View Full Version : Expansion The hysteria over the future of Rugby League football
littleduck
2 Jun 2008, 17:51
Great article today in the Herald by Roy Masters:
(my comments mixed in between)
Hysteria is deja voodoo all over again
Roy Masters | May 31, 2008
RUGBY league has always been a code of over-reaction. Instead of celebrating 100 years of history, or delighting in NSW's unexpected and expertly prepared win over Queensland in State of Origin I, or citing the wonderful Wests Tigers versus Titans match at Leichhardt Oval as evidence the lads on the field are still putting on a great show, we're talking death row for Sydney clubs. I agree that of all the football codes out there RL gets the most negative press because it has this inate ability to shoot iself in the foot publicity-wise. The game would rather talk about its negatives than celebrate its positives, which it should be doing in its centenary year.
Surely such an entertaining game between a joint-venture club and a new side at a time when the NRL was becoming a "run from dummy half, put on a block play and kick for the corners" bore, was a reminder rugby league has an enduring, even endearing, capacity to surprise. Yeah.
So what prompted this week of reactive gloom? NRL chief executive David Gallop kicked off with his prediction a Sydney club could die as a result of the savage burden of the increased tax on poker machine revenue, despite the NRL lobbying NSW's then treasurer Michael Egan to change the planned legislation three years ago. Its clearly a planned media stunt to pressure the NSW Treasurer that has back-fired a little as people whiff negativity about the games future.
Shortly after the Gallop bomb, South Sydney co-owner Peter Holmes a Court ran from dummy half, saying he could not guarantee the future of the Rabbitohs, a club which plans to ban poker machines. Yeah, unfortunate timing.
Instead of Magpies supporters at Wests' Black and White ball last night enjoying a centenary of rich history - from millionaires to fibros to duplex dwellers with Balmain - fans were speculating where the club would be in 2010. Typical.
Suddenly, what began as a [B]strategy to pressure the NSW Government to change its tax policy became Souths moving to the Central Coast, where their only resemblance to the Rabbitohs would be their colours. Yeah, as I said a deliberate media campaign to pressure the NSW Treasurer over its pokies tax. A worthwhile campaign considering the Sydney clubs are being anally probed with a barbed wire razor by a single government decision.
What should have been a year in which we look back on a century of achievement has become a year when people are talking a new beginning. RL never celebrates its positives, of which there are many. It seems to be a unique trait to RL.
Traditionalists have become revolutionaries - men who fought to nurture the game's history are preaching new franchises, new countries, new leagues.
Fans always like the mathematical challenge of new semi-final formats, or draws to accommodate extra rounds or byes, or the geography of merged teams but suddenly we are having long-term league officials rolling out blank pages of butcher's paper to draw new maps. Clearly the game needs to get full value from broadcast rights and that means taking the hard decisions to put in place a governing structure that will allow the game to grow and prosper .
And also re-admit Perth at the very least in the very near future, either the Reds or a relocation in partnership with the Reds. Broadcast revenue seems to be about metropolitan capitial Oztam ratings and therefore, the game must be in every capital city.
Take Titans chairman Paul Broughton, a man who has done everything in rugby league except referee.
He's held a ball, a clipboard, a team sheet, a meeting to order - as player, coach, selector, administrator and board member - but not a whistle. He was sacked as Newtown coach and became a NSWRL official, creating the Metropolitan Cup, which allowed the Jets to survive.
The Super League war broke out the night of his 64th birthday, when only a few city blocks separated John Quayle's arrival at the party at Bobby Chow's hotel in The Rocks, trailing faxes from the rebel clubs, and John Ribot signing Canterbury players at Goldfields House.
Sometime during the next 10 years, Broughton got younger. He was moved to the Gold Coast to run the Chargers and when they folded, remained there, developing the business plan that became the Titans. The success of the Titans, aged three, has changed his thinking.
The Gold Coast Titans are the culmination of a true grassroots-driven campaign over many years by some good loyal people. The Titans are truly a product of the dedication and commitment of the Gold Coast community and its leaders for a common cause... that cause being a football team that unites the Gold Coast.
"I agree with [former Souths president] George Piggins that this is the beginning of a new century," he said. "Close the history book and retain the heritage of some clubs who cannot survive and maintain their dignity as Newtown has.
"No more mergers. Form a historical clubs society limited to those no longer in existence. Then let the process of a new club with a new name begin, not incorporating any of the former clubs logos, or brand names.
"Let new management and some old and new fans choose the name. The original Sydney club boundaries set in 1908 must be abandoned and prime consideration must be given to commissioned reports on demographic change, particularly the Polynesian impact. Let 2010 be the new beginning." A terrific commercially-minded idea in theory, but potentially devastating in practice.
Ribot, inaugural boss of the Broncos and founder of the Storm - clubs that have won eight premierships in a combined 30 years - has also been monitoring the debate, with a sense of deja voodoo. Always a believer that Sydney had too many clubs, he is fascinated by Parramatta boss Denis Fitzgerald's solution to falling revenue - cut the salary cap.
