League players slam the door on expansion plans for NRL

[Beaussie]

Doesn't look like good news for the Central Coast Bears bid. Thoughts?

League players slam the door on expansion plans for NRL
Josh Rakic
July 10, 2011 .

NRL players have voiced their opinion in numbers that the existing competition should stay as it is - 16 teams and no more.

The revelation is a massive blow to expansion bid contenders Perth, the Central Coast, Central Queensland, Wellington, Papua New Guinea and Brisbane, with 40 per cent of the 104 players who responded to the question declaring the competition is fine just the way it is.

Many cited financial and logistical reasons for voting against any expansion in the foreseeable future, while others feared the introduction of new sides could spark a player talent crisis.

There are also concerns that any extra revenue from the new TV deal would be diluted among the expanded playing group.

NRL chief executive David Gallop has said he expects the competition to incorporate two new sides by 2015 and one possibly as soon as 2014.

But only 31 per cent backed that decision.

Pressed on the issue where the next team should be based, the responses proved critical for the Central Coast Bears bid, with just under 23 per cent throwing their support behind the banished Bears.

It was a different story for boom capital Perth however, with the overwhelming majority of almost 44 per cent of players declaring if the game was to expand it must be into a new state.

''I can't really see the point of expansion if we're just putting teams into areas where there's already rugby league,'' one player said. Another added: ''If we want to actually grow the game, then it would have to be in Western Australia for sure.''

A second team in Brisbane and the Central Queensland bid were the next best options, players said, with only 22.9 per cent believing NSW should be given another team.

The Brisbane and Central Queensland bids both were shown support by 25 per cent of participants, a sure sign that players are well aware of where the future of NRL lies.

''Certainly Perth and another team in Queensland are very attractive options,'' Gallop said. There's Gosford, too. To extend the game's national profile is a long-term goal.''

And sadly for the Bears, it's not on the Central Coast, which has NRL teams an hour away either side of Bluetongue Stadium.

On Perth, cult Manly figure George Rose said a team in Western Australia was an obvious choice.

''I think it's a good number at the moment, the competition, but if we have to go somewhere I reckon Perth,'' he said.

''If they want to throw a team in at Perth, I'd love to travel over there.''

But injured Penrith and Blues star Michael Gordon was a little more favourable towards expansion and the Bears, declaring he'd like to see as many as 20 teams in the competition.

''Expansion is good if they're able to survive - 18-20 teams,'' he said. ''Central Coast would be up there, and Perth and Brisbane have a big bid for a second team. They would be the first three.''

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... z1RgXBC5KI

[TLPG]

What interests me is that there's no mention of Adelaide. CQ won't work because the population base isn't high enough (Rockhampton is no Townsville). If they want a second team in Brisbane they'll have to make a better fist of it than they did with the Crushers.

IIRC Perth was no more successful than Adelaide were last time. Perth have the additional problem of travel costs, with ALL trips to the east coast and no options closer. When West Coast joined they had to do it hard, but when the Crows arrived in the comp I think it helped them a bit. Melbourne's closer to Perth than Sydney or Brisbane as well.

Of course the arrival of Fremantle and then Port Adelaide made it easier still.

A Perth RL team will face higher costs than the Eagles faced when they first started, so they will need big crowds and high membership numbers from the get go.