How to Avoid Super League War 2

By Daniel Andruczyk

So has someone spiked the water in Australia or something? So first we get a leadership spill in the Australian government and then Stephen Humphrey’s comes up with what has to be one of the most bizarre and what I fee absurd proposed changes to Rugby League, I have ever read. Yes you read right the proposed changes to the NRL that the Wests Tigers boss want to introduce are a farce. They could lead to a new Super League War even. Let me try and show you how and why. This may be a long posts so bare with me please.

The proposal

The proposed changes that Humphrey’s wants to bring in are meant to increase revenue to clubs  and players while reducing player burnout. But what does it really do? Lets have a look at what the proposal actually says:

  • 30 weeks of premiership rounds instead of 26 to allow a fairer draw in which clubs play every team twice
  • The season to kick off in mid-February and finish in the second week of October
  • Matches reduced from 80 minutes to 60 minutes to prevent player burnout and make it easier on players in February and March
  • An alternative plan for 80-minute games, split into 20-minute quarters
  • Coaches told to use players for no more than 25 of the 30 rounds
  • Expanding 25-man NRL squads to 32 players.

Humphrey’s claims to have consulted 8 players in the Wests team but does not say what their reaction was. But from the little information that has been leaked we can start to dissect a few numbers about what it all means. So lets have a go

Lets Break it down

I will try and keep these in some order, but there may be some ideas that pop in and out here and there. So first order of business. The burnout issue. Humphrey’s claims that there will be less player burnout with matches at 60 mins long and 30 weeks. Well lets do the math. If we include 4 weeks of play offs, players will have all up 34 weeks of matches. So 60 minutes by 34 rounds gives you 2040  minutes of Rugby League. Compare that to what we have now which is 80 minutes at 30 weeks including play offs and that gives you 2400 minutes. The difference of these is 360 minutes which is only 6 hours… yes folks only one nights sleep less. Not really the grand reduction in player burnout is it. If we are talking 6 days then I would be more impressed, but we are not, its only a nights sleep if that for professional players.

Going to 60 minutes would also take the gladiatorial contest out of the sport. Players will become more and more uniform in their build and the way they play. Players will either become smaller and faster of bigger and stronger. One of the great attractions of the sport is that at different times of the match different players start to come in their own. The back 20 mins are always great because you start to see the smaller players take on the tiring forwards, where as the front 20 is always dominated by the gig forward packs colliding. People pay their money to see that, If I wanted to see a rolly polly contest of players just fluffing around then I would go and watch a game of Rugby Union… in essence that is what will happen with the sport… you wont be able to compared players and teams of times gone by either since in essence they are playing different sports. Also consider this, you now are seeing 20 minutes less of Rugby League, that is a 25% cut, will the stadium entrance fees also go down by 25%? I bet they wont, if anything they will get hiked up, so the fan will get a raw deal too. Not sure about you, but having to pay $30 to watch the NRL now can be a bit stiff sometimes and I certainly will not be willing to pay $30 for 25% less of a game.

If I want to see a 80 minute game with quarters then I will watch American Football, in essence that is what will happen. So 80 minute games going to 30 rounds, how does that reduce player burnout? what you have 10 mins break in between and 20 minutes at half time, so 1/3 of the time at the stadium is spent twiddling your thumbs? Fans are there to watch a game not have to sit through and get bombarded by adds, sure advertisers are salivating at that prospect, but very soon I reckon fans will be staying away and it will negate anything positive that may come from it. Silly.

There actually is no real need to have teams play each other twice… I don’t know where this notion that it makes it fairer comes from. Wasn’t the whole point of the Salary Cap meant to make things fairer? If not then why have a cap? But seriously in a 16 team competition, if after 26 rounds you cannot have the top 8 sorted out then you have a pretty bad competition, hell you should be able to figure it out by 20 rounds! That would makes so much more sense if you want to decrease player burnout.