"Denis wants to recede further back into Sydney, dragging the Broncos, Storm, Titans with him," Ribot said. "I agree with [Roosters player] Willie Mason, who is effectively saying, 'Get a business plan'. The AFL and cricket are now the strongest sports in Australia and are in all the major stadiums. The AFL will own Telstra Dome in five years and are reported to be buying the Olympic stadium at Homebush, while they also play at the MCG, SCG and Gabba.
"Meanwhile, we're playing in stadiums we don't fit into. The AFL offers North Melbourne $100 million to relocate to the Gold Coast, while we offer the Rabbitohs $8m to move to Gosford. Let's look at the big picture, guys. Maybe they're seeing something we are not." John Ribot is still a visionary for moving the game onwards and upwards and the same Sydney-based administrators that have been there for decades like Denis are still inward-looking and Sydney-centric.
Broughton says: "Our sport needs a commissioner with ultimate power and visionary people to advise who aren't clinging to the security blanket because they are frightened people. The clubs must own the game and News Ltd and the ARL be major shareholders but not run the game." Absolutely. AFL has a major competitive advantage of RL because of the governing structure of the game.
Ribot has similarly strong views on the need for the game to be independent, saying of the blame game: "It's our own fault. We can't keep passing the buck." John Ribot had a crack in 1995. His time has been and gone as far as being the visionary for the games goes. However, his views on the exact same problems remain just as valid today as they did back then.
Gallop says: "This 'where are we going?' debate and the hysteria over expansion ignores the fact we have introduced a brand-new competition - the Toyota Cup - which is rating over 100,000 viewers." Gallop likes to quote the success stories, of which there are many in recent years, but he fails to acknowledge that they are success stories in spite of the games out-dated corporate governance structure and not because of it.
Asked whether the NRL receives a TV rights payment for the new programming, Gallop said: "No, it's a one-year deal. Fox Sports and us want to see where it's going. They pay production costs." Clearly another magnificent success story but the game will earn $nil from that success in 2008. The NRL allowed that. Stupidity.
So they bloody well should. The NRL is underfunded because of a poor TV deal with Fox Sports, a pay TV monopoly that is half owned by News Ltd, which half owns the NRL. Rugby league is the best sport in the world for TV, meaning young people can watch games on big screens in pubs, buying $3 beers, enjoying close-up replays, rather than catch a train to Homebush Bay and pay twice as much for a drink in a stadium without atmosphere.
Clubs would not have to rely on poker machines, or gate takings if they were compensated for the magnificent product we saw at Leichhardt Oval, or the free programming on Fox. Absolutely.
Freo Big Fella
2 Jun 2008, 18:04
So in short;
-League administrators allowed themselves to be subject to a monumental reaming by Uncle Rupert.
-League clubs got themselves into a position where they were nearly entirely reliant on a revenue stream that's only slightly more socially acceptable than crack dealing.
-The NRL ____s up a hamfisted attempt to put political pressure on the NSW government what could be considered an eminently resonable attempt to combat problem gambling (or a cash grab, depending on how you see these things).
-NRL supporters sit back and allow all this to happen without raising as much as a whimper.
Not really registering much on my sympathy meter.
genghiskhan
2 Jun 2008, 18:12
Great article today in the Herald by Roy Masters:
(my comments mixed in between)
I agree that of all the football codes out there RL gets the most negative press because it has this inate ability to shoot iself in the foot publicity-wise. The game would rather talk about its negatives than celebrate its positives, which it should be doing in its centenary year.
Yeah.
Its clearly a planned media stunt to pressure the NSW Treasurer that has back-fired a little as people whiff negativity about the games future.
Yeah, unfortunate timing.
Typical.
Yeah, as I said a deliberate media campaign to pressure the NSW Treasurer over its pokies tax. A worthwhile campaign considering the Sydney clubs are being anally probed with a barbed wire razor by a single government decision.
RL never celebrates its positives, of which there are many. It seems to be a unique trait to RL.
Clearly the game needs to get full value from broadcast rights and that means taking the hard decisions to put in place a governing structure that will allow the game to grow and prosper .
And also re-admit Perth at the very least in the very near future, either the Reds or a relocation in partnership with the Reds. Broadcast revenue seems to be about metropolitan capitial Oztam ratings and therefore, the game must be in every capital city.
The Gold Coast Titans are the culmination of a true grassroots-driven campaign over many years by some good loyal people. The Titans are truly a product of the dedication and commitment of the Gold Coast community and its leaders for a common cause... that cause being a football team that unites the Gold Coast.
A terrific commercially-minded idea in theory, but potentially devastating in practice.
John Ribot is still a visionary for moving the game onwards and upwards and the same Sydney-based administrators that have been there for decades like Denis are still inward-looking and Sydney-centric.
Absolutely. AFL has a major competitive advantage of RL because of the governing structure of the game.
John Ribot had a crack in 1995. His time has been and gone as far as being the visionary for the games goes. However, his views on the exact same problems remain just as valid today as they did back then.
