|
|
Post by russ on Aug 31, 2016 14:03:29 GMT
Okay time for something different I read this article on the Roar website, advising certain players past their best to go to SL. Now this annoyed me because although I know NRL is the top RL League I find this just plain arrogant and it happens time and time again. Even the influx of players from SL who fitted right in does nothing to alter these kind of articles and statements. I know the Aussies don't do humble winner but a bit of care wouldn't go amiss. The link is below see what you think? www.theroar.com.au/2016/08/31/five-nrl-stars-head-super-league/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2016 14:23:17 GMT
To be fair any of those apart from Mullen would be an asset in SL. I think Marshal will head over here for a swansong and be a world beater, Uate I'd take as a replacement for Vidot if he's on the outer and going and Farah is still one of the best hookers in the world never mind SL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carnster on Aug 31, 2016 15:18:11 GMT
The trouble is, SL is second class to NRL. Some may even say third class. It's not that our players are worse or we don't produce talent. We do, and the Aussies openly admit that we produce world-class players. The trouble lies in that we don't have a world-class competition in SL. SL is not an even playing field. It's heavily weighted in favour of six or so Clubs that dominate, and we simply don't have the player pool that Oz and NZ have at their disposal. Of course, having RL as your premier sport makes a massive difference which also helps in numerous different areas of the game. Not all clubs in SL operate to the same financial ceiling skewing things further out of balance. In the NRL, the reason any Club can go from bottom to top in two seasons is because the NRL cover the cost of each Clubs cap. Paid for equally to the same level through the amount of sponsorship and tv rights.
Imagine if the RFL did the same over here?
Every Club could afford to max out their cap, retain their stars (or future stars), stop the player drain to RU and the NRL, and it would free up other investments a Club might want to make with its limited income. That money is then free to develop academies, facilities, investment in the amateur game etc. Instead we have a convoluted system that favours the already financially secure Clubs and allows them to act like magnets for the best amateur talent, who then sign and give the already secure club another financial dispensation for every player that makes it. It's a wonder that the lower Clubs in SL are even competing.
The RFL can't even decide how it wants to run the SL at the moment. It keeps changing formats, moving goalposts. SL is a decent competition but it is run like a rank amateur set-up in comparison to the NRL.
That's why it's rightly seen as second-class, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by russ on Aug 31, 2016 16:06:27 GMT
To be fair any of those apart from Mullen would be an asset in SL. I think Marshal will head over here for a swansong and be a world beater, Uate I'd take as a replacement for Vidot if he's on the outer and going and Farah is still one of the best hookers in the world never mind SL. I'm not having a go at the players I leave that to Schoey and Phil Gould, just the attitude towards SL which is derisive and don't help RL in any country least of all where it comes second to others. |
|
|
|
Post by russ on Aug 31, 2016 16:09:58 GMT
The trouble is, SL is second class to NRL. Some may even say third class. It's not that our players are worse or we don't produce talent. We do, and the Aussies openly admit that we produce world-class players. The trouble lies in that we don't have a world-class competition in SL. SL is not an even playing field. It's heavily weighted in favour of six or so Clubs that dominate, and we simply don't have the player pool that Oz and NZ have at their disposal. Of course, having RL as your premier sport makes a massive difference which also helps in numerous different areas of the game. Not all clubs in SL operate to the same financial ceiling skewing things further out of balance. In the NRL, the reason any Club can go from bottom to top in two seasons is because the NRL cover the cost of each Clubs cap. Paid for equally to the same level through the amount of sponsorship and tv rights. Imagine if the RFL did the same over here? Every Club could afford to max out their cap, retain their stars (or future stars), stop the player drain to RU and the NRL, and it would free up other investments a Club might want to make with its limited income. That money is then free to develop academies, facilities, investment in the amateur game etc. Instead we have a convoluted system that favours the already financially secure Clubs and allows them to act like magnets for the best amateur talent, who then sign and give the already secure club another financial dispensation for every player that makes it. It's a wonder that the lower Clubs in SL are even competing. The RFL can't even decide how it wants to run the SL at the moment. It keeps changing formats, moving goalposts. SL is a decent competition but it is run like a rank amateur set-up in comparison to the NRL. That's why it's rightly seen as second-class, in my opinion. I would agree with most of that assessment as to why Carnster. But the attitude stinks and does nothing to help the game grow and prosper anywhere but in Australia. Now this is fine if your ambition is to be Aussie Rules 2 rather than a global brand. |
|