Keeping with the 30 week theme, the season would go from mid February to mid October. Bloody hell if anything this just makes a mockery of the sport around the world and domestically. So here are some fundamental questions to be asked. What happens to the 4 weeks of pre season matches? What about the World Cup Challenge, when does that get played. Certainly not in January or early February when Europe is in the middle of their winter, wasn’t the point of the ESL going to Summer Rugby that games don’t get played in winter? Think about this as well, from mid October to mid February, there is roughly 16 weeks. Now once the NRL finishes, you need 6 weeks at least (I’d prefer 8 weeks myself) for the international season, with the 4 weeks of pre season matches that only leaves 6 weeks on the off season, which is about what the players get now. So what’s the point of all this if in effect nothing changes.

The expansion of the player roster from 25 players to 32 players makes no sense. I actually do not see at all what end game on this is. We talk about players not getting enough, this will only dilute things even more. Currently the salary cap stands at $4.1 million this on average translates to $164,000 for a 25 man squad. If this level is kept and the teams expanded to 32 players then the average salary goes down to $128,125. Even with the proposed salary cap increases with an extra $300,000 for marquee players and an extra $1000,000 on top of the existing cp, this only increases it to $4.5 million. Again over 32 players the average salary only increases to $140,625, still below where the current average is. So players in fact will be getting a dud deal on this. To keep the current average salary of $164,000 at the 32 player roster the Salary Cap needs to increase to $5.25 million. Can you see that happening? I cannot.

Players will not play more than 25 round in the 30 rounds, I actually almost crapped my pants laughing. So players that play in effect 24 rounds (remember there are 2 byes for teams) will now play 25 rounds… one extra. What the hell. Actually there is no mention of State of Origin and how that would fit into all this, as that is probably the big issue for players. What’s also to stop a team from effectively “throwing” the first 5 rounds in the season with all the fringe players and not the super stars and then stacking the next 25 with the best players.

Implications

There are some drastic implications that can come out of this for the game in general around the world. The international game would be affected quite dramatically, with the season in essence being extended, that is 30 rounds of NRL, 4 rounds of play offs and 4 weeks of pre-season games, that leaves only 14 weeks of the year left… take another 6 weeks for Internationals and travel, that leaves 8 weeks for the off-season. Pre season training you need to get started at least a month before the pre-season games, so there is 4-5 weeks gone. Thus players will get only 3-4 weeks off to do their own thing?! NOW please someone tell me how is this getting rid of player burn out. That is a bigger schedule than what it is now!

Clubs because of this schedule will be less willing to release players on international rep duty because the potential injury recovery period will be so much less now. On average at the moment clubs have an extra 4 weeks for player recovery and down time.

The idea of expansion will be killed off once and for all, how do you have a 18 team competition in 30 rounds, teams play each other once, it can’t be done unless you go to a 34 round competition? Which once again increases the number of games, player burnout etc… less time for internationals so you can see where that is going yes? It will become a purely Australian sport and no one else in the world will play it. The new AFL.

But how does this effect the rest of the world? Aside from the fact that the internationals may be affected with player eligibility will all other nations be forced to take on these measures? Or will the RLIF in all their wisdom deem, just like with 2 refs and corner posts and other things, that this only applies to the NRL and Australia? Those of you who have followed me over the years on various media know that I have warned that the NRL within the next 5-10 years is in danger of becoming not Rugby League but an entirely whole new sport, and this certainly is bringing in enough whole sale changes that its could be the start of the revolution. We may soon have Australian Rugby Rules. What will be next, padding, helmets? There already is a sport like that.