Gallop likes to quote the success stories, of which there are many in recent years, but he fails to acknowledge that they are success stories in spite of the games out-dated corporate governance structure and not because of it.
Clearly another magnificent success story but the game will earn $nil from that success in 2008. The NRL allowed that. Stupidity.
Absolutely.
The problem will rugby league is that it is trying to compete head on with the AFL and it can't. You can't expect to get the same television rights when you only show about four hours a week in two states, compared to 9- 15 hours a week in all states. Furthermore, whenever a goal is kicked in the AFL, you can have an add break. You don't have the same opportunities for ad breaks in rugby league.
As for promotion, you can't expect to have the same funds to play with when your crowds are around 5-10,000 people compared to 30-50,000 for the AFL.
Rugby leagues only real future is largely away from direct competition with the AFL. Instead of trying to be a big player with games out of Homebush stadium, it needs to go back to the suburbs and regional outposts. Its heartlands are places like Gosford, Newcastle, Nth Queensland, Wollongong. It is these smaller cities where the AFL can't put a team that rugby league needs to make their own. Unfortunately, rugby league is focussing on the AFL as the enemy and soccer is slipping under their guard to push into these regional areas.
littleduck
2 Jun 2008, 18:38
The problem will rugby league is that it is trying to compete head on with the AFL and it can't. I dont think either code is doing that at all but the other code is the major competitor in the footballing industry nationally.
You can't expect to get the same television rights when you only show about four hours a week in two states, compared to 9- 15 hours a week in all states. Bollocks.
Furthermore, whenever a goal is kicked in the AFL, you can have an add break. You don't have the same opportunities for ad breaks in rugby league. Bollocks.
As for promotion, you can't expect to have the same funds to play with when your crowds are around 5-10,000 people compared to 30-50,000 for the AFL. Yeah, gate receipts should be double in AFL but bums on seats doesnt affect viewership and television rights.
Rugby leagues only real future is largely away from direct competition with the AFL. Bollocks. That is the silliest suggestion you've ever posted.
Instead of trying to be a big player with games out of Homebush stadium, it needs to go back to the suburbs and regional outposts. Bollocks. The future is not antiquated suburban venues and 10,000 crowds. There is something charming about 17,000 packed to the rafters and hanging off trees at Leichardt, but its not a successful model for the future.
Its heartlands are places like Gosford, Newcastle, Nth Queensland, Wollongong. It is these smaller cities where the AFL can't put a team that rugby league needs to make their own. RL can and does embrace regional teams in NSW and QLD where AFL can only surrender and put up the white flag.
Unfortunately, rugby league is focussing on the AFL as the enemy and soccer is slipping under their guard to push into these regional areas.The reality is that RL has enough internal problems of its own without worrying what other codes are doing. However, what other codes are doing in a strategic often provides the impetus for action.
Eg #1. AFL fast-tracking Gold Coast expansion in response to the Gold Coast Titans
Eg #2. NRL increasing grassroots development funding in response to AFL's successes via Auskick at that level
chinggis77
2 Jun 2008, 18:42
Unfortunately, rugby league is focussing on the AFL as the enemy and soccer is slipping under their guard to push into these regional areas.
Good point. They hardly ever mention the threat from Soccer despite it being the most widely played team sport in the Country.
Some people are arguing that NRL should rationalise grounds and play all games out of the main big stadiums. That would be a disaster IMO. Doesn't make great TV to see 1/4 filled stadiums with zero atmosphere.
littleduck
2 Jun 2008, 18:43
So in short;
-League administrators allowed themselves to be subject to a monumental reaming by Uncle Rupert. You obviously don't understand.
-League clubs got themselves into a position where they were nearly entirely reliant on a revenue stream that's only slightly more socially acceptable than crack dealing. AFL clubs would be $hitting themselves too if the Victorian Govt enacted similar legislation.
-The NRL ____s up a hamfisted attempt to put political pressure on the NSW government what could be considered an eminently resonable attempt to combat problem gambling (or a cash grab, depending on how you see these things). If its so eminently reasonable, why dont you lobby the Victorian Govt to enact the same legislation in your state??? Ay.
-NRL supporters sit back and allow all this to happen without raising as much as a whimper. I wouldnt say that.
Not really registering much on my sympathy meter.To be expected.
littleduck
2 Jun 2008, 18:48
Some people are arguing that NRL should rationalise grounds and play all games out of the main big stadiums. Any Sydney club that desires to grow and prosper in the future should be playing its home games at a world-class venue and not an antiquated suburban park. The problem is that the world-class Olympic Stadium at Homebush is not suited to RL football and the Football Stadium at Moore Park is inaccesible by the fans of most clubs. It's a catch 22 situation. The solution is complex and difficult.
That would be a disaster IMO. It would if those 2 venues were the Football Stadium and the Olympic Stadium.
Doesn't make great TV to see 1/4 filled stadiums with zero atmosphere.True.
typical very good stuff from masters, one of the best sport writers in the country (though even he is paranoid about AFL expansion sometimes)
genghiskhan
2 Jun 2008, 19:01
I dont think either code is doing that at all but the other code is the major competitor in the footballing industry nationally.
