considered one of the best players in the game, would receive a ranking of 20.

A player who has played State of Origin, but who has not represented Australia would receive a rank of 15. A top flight NRL player, but who has not played representative football would be ranked 10, while a rookie in his first season may be a 2. As a built-in incentive, a player who has played at the one club for ten years or more, such as Darren Lockyer or Steve Price, would receive a ranking of zero.

Collectively, each team would have a set total of points by which they could accommodate their players, which for arguments sake might be a figure such as 200.

On face value, this system would solve a lot of problems for the League right now. The greatest advantage would be that individual clubs could no longer rort the system as they have done under the Salary Cap. Moreover, as the rankings of players constituted whether or not they could play for a certain team, the payments of players would not be under scrutiny.

In the case of Johnathan Thurston, provided that the North Queensland Cowboys could keep his ranking within their allocated points, they could pay him whatever they pleased. This would stifle talk of Thurston chasing money by looking to move to other codes such as Rugby and AFL. Indeed this would also apply to all players and would grant Rugby League more bargaining power when having to compete with the war chests of other codes.

The amount of players that Rugby League has lost to either English Super League or other football codes, coupled with the amount that we will lose in the future is astounding. Right now there is even talk that Israel Folau may switch to the new Melbourne Rebels Rugby Super 15 franchise or even to the new Greater Western AFL team. If the Salary Cap were to be removed, Rugby League would have a much better chance at retaining their marque stars.

With all ideas however, there is always a draw back. The only one that I can determine is that with the abolition of the Salary Cap in preference to a ranking system, the payments to players could skyrocket to unsustainable levels. Indeed, one advantage of introducing the Salary Cap was that clubs with low income streams could not spend money that they did not have.

Obviously the temptation to splurge in an effort to attract the best type of players could place some clubs behind the eight-ball. Therefore, some sort of Salary Cap would still need to be in place. But this would be a figure that is far and beyond that of which exists now and only have the intention of keeping player payments sustainable.

In terms of rorting, the likelihood of it happening would be far reduced, but not eliminated altogether. Obviously the case might arise where the League’s governing body may favour particular clubs by keeping their players’ rankings low, while raising those of players at other clubs. However, that seems unlikely due to the transparency of the scheme.

Another issue that may cause concern is formulating an adequate system of ranking players. Obviously on face value, a player such as Benji Marshall would receive a high ranking. But then how could you effectively compare Marshall’s ranking to a player such as Gareth Ellis? Obviously Marshall provides the Wests Tigers with more marque value and is viewed as much more of a superstar. But is what he contributes to the team any greater than the contribution of Ellis?

The issue is; how can you sufficiently determine the unique importance of players such as Marshall and Ellis. By nature the two play in vastly different positions and contribute quite differently to each other, but are both valuable nonetheless. The same could be said of Petero Civoniceva, who contributes greatly to the Panthers. But how would you rank his contributions in contrast to other Panthers such as Michael Jennings or Luke Lewis?

The most important point in all of this is the contribution of the current Salary Cap system upon the game. The structure of the Cap has caused the competition to become incredibly balanced, whereas no game is ever predictable. Every side, despite their position on the ladder, is always a chance of winning on any given day.

It is this fundamental element of the Cap that cannot be lost, as it is by far its most valuable. If Alan Jones’ proposed ranking system could still provide this however, then the validity of it only increases.

With that said, hopefully the proposal of replacing the Salary Cap system can seriously be considered by the games new administrators when the Independent Commission is established in due course.

Vote

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Steven Tripp - Category: No Category

Email this Post to a Friend