What will happen to the rest of the world? Nations are taking up the sport precisely because of the way it is now, with the gladiatorial aspect it brings, will they follow suit? Or will in essence the sport split. Imagine this scenario. The NRL gets its independent commission and brings in these changes. News Limited now free of these shackles and knowing how well RUGBY LEAGUE sells goes ahead and sets up its own TRADITIONAL competition based on the Nth Sydney Bears, Newtown Jets, Ipswich, Wynnum and Brothers, Brings back the Mariners, and Chargers, Adelaide and Perth, a northern Territory team and the team out of Central Queensland. News can have complete control for his satellite and pay TV networks, so these games will be broadcast all over the world, since  News have such a large control in the USA and Europe. The NRL wont be able to do a thing since they have a different game now. More player defections will happen to the traditional code and Union. A new SUPER LEAGUE WAR will break out, but the lines will be skewed now, where do the traditionalists go, with the new NRL or the traditional game on offer by NEWS now? This will be Rugby League Afghanistan in some ways. England and Europe and the AMNRL not wanting to have to switch to a new sport and knowing News has the global exposure will sign on as well. Since there are only 24 weeks in the domestic season now there is much more room for a proper International competition, one that will rival Union in some sense, a full time RLIF may be set up with World Cups being stated in the USA and Russia, gaining the money there. Seeing that the game is international now it will start to get much greater international exposure…

… you know what that actually sounds pretty good, come to think of it. I think my point is made, that the proposed changes can do much more harm than good for the sport in general.

Solutions

Solutions solutions solutions? OK the premise of this whole thing is to generate more revenue and to give players more recovery time not to burn out. So lets try and tackle one thing at a time.

As I mentioned previously there is actually no real reason why you need to have everyone playing each other twice in a season. If you can’t figure out by about 20 rounds who the best 8 teams are then you have a real problem on your hands. So my proposal is this. Lets expand the NRL from 16 to 20 teams. The 4 extra team would be Perth, Adelaide, NSW Central Coast and Central Queensland. This at least brings in the whole nation into the sport. Each team plays each other once and then there is an extra round for Derbys/heritage round, this provides 20 regular rounds. Then have a usual 4 weeks of play offs. So 24 weeks right there.

Rather than the usual pre season friendlies, lets have a pre-season knock out competition that lasts 6 rounds. All up you would have 64 teams start. The 20 NRL teams and a range of the top CRL teams, 2nd division teams and the champions from Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia, Northern Territory and Tasmania as well as PNG and New Zealand. These matches would be played through out the country, with games drawn randomly just like in the Challenge Cup in the UK.

So right there there is 30 weeks of domestic matches, high quality domestic matches. Then at the back end of this we have the origin matches which lead into a 6 week international competition. So lets recap here:

  • Currently: 4 weeks pre season games + 26 weeks (with origin etc…) NRL + 4 weeks Play-offs = 34 weeks
  • Humphrey’s proposed: 4 weeks pre season + 30 weeks NRL + 4 weeks play offs+ 4 weeks origin = 42 weeks  <—- Look at that right there!
  • My Proposed: 6 weeks knock out comp + 20 weeks NRL + 4 weeks play offs + 4 weeks origin= 34 weeks

So in essence I am not changing anything in terms of the current amount of weeks, which seems to be agreed is about the limit of things? Yes The knock out comp if anything can be scaled back by a week or two if players want more time so there is flexibility in that. But most importantly there is still room for at least 6 weeks of internationals and that leaves 10 weeks for a proper off-season.

In terms of revenue, there are now 4 big Rugby League competitions for TV stations to be fighting over. The pre season competition which is national, The NRL proper which is National, State of Origin and Internationals… so this would increase revenue by at least double what it is now. With an independent commission the NRL clubs would be the ones that get the revenue essentially and so the Cap could be raised to say $5 million or $5.5 Million, good for players yes, keeps them in. With the game being truly national now with all the major states represented it should be a much better sell to the advertisers and stations to pick it up and show it live around the country and world. Get telecasts of over seas games in as well, super league, Challenge Cup, show them in times that people can watch, let them join the fight for the rights. There is so much that can be done to maximise profits. After all that is the end game here yes?

Player rosters would stay as they are, 25 per team but with 4 new teams it allows the 100 or so players overseas to come back, or even start recruiting mote players from Overseas. Why not have a Remi Casty from France play here or a Soni Radovanovic? They would be fantastic and start to give the sport that international credibility that it deserves.