Bollocks.
Bollocks.
Yeah, gate receipts should be double in AFL but bums on seats doesnt affect viewership and television rights.
Bollocks. That is the silliest suggestion you've ever posted.
Bollocks. The future is not antiquated suburban venues and 10,000 crowds. There is something charming about 17,000 packed to the rafters and hanging off trees at Leichardt, but its not a successful model for the future.
RL can and does embrace regional teams in NSW and QLD where AFL can only surrender and put up the white flag.
The reality is that RL has enough internal problems of its own without worrying what other codes are doing. However, what other codes are doing in a strategic often provides the impetus for action.
Eg #1. AFL fast-tracking Gold Coast expansion in response to the Gold Coast Titans
Eg #2. NRL increasing grassroots development funding in response to AFL's successes via Auskick at that level
Bullocks, bullocks, bullocks. No matter how many times you say it, it is never a substitute for a reasoned argument. In any case, saying bullocks to some of those points is just plainly stupid. For example, the lack of add breaks in rugby league. Why do you think Gridiron introduced the time out? Is it "bullocks" that they wanted an add break to increase the value of television rights? Why does rugby league show games on delayed telecast? Is it bullocks that people prefer to watch games live?
Bullocks to you sir, I feel your retorts are somewhat lacking!
Freo Big Fella
2 Jun 2008, 19:11
AFL clubs would be $hitting themselves too if the Victorian Govt enacted similar legislation.
The Cats aside, there don't seem to be as many AFL clubs that are as publicly reliant on Pokie revenue as the average NRL side. It's hard to compare a couple of dozen machines at a Windy Hill Social Club to the massive Quasi-Casino that is the average Leagues Club.
If its so eminently reasonable, why dont you lobby the Victorian Govt to enact the same legislation in your state??? Ay.
I live in WA you hayseed. You know, the only state to still maintain an outright Pokie ban outside of the central casino, whose sporting teams derive precisely zero revenue from the dreaded pub-killers?
So in short;
-League administrators allowed themselves to be subject to a monumental reaming by Uncle Rupert.
-League clubs got themselves into a position where they were nearly entirely reliant on a revenue stream that's only slightly more socially acceptable than crack dealing.
-The NRL ____s up a hamfisted attempt to put political pressure on the NSW government what could be considered an eminently resonable attempt to combat problem gambling (or a cash grab, depending on how you see these things).
-NRL supporters sit back and allow all this to happen without raising as much as a whimper.
Not really registering much on my sympathy meter.
We have the official list of NRL excuses for low crowds .
Should we have the official list of NRL excuses why rl is dying .
;)
Sebastian Balboa
2 Jun 2008, 19:44
We have the official list of NRL excuses for low crowds .
Should we have the official list of NRL excuses why rl is dying .
;)
Go on, add it :thumbsu:
littleduck
2 Jun 2008, 20:06
The Cats aside, there don't seem to be as many AFL clubs that are as publicly reliant on Pokie revenue as the average NRL side. It's hard to compare a couple of dozen machines at a Windy Hill Social Club to the massive Quasi-Casino that is the average Leagues Club. True.
I live in WA you hayseed. You know, the only state to still maintain an outright Pokie ban outside of the central casino, whose sporting teams derive precisely zero revenue from the dreaded pub-killers?Fair enough.
Should we have the official list of NRL excuses why rl is dying
Go on, add it :thumbsu:
The NRL has their own list on why the code is dying?
I'd like to see it too.
littleduck
2 Jun 2008, 20:13
Bullocks, bullocks, bullocks. No matter how many times you say it, it is never a substitute for a reasoned argument. In any case, saying bullocks to some of those points is just plainly stupid. For example, the lack of add breaks in rugby league. Why do you think Gridiron introduced the time out? Is it "bullocks" that they wanted an add break to increase the value of television rights? Why does rugby league show games on delayed telecast? Is it bullocks that people prefer to watch games live?
Bullocks to you sir, I feel your retorts are somewhat lacking!Broadcasters getting full value for their $dollar is not solely related to the number of breaks for ads, which you are saying occurs more frequently in AFL due to the greater number of goals kicked as opposed to tries scored. Advertising also occurs, for example, on screen during generally play as well as verbally by commentators.
I dont know about you but if I see, for example, VB or XXXXGold or BundyRum plastered all over the screen or spewed forth from the lips of commentators for a 2-hour telecast of RL and then a 3-hour telecast of AFL I don't think the AFL sponsorship costs more than the RL sponsorship. There are only so many major sponsors per telecast.
genghiskhan
2 Jun 2008, 20:28
Broadcasters getting full value for their $dollar is not solely related to the number of breaks for ads, which you are saying occurs more frequently in AFL due to the greater number of goals kicked as opposed to tries scored. Advertising also occurs, for example, on screen during generally play as well as verbally by commentators.
I dont know about you but if I see, for example, VB or XXXXGold or BundyRum plastered all over the screen or spewed forth from the lips of commentators for a 2-hour telecast of RL and then a 3-hour telecast of AFL I don't think the AFL sponsorship costs more than the RL sponsorship. There are only so many major sponsors per telecast.
You can always pitch that idea to potential advertisers if you like. They can pay for a 30-second ad break in an AFL broadcast in which there ad will be the sole thing on TV, or they can have their logo floating underneath during the play when viewers are concentrating on other things. If you offer them the same price for each, I would guess most would choose the 30-second ad break.
It may be painful for NRL fans to admit, but am NRL game that rates equal to AFL, is worth much less to broadcasters than the AFL game.
It may be painful for NRL fans to admit, but am NRL game that rates equal to AFL, is worth much less to broadcasters than the AFL game.
and not just because of the higher rate of advertisments, but also because an AFL telecast is an hour longer than an NRL game
The problem will rugby league is that it is trying to compete head on with the AFL and it can't. You can't expect to get the same television rights when you only show about four hours a week in two states, compared to 9- 15 hours a week in all states. Furthermore, whenever a goal is kicked in the AFL, you can have an add break. You don't have the same opportunities for ad breaks in rugby league.
As for promotion, you can't expect to have the same funds to play with when your crowds are around 5-10,000 people compared to 30-50,000 for the AFL.
Rugby leagues only real future is largely away from direct competition with the AFL. Instead of trying to be a big player with games out of Homebush stadium, it needs to go back to the suburbs and regional outposts. Its heartlands are places like Gosford, Newcastle, Nth Queensland, Wollongong. It is these smaller cities where the AFL can't put a team that rugby league needs to make their own. Unfortunately, rugby league is focussing on the AFL as the enemy and soccer is slipping under their guard to push into these regional areas.
You sir are 100% spot on in this argument.:thumbsu:
AFL is one of the only sports in the world which can have 6 add breaks (on average) per half hour (during the game) as well as the longer add breaks during the quarter time/half time. This is OUTSTANDING revenue for advertisers, particulary with the growth of the internet as an intertainment medium which is really changing tv viewing habits, although sport on TV being something which people still watch, and will still watch in the future. The more advertisements the better.
Keep in mind that large crowds looks better on tv.
I completely agree that Soccer is more of a threat to Rugby, they use the same sized grounds and rumour mill is that 9 is looking at snapping up the soccer rights post 2010-11 for free to air. luckily for nrl however, soccer is played over summer in australia (for now).
NRL should not tackle/attack/feel threatened by the AFL. They need to try to market the NRL with its strengths and try to keep their teams if possible. The product they are offering is at threat, the money counters and marketing types will weigh up soccer vs nrl and soccer might have more importance in the future. eg, nrl, no add breaks (accept at pre game and half time), played in qld and nsw, has state of origin vs soccer, no add breaks (accept at pre game and half time), played all over aust & nz. sport played around the world, includes asian champions league, etc
I suggest the next set of tv rights for afl will be close to 1 billion and soccer to be a threat to the afl in some form within 15-20 years.
I have no idea what the NRL rights will be, nor soccer rights for the next round of bidding.
Just my 2 cents.
Let's face it, NRL in Sydney is stuffed. Too many clubs, not enough fans or $$$, poor stadium set ups - either too big or too small / old.
IMO, they should build on their strengths and forget expansion. Consolidate the sport's dominance in NSW & QLD and build up NZ & Melbourne. Hope that Sharks or Souths move to Gosford.
E.g. Souths V Perth at ANZ will be a disaster. Other than a possible rare Souths win, crowds of 5K cannot be good for the game.
ChrisFooty
3 Jun 2008, 03:20
rugby league will always have a foothold in this country. How strong it will be in 10-20 years time is unknown. Really depends how true all this media coverage actually is. Will there be any mergers? I would not support my AFL club if it merged or relocated into something different. I wonder how sydney rugby league fans feel the same way?
littleduck
3 Jun 2008, 09:49
You can always pitch that idea to potential advertisers if you like. They can pay for a 30-second ad break in an AFL broadcast in which there ad will be the sole thing on TV, or they can have their logo floating underneath during the play when viewers are concentrating on other things. If you offer them the same price for each, I would guess most would choose the 30-second ad break.
It may be painful for NRL fans to admit, but am NRL game that rates equal to AFL, is worth much less to broadcasters than the AFL game.
Lets consider an example then.
So the sponsorship revenue for the broadcaster of RL State of Origin makes about the same as the broadcaster of the Anzac Day AFL game with an official audience of about half the Origin because they can show twice as many ads????????
A Living God
3 Jun 2008, 11:05
Lets consider an example then.
So the sponsorship revenue for the broadcaster of RL State of Origin makes about the same as the broadcaster of the Anzac Day AFL game with an official audience of about half the Origin because they can show twice as many ads????????
The maths is pretty simple
NRL 20 minutes of adds @ $20,000 per 30 seconds = $800,000
AFL 40 minutes of adds @ $10,000 per 30 seconds = $800,000
So the sponsorship revenue for the broadcaster of RL State of Origin makes about the same as the broadcaster of the Anzac Day AFL game with an official audience of about half the Origin because they can show twice as many ads
Possibily . You seem surprised at the mathmatics !