With the International game starting to get more revenue as well, since it would negotiate TV rights independently, they can finally start to get a full time board in, fund the New World Nations better, get a global structure that makes sense and give the Rugby League World Cup the credibility it so richly deserves finally.

Summary

So to summarise, the proposed changes to the NRL from Stephen Humphrey’s will only serve to reduce the quality of the game not only in Australia but Internationally, any new money that comes in will not be seen by the players, in fact any they essentially will be getting pay cuts, even with the extra $400,000 in Salary Cap increases that have been supported recently. Some players will end up playing more Rugby League than they currently do… not less as is stated. Any new profits that come from selling the rights to the game will go into the pockets of the Clubs and CEO’s since it can’t be spent on the players.

If we want radical changes to the game, lets do radical changes from the bottom up. Lets look at other nations and structures on how they run their sport. The UK being the most obvious. Lets have the faith in our sport, and I mean that, OUR sport, to be sell itself as the product it is. Lets make sure that everyone can see it live and compete on the TV. That is the only way to convince the advertisers and TV stations that it is worth investing in, not when you cut your won leg off.

Following Humphrey’s proposal will do more damage to the sport nationally and internationally than good and eventually will lead to a new type of sport being produced similar to the NFL and a second Super League War 2 will erupt.

Daniel Andruczyk’s email: daniel@rugbyleagueinternationalscores.com
banner ad

29 Responses to “How to Avoid Super League War 2”

  1. Anthony says:

    Agree with what you’ve put Dan. I think the Origin series should be played on a stand alone weekend for rep football so it could be arranged for NZ and the like to play test football while Australia is in the middle of that.

    • druzik says:

      Yes, people complain that SoO is diluting the NRL competition, and it probably is, then lets get SoO as a stand alone and that allows other nations to do internationals or their own rep games etc as well.

      You can even break up the season by having 10 weeks NRL, then 4 weeks of Origins, and then the next 10 weeks of NRL. There is flexibility there.

      Personally I would prefer to have Origin at the end of the NRL season It just makes sense…. actually I just realised that I never talked about the start and end of the season…may need to add an extra bit in.

  2. Juro says:

    What happens if the game is only 60 minutes instead of 80? Players will hit harder because they don’t need to conserve their energy for as long.

    So players will get more injuries.

    So players will need more recovery time.

    So we’ll need more players.

    So on and so on…

    So stupid!

  3. Ashley says:

    If they do go through with the 60 minute game and contradictory long season then I guess I would just ditch the NRL and stick to SL and Elite league.

    The only one I would consider is the 4 quarters but with a 2-3 minute break only for some adverts.

    There must be some people within the NRL who are off in a little world of their own.

    How do I go about getting a job in any of the governing bodies????? I’m starting to think I could do a better job. Yes, league is a revolutionary sport in most areas but things need to settle down, the game doesn’t need new changes every other day.

    • druzik says:

      Yes… I dont think I was to see a 60 min Rugby League… If I wan’t to see a shorter version of Rugby League i’d go watch 9s!

      Super League and Elite and the AMNRL will be what I follow as well.

      The Yanks play in 20 min quarters… so it would be wise to consult them about it.

      Haha… yes we all wonder how we get a job in there… but unless you are in with the Blazer brigade there then its hard I fear.

  4. dragons4eva says:

    I agree with you Druzik…i fear one day the NRL will become the NFL of Rugby. “Australian Rugby Rules” ha ha never would of thought of that one. But seriously yeah everything you’ve said is true. I fear we’ll become like the Americans and screw up the spread of RL worldwide into a game that “only those crazy Australians play”.

  5. PNG says:

    Humphreys idea is so stupid players already complain of burnout so his solution is to make the season longer did i miss something there ? players that were on both of the telivised rugby league shows all said they thought the idea was a dud some of them even sugested shortening the season as you have darren lockyer has come out and said it would be terrible for international rugbyleague when the captain of the aus team thinks it would be bad for rep footy surely someone should listen congrats to lockyer for seeing the bigger pictuer

    • druzik says:

      Yeah, I am nor surprised that players are dubious on Humphrey’s proposal. Sometimes I wonder what planet these CEO’s are on.