.
A Living God
3 Jun 2008, 11:44
In 2007 the 9 Sydney based NRL teams drew a total home crowd of 23,395 (increase of 1.7%) more than by the 12 Sydney based NSWRL in 1987. By comparison the 10 Melbourne (including Geelong) based AFL teams drew a total home crowd of 1,763,302 (increase of 74.3%) more than 11 Melbourne based VFL teams in 1987.
Virtual no growth in attendance for professional RL in Sydney over two decades would have to little bit of a concern regarding the health of RL.
Beaussie
3 Jun 2008, 12:18
Virtual no growth in attendance for professional RL in Sydney over two decades would have to little bit of a concern regarding the health of RL.
Stagnate crowds was an issue pointed out by the recenct 60 Minutes story on the two football codes. Lack of growth in crowds and declining TV ratings in NSW and QLD, along with increases in pokie taxes and changes to smoking laws are alarming for the NRL one would think.
I'd like to see it too.
Official Rl is dying excuses .
In order to save the game, the NRL had to kill off Newtown Jets, Sth Qld Crushers, GC Chargers, Hunter Mariners, North Sydney Bears, Balmain, Sth Sydney , Adelaide Rams, and the Western Reds.
The re-instated Rabbitohs sit on one win and losses of $4 million, the South Sydney saviours themselves are looking a little battle-worn.
The Sydney media bagged Holmes a Court, and Crowe, running the club: Armani suits, expensive pre season jaunts to the USA and so on.
Last week Holmes a Court could not guarantee its survival. Now , George Piggins, has offered to buy the club back from Crowe and Holmes a Court and relocate it to Gosford, and pick up a $8 million grant the NRL
The AFL offers North Melbourne $100 million to relocate to the Gold Coast, while we offer the Rabbitohs $8m to move to Gosford.
Currently five NRL clubs host home games at ANZ Stadium and benefit from a $100,000 a game guarantee, regardless of crowd size,
Sydney NRL clubs would be on the ropes if the extraordinarily generous deal the owners of Sydney’s ANZ Stadium offer was withdrawn
The AFL would be able to put even greater pressure on struggling NRL clubs by ending the lucrative deal the current owners offer.
Five of the nine Sydney NRL clubs are in a desperate financial situation, thanks to their leagues clubs slashing grants to the football clubs.
Crowds at ANZ Stadium are poor generally poor, and look even worse in a facility that can seat over 80,000. .
NRL chief executive David Gallop predicted a Sydney club could die as a result of the increased tax on poker machine revenue
Its clearly a planned media stunt to pressure the NSW Treasurer that has back-fired as people whiff negativity about the games future.
Ribot, inaugural boss of the Broncos and founder of the Storm - Always a believer that Sydney had too many clubs
and tthat he AFL and cricket are now the strongest sports in Australia and are in all the major stadiums. .
He is fascinated by Parramatta boss Denis Fitzgerald's solution to falling revenue - cut the salary cap.
In essence NRL in Sydney is stuffed.
Too many clubs, not enough fans , not enough revenue and poor stadium set ups .
The credibility of the NRL that claim Sydney crowd numbers are up is not helped by reports that of the 67,000 crowd
at the State of Origin game at ANZ last week, around 20,000 were freebies.
The credibility of the NRL is not helped by our players antics
The credibility of the NRL is not helped by our greatest modern day player played on drugs
The credibility of the NRL is not helped by our greatest ever player was an Aussie Rules player.
The credibility of the NRL is not helped by supporters saying "FREE TICKETS are a GOOD thing people"
The problem will rugby league is that it is trying to compete head on with the AFL and it can't. You can't expect to get the same television rights when you only show about four hours a week in two states, compared to 9- 15 hours a week in all states
with less add breaks and game that is 1/3 shorter .
.
As for promotion, you can't expect to have the same funds to play with when your crowds are around 5-10,000 people
compared to 30-50,000 for the AFL.
:thumbsu:
cheers .
genghiskhan
3 Jun 2008, 13:16
Let's face it, NRL in Sydney is stuffed. Too many clubs, not enough fans or $$$, poor stadium set ups - either too big or too small / old.
IMO, they should build on their strengths and forget expansion. Consolidate the sport's dominance in NSW & QLD and build up NZ & Melbourne. Hope that Sharks or Souths move to Gosford.
E.g. Souths V Perth at ANZ will be a disaster. Other than a possible rare Souths win, crowds of 5K cannot be good for the game.
The NRL in Australia is actually very strong, provided you don't assess strength via comparison to the AFL. Against the AFL, the NRL is just hopelessly outgunned.
The problem with the NRL is that they don't accept the situation. The AFL plays in an front in a huge stadium in Melbourne, so the NRL must do the same in Sydney and so off they go to Homebush and get crowds of 5,000 people in an 80,000 stadium. AFL players get $500,000-1,000,000 so the NRL feels their players must get the same. In the process, they sell their soul and bankrupt themselves.