      Its great that Darren came out and championed International Rugby League I wish more players did. I think though you’ll find that most players are happy with the season as it is but.

  6. Super Steve says:

    This is just ridiculous.

    I really cant see it getting up, from the players that have been asked about it so far Im yet to see one thats in favour of it. 60 minute games is a total joke. We are raising the cap next year as it is, then the following year we re-negotiate our TV deal, which is going to be much bigger than the one we’re currently on. Why the need one year out from that is this bloke coming up with such stupid ways to generate more capital?.

    • druzik says:

      completely agree, and as you say so far all the players have come out and not supported it.

      Its funny how recently many things surrounding the game and politics have come out around the Wests Tigers… They can’t be in that much financial strife can they? They have three leagues clubs feeding the team effectively.

  7. Cheyne Maher says:

    Mate, i have just scanned over your blog and agree totally with almost every point you make! I will say it is good to see RL officials thinking outside of the box but this proposal of Humphreys will totally change the sport and won’t even acheive what he wants (ie greater revenue and reduced player burnout).

    As you pointed out the reduction in minutes is minimal and it will destroy RL as a gladiatorial sport and all players will be one dimensional 100kg athletes. This will take away the Matty Bowens and Preston Campbells who contribute greatly to the sports appeal and therefore success.

    I also agree that by having long add breaks we may as well play Ice Hockey or NFL. Aussies love full on action, not drawn out breaks. This will also reduce the popularity of the sport, which will in turn make advertising less appealing and actually decrease revenue from broadcasters.

    Thirdly i also agree that it isnt necessary that we play everyone twice. I sent my thoughts on this to the Daily Telegraph, stating exactly the same point as yours – if you’re not good enough to qualify for a top eight finals system (no matter who you play twice), then you’re not good enough to win the comp any way. Playing everyone twice wont solve the so called inequitable draw anyway as some teams will play others without origin players, or without suspended stars etc. Again if you’re good enough to win the comp you’ll find a way to get there any way.

    As you said this proposal wont make sense in the case of expansion, as we obviously wont ever increase the competition to 34 weeks etc.

    One other point which i am not sure if you mentioned (i read this quickly), is that more isnt always more. In fact LESS IS USUALLY MORE. For example, the Tigers only host 3-4 games a year at Leichardt Oval and they get packed out every time, even when they are playing out of town sides like Canberra, because there is a novelty value to watching footy there.

    Increasing the number of home games each club has will lead to more expensive and less attractive membership packages and gross attendances over the season would more than likely decrease. This would have a detrimental effect on revenue for the clubs.

    Look at the NFL – each club only hosts ten games each per year (two of which are essentially trials), prior to the finals – another example of less being more. This is one of the biggest sports in the world and not everyone plays everyone twice and not even does every team in the same conference play exactly the same teams and it still doesnt seem to affect the quality of their sport.

    However if it is felt that we need a more “equitable” draw, then we could consider splitting into conferences. At the moment you could have two conferences of eight, where you play everyone once and the seven others in your conference twice – this equals 22 rounds. If there were 18 teams again the same would apply, but this time with three conferences of six teams, which would again equal 22 rounds. If we got to 20 teams you could have five conferences of four, which would again equal 22 rounds. More than this you probably just have everyone playing everyone once. This also makes financial sense as it could make the most of derby matches and reduce some travelling costs.

    The finals would work that the winner of each conference would qualify for the semis as would the next best teams overall, which i think is how the new Super 15 format will work. This ensures that each conference is represented, but also allows for all teams in the one conference to qualify and therefore not be disadvantaged if they happen to be in a stronger conference.

    FOR EG. (Based on an 18 team comp, with CC Bears and Perth Reds)

    NORTHERN NSW conference (Eels, Dogs, Panthers, Manly, CC Bears and Knights)

    SOUTHERN NSW conference (Roosters, Souths, Dragons, Cronulla, Wests and Canberra)

    “AUSTRALASIAN” conference (Broncos, Cowboys, Titans, Storm, Warriors and Perth Reds).

    If the Eels, Roosters and Broncos each won their conference they would qualify for the finals, but if the other five teams from the Northern NSW conference had better win/loss ratios (perhaps from just one full round or overall) than those from the other conferences, they would fill the remaining five finals spots.

    Again i dont think it is neccessary to have an even draw, but if it is what people want, then i think this would be a better and more flexible option than simply adding a further six matches for each club!

    And whatever we do, please NRL do not ever consider four quarters again – it would totally change the fabric of our sport!

    • druzik says:

      Some interesting points there… you got me thinking a bit more about something which i will mull through and get back to later…. Believe it or not, I think Fijian RL may have the potential solution.

      • Cheyne Maher says:

        Sweet, i’ll keep an eye out for it!

      • druzik says:

        No worries… I’ll get it up soon I hope.

      • druzik says:

        I started formulating something… but I think the NRL is pretty much run the same way I thought we should do it, so I wont be doing a blog on it since its not relevant… sorry.

      • Cheyne Maher says:

        No worries mate, i tend to agree, like i said earlier, personally i dont think the uneven draw is a real problem when there is a top eight finals system anyway, the conference thing was just an alternate proposal for those who were whingeing about the “uneveness”.

        The only change i would like to see is perhaps a slight reduction in rounds, 20-22 ideally, with origin matches played on fair dinkum rep weekends where all have nations have the opportunity to be involved. Apart from that, not much is broken, so why fix it!

      • druzik says:

        The NRL is already in a sort of conference system. Teams are split into two groups with teams in the same group playing each other twice and from the other group once… but have the one tables, which is effectively what Fiji has… so I saw no point in it.

        Yeah 22 would be ideal, but I think the reason we are at 26 rounds is the clubs need it to make money basically.

    • Juro says:

      I don’t like the idea of conferences based on geographical borders (eg grouping the Sydney and non-Sydney teams). I would prefer conferences redrawn each year based on the previous year’s final placings. This would lead to the conferences being equitable, and is in fact similar to what they actually had up until a few years ago.

      • druzik says:

        Yes… I agree with you on that, have a conference draw each year.

        In some ways it would be smart that when the draw is done to make a big thing of it, have the public buy tickets to it etc… live draw on radio or TV… its what is done in Europe with the knock out comps.

        In the FA cup say when each round is draw, its a random draw and is a big, big thing for fans, to see just who they get.

      • Jake says:

        If the NRL went to conferences, it would be important to maintain the same conferences from year to year. Part of the problem with simply playing everybody or mixing up the conferences is that it ignores rivalries/derbies. Eels v. Dogs brings more fans to the stadium and gets better tv numbers than Panthers v. Cowboys. The NFL has a very good format in this regard.

      • druzik says:

        Well we already do have conferences of sorts, as you may have noticed that not all teams play each other twice and its based on groupings of the teams already from what I understand and it changes each year.

        I agree that in the current NRL set up having dedicated conferences would be very difficult. I guess if you were to try and make them then you would have a NSW conference and others one, but then you may as well go back to separate NSWRL and QRL.

        In fact I think we may have missed the boat on having a good conference system back in 1988 or even further back when we should have had the BRL and NSWRL go into play off systems… but then again we have has short sighted administrators for a long time in Rugby League.

  8. dragons4eva says:

    This is just my little two cents that I thought of;

    Preseason:

    Massive Knockout Competition (could call it the ARL Cup) with all teams playing one another coming in at later rounds when a semi pro, pro team etc similar to the Challenge Cup.

    NRL

    NRL kicks off normal time in March.

    We could open the season with something similar to the ‘Magic Weekend’ but a little differently.

    Have like double headers at Suncorp, Aussie, SCG etc with the Classic rivalries and classic kits(kinda like the Heritage Round) to really kick start the season with a bang.

    E.g.

    Saturday

    Suncorp Stadium:

    Game 1. Broncos v Titans

    Game 2. Cowboys v Warriors

    Sunday

    Aussie Stadium

    Game 1. Manly v Paramatta

    Game 2. St George v Bulldogs

    SCG

    Game 1. Souths v Tigers

    Game 2. Roosters v Knights

    Canberra Stadium

    Game 1. Sharks v Penrith

    Game 2. Raiders v Storm

    Then instead of 22 (as suggested) or 26(as normal) maybe have 15 rounds so no team has 1 extra bye over another team.

    So all up there are 16 rounds then the finals.

    So then the competition(including Finals) would finish around mid-end of July.

    When the finals are over then we could play the World Club Challenge the last weekend in July or first Weekend of August rotating locations between Aus/Eng each year.

    Then the next month (August) could be an international open window where International teams play friendlies against one another. This could benefit England greatly as they always complain that they do not get enough games before going to Aus/NZ. As for TV revenue…well show all of the friendlies LIVE!!! It could show like this;

    August-mid September

    1. State of Origin over 3 weekends

    2. International friendlies (both Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere). Some fixtures such as Tonga v Samoa etc could be played the same weekend as SOO to make up for lost tv revenue.

    So from mid September to around mid November that leaves two whole months for International competitions. SO we could have our Pacific Cups, Four Nations, European Cup, Atlantic Cup etc with all teams 100%, no club interference and not tied down with SOO or Club duties.

    I think this systems’ main aim is basically stepping stones from Club to Internationals…what do you guyz think?

    • druzik says:

      that is another potential system, just on the 16 round comp though, one thing I forgot to mention is that the NRL and ESL clubs need about 20-22 round in order to break even with money.

      Also how does your system deal with expansion which is most probably going to happen in a couple years.

  9. roml357 says:

    Here, Here, Druzik totally agree, I like the idea of the pre comp cup, it can be used for so many good things such as playing games in non heartland areas and country areas, the final could even be played in darwin or perth something like that.
    I would like the regular season to come down to 22 rounds as well, there would be better quality matches and less burnout for the players.
    State of origin has got to move to stand alone wknds or moved after the finals. The nrl games played without there top players is a absolute farce and boring as bat shit too.
    I would like it after the finals so you could go from the gf, soo in 3 successive weeks then straight into the international season, ratings would be through the roof, but not sure if it is practical having it that way.
    And if anything the 4 nations should expand to 6 with the winners of the euro comp and pacific comp making the final two places. Itll give more exposure to the teams when it comes world cup time.
    However your international schedule is a good read, im just saying if anything thats the least they could do is expand the 4 nations to 6.

    • druzik says:

      Yes, there is no reason why games in the pres season cup cant be taken on the road. Agree the final can be bid by various cities to host the final.

      Yes agree 20-22 rounds is ideal, it used to be like that and SoO needs to be changed in some way too.

      Eventually we may get a 6 Nations, but call it something else like the RLIF cup or something. But we need to make sure that its pushed hard, alsmost as hard as the WC to get profits going so we are not always reliant on the World cup for funding.

  10. C.T.SANDERS says:

    THAT’S RUGBY LEAGUE.GOES FROM THE SUBLIME TO THE RIDICULOUS.NO WONDER THE SPORT GOES NO WHERE BECAUSE IT IS A CIRCUS RUN BY CLOWNS

  11. C.T.SANDERS says:

    Under unlimited tackles you get rid of the three most boring aspects of rl football,the set of six terminoloy which is absurd to say the least,the gang tackle and the repetitious kick on the last tackle which has reduced our game into a barge kick and yawn spectacle.With proper scrums,corner posts,one referee,2 substitutions per game with no interchange and the scrapping of the video referee rl will then become the greatest game of all when stupidity goes out of the game for once and for all.I have had a gutsful of the administrators tampering with the rules over the years and enoughs enough.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Powered by Wordpress | Built by Thinking Cap Studios