It had the same mentality when rugby union started rising up. Union had a strong international presence, so the ARL decided it needed a strong international presence. This eventually led to the Super League concept of global domination, over expansion and collapse.
While it is brave and courageous in one sense, it is also plainly stupid. It is like a 70kg pee wee trying to be a prop forward. Indeed it is brave to take the opposition head on, but you have to know your limitations and play within them.
The problem with the NRL is that they don't accept the situation. .
That is probably the critical point .
.
Official Rl is dying excuses .
Nope.
I want a direct link to a web page with all the NRL official excuses as to why Rugby league is dying and not some more of your made up dribble.
TIA.
I want a direct link to a web page with all the NRL official excuses as to why Rugby league is dying and not some more of your made up dribble.
Well these are quotations taken mainly from two only articles
recently posted on BF and edited for brevity .
One of thos posters supplying the post is ld .
See start of thread .
I suggest you contact ld .
.
Well these are quotations taken mainly from two only articles
recently posted on BF and edited for brevity .
One of thos posters supplying the post is ld .
See start of thread .
I suggest you contact ld .
.
"You" claimed the NRL had an official list of reasons why "Rugby league" is "dying" if you can't provide the link to this, then just say so.
TIA, again.
"You" claimed the NRL had an official list of reasons why "Rugby league" is "dying" if you can't provide the link to this, then just say so.
Please quote where I said that , because I don't believe I did .
.
genghiskhan
3 Jun 2008, 18:49
Nope.
I want a direct link to a web page with all the NRL official excuses as to why Rugby league is dying and not some more of your made up dribble.
TIA.
Plenty of newspapers are giving explanations. John Singleton is putting some blame on Homebush. Unlike littleduck, he isn't saying fans are too far from the action. He just says its too big and doesn't feel good.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,23754642-23214,00.html
Advertising guru John Singleton believes some of league's problems stem from unsuitable venues such as the massive 90,000-seat ANZ Stadium at Homebush.
"The best thing Osama bin Laden could do to get rugby league fans on side in Australia is blow up Homebush Stadium," Singleton said.
"That's the greatest blight on sport. The clubs get a handout to play there. Nobody watches on TV because it looks like nobody is there. It's a blight on TV ratings. The players hate it. I hate it. You hate it."
catters05
3 Jun 2008, 18:54
Plenty of newspapers are giving explanations. John Singleton is putting some blame on Homebush. Unlike littleduck, he isn't saying fans are too far from the action. He just says its too big and doesn't feel good.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,23754642-23214,00.html
Advertising guru John Singleton believes some of league's problems stem from unsuitable venues such as the massive 90,000-seat ANZ Stadium at Homebush.
"The best thing Osama bin Laden could do to get rugby league fans on side in Australia is blow up Homebush Stadium," Singleton said.
"That's the greatest blight on sport. The clubs get a handout to play there. Nobody watches on TV because it looks like nobody is there. It's a blight on TV ratings. The players hate it. I hate it. You hate it."
Is a bit of a silly way of putting it in the news IMO.
But in saying that the NRL will find it very hard to fill a big stadium in Sydney, they rarely could fill up Sydney Football Stadium, so not sure how they were going to do it with ANZ.
ANZ should be a DoubleHeader Saturday or Sunday deal. Sign up with Foxtel as a sponsor who maybe can offer tickets for people who sign up to Foxtel (I dont know) just something to try get big crowds there.
I am sure the players would love it if they could at least half fill the stadium.
catters05
3 Jun 2008, 18:55
But this guy also wants his own Central Coast club, so I think the Sydney Clubs need to get together to decide what they want to do and how they can help each other.
ParraEelsNRL
3 Jun 2008, 19:05
Someone should tell him the ratings are up even though as he put it, they are down, what a dikchead, he's only after his own team, he can get bent, look what happened to the Jets when he had them, where are they now singo?
He is like that guy who use to run carlton, do any sports need rich people like that in their game?
And the stadium is the problem, not that it's 82,500, it's because it's an oval.
genghiskhan
3 Jun 2008, 19:10
But this guy also wants his own Central Coast club, so I think the Sydney Clubs need to get together to decide what they want to do and how they can help each other.
He has the lease on the Gosford stadium and naturally wants a club there. Despite the obvious conflict of interest, I still agree with what he says. These big, new and modern stadiums just aren't the go for a code that people like to support via their televisions.
I know double headers have worked in the past, but I don't think they are the way to go. Do you really want to watch two other teams you don't care about? Perhaps, but how much noise would you make?
Bonuspoints
3 Jun 2008, 19:32
IMO RL struggles come from the top level not making the most of its grass roots level. They've got the interest at the grass roots level there is no doubt about that, but they don't know how to convert them into club active fans. I say active because active fans go to games, buy merchandise, etc. I think they're onto it now with clubs becoming more active in their communities, but that connection isn't as strong as what it was 10 years ago. I must say that I have no factual evidence and I'm going off the Dennis Denuto here (the vibe). I've got a mate that works for the QRL and a couple of others involved in primary school sports and they're telling me that at a junior grass roots level things aren't the same.
One thing I think hurts is that they're pricing their fans out of the games. The tickets and merchandise is getting way too expensive for working class families and its happening in the AFL too. Its going to get harder too as living expenses are going up which eats away at our fun money to spend on things like sports. When a jersey costs $100+, tickets for games are $38, etc it makes it hard to be an active fan when you've got a blue collar job, kids, mortgage, etc.
Please quote where I said that , because I don't believe I did .
.
Should we have the official list of NRL excuses why rl is dying
I can't find them anywhere.
Plenty of newspapers are giving explanations. John Singleton is putting some blame on Homebush. Unlike littleduck, he isn't saying fans are too far from the action. He just says its too big and doesn't feel good.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,23754642-23214,00.html
Advertising guru John Singleton believes some of league's problems stem from unsuitable venues such as the massive 90,000-seat ANZ Stadium at Homebush.
"The best thing Osama bin Laden could do to get rugby league fans on side in Australia is blow up Homebush Stadium," Singleton said.
"That's the greatest blight on sport. The clubs get a handout to play there. Nobody watches on TV because it looks like nobody is there. It's a blight on TV ratings. The players hate it. I hate it. You hate it."
Allegedly Rugby league is dying, but I still don't see it.
genghiskhan
3 Jun 2008, 19:51
Allegedly Rugby league is dying, but I still don't see it.
It is not dying, but its economic power relative to the AFL is diminishing year by year. Clubs in Sydney are also going broke.
From what I see, the NRL is not managing this situation very well and most rugby league fans are not handling it very well either.
ParraEelsNRL
3 Jun 2008, 19:57
Well we do have the biggest sports club in the country.
Well we do have the biggest sports club in the country.
Just because people refer to 'playing' the pokies doesn't make it a sport.
In 2007 the 9 Sydney based NRL teams drew a total home crowd of 23,395 (increase of 1.7%) more than by the 12 Sydney based NSWRL in 1987. By comparison the 10 Melbourne (including Geelong) based AFL teams drew a total home crowd of 1,763,302 (increase of 74.3%) more than 11 Melbourne based VFL teams in 1987.
Virtual no growth in attendance for professional RL in Sydney over two decades would have to little bit of a concern regarding the health of RL.
Thats the guts of it and the smarter heads like Gallop at the NRL know it.
Also the brutal thuggish nature of the game and many potential supporters esp women that are turned off by it.
It is not dying
Thank you. Some sense at last.
ParraEelsNRL
4 Jun 2008, 04:14
Just because people refer to 'playing' the pokies doesn't make it a sport.
The Broncos - according to independent analysis conducted by the Business Review Weekly are the most powerful sporting brand in Australia, brand strategy company FutureBrand ranked NRL and AFL teams on total revenue, crowds, numbers of star players, television ratings and regular season appearances on free-to-air TV, as well as on-field success, to ascertain their 'powerful brand' rankings.
http://www.broncos.com.au/index.php?page_id=3427
littleduck
4 Jun 2008, 10:09
It is not dying, but its economic power relative to the AFL is diminishing year by year. Good point, but isn't that because while NRL is growing all of its key performance indicators, AFL has been in the fortunate position to grow bigger at a faster rate than RL in the post-Super League era of the last 10-years?
Clubs in Sydney are also going broke. Yes they are struggling, but the hysterical media is merely the outcome of a deliberate RL media campaign to pressure the NSW Treasurer into reconsidering its pokies tax policy.
RL can withstand such campaigns because the game has always been built around controversy. It's probably the only brand of football in Australia that can carve itself up and yet still prosper.
From what I see, the NRL is not managing this situation very well and most rugby league fans are not handling it very well either.The NRL is the manager of the elite competition only. There is no single RL body that governs the whole game. This is the reason why the game has never had clear direction from the top down. It's governed from the bottom up. A clear competitive disadvantage over the independent AFL commission that governs the whole game.
The Broncos - according to independent analysis conducted by the Business Review Weekly are the most powerful sporting brand in Australia, brand strategy company FutureBrand ranked NRL and AFL teams on total revenue, crowds, numbers of star players, television ratings and regular season appearances on free-to-air TV, as well as on-field success, to ascertain their 'powerful brand' rankings.
http://www.broncos.com.au/index.php?page_id=3427
'Broncos are best' says Broncos media release.
Amazing how the market only values them at $26 million then.
West Coast alone made nearly 1/3rd of that last year purely in profit.
'Broncos are best' says Broncos media release.
Amazing how the market only values them at $26 million then.
West Coast alone made nearly 1/3rd of that last year purely in profit.
From the website:
"Out & About Marketing and Media is the official signage partner of the WOW Brisbane Broncos."
ParraEelsNRL
4 Jun 2008, 15:51
Only club in the country on the ASX.
Only club in the country on the ASX.
I hear a whisper that the AFL are going to buy a controlling interest .
And completely decimate QLD rl in one simple step .
Heck $13 million to wipeout rl in Brisbane - priceless .
:p
:D
:thumbsu: