Last Game at Home ( for 2 years supposedly)

fishermanaxe

Grey Nurse
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
709
Reaction score
21
Location
Yogeytown
No I doubt I’ll get flamed for starting a new thread on this- but doesn’t this topic deserve it?

I know this has been discussed under the “Development update “ thread but this is different.

There’s just something so fishy about the whole process and it has my spidey senses going. The refurb of the leagues club is supposed to take 2 years! What exactly about the refurb will take that long ? The Cowboys can build a completely new ground in less time.

There is no promise of a ground refurb - just a few lines about being able to spend a few $ on it with the money we save from not operating the ground for 2 years . What does this mean exactly?

Im worried there is something far more sinister behind the idea of not playing at home for 2 years.
Could this be a pre-cursor allow relocation with minimal public outcry ?

Imagine this , after 18 months or so talks starts again about the Sharks relocating after a dramatic drop in membership numbers, crowd attendances, revenue etc ( all perfectly understandable having no home ground )

NRL then say to the club “ you are not hitting your expected KPI’s and relocation is on our agenda” .... followed by “ you are in serious jeopardy of being closed down , but have we got a deal for you!!! “ . With no tangible evidence of our prospects of survivability, back room discussions ensue, and a heavily influenced ( by the NRL ) but publicy joint decision is made that relocation is our only option! A number of preferential options are offered to existing members to try and sweeten the deal.... but the ball is already in motion.... need I I go on?
 

fishermanaxe

Grey Nurse
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
709
Reaction score
21
Location
Yogeytown
So you think the board are doing upgrades in the hope that the NRL will locate us?

No. I think the board are doing upgrades to the leagues club to attempt to attract and capitalize on the new residential population- which in itself is a perfectly sound decision. I do believe that the board has our long term interests at heart. However , I do have grave concerns that the NRL might view our momentary weakness and inevitable shortcomings as an opportunity to drive their agenda for relocation.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
20,844
Reaction score
808
Location
Wild West
You think the NRL let us have a salary cap scandal but renovating is going to far?
 

SF

Mako Shark
Staff member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
235
Location
Monty Porter Stand
I am concerned about it too, it all happened very quickly. I know it has been floated for a couple of years, but one minute they were talking about member consultation sessions, the next they said this is your last chance to comment. Honestly I think this decision deserved an EGM, or at least actual plans released to members, rather than slow leaks to the Tele, two emails and a podcast. I do worry about some conflicts of interest too.

Though one thing that made me accept it more though was going to the game last week, and seeing all the change that had happened from the previous game. It already is a bit of a safety nightmare with all the roads and traffic diversions. Plus if they close the Peter Burns Stand where do all those members go.

Obviously it would have been a crazy few weeks for the club with Gal’s last game, but once our season is over, I hope the CEO will deliver on his promises to get detailed information out there about the actual stadium plans.
 

Sharkmate

Bull Shark
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
1,694
Reaction score
4
Location
Port Macquarie
Whilst we own our own ground, the NRL would be reluctant to relocate us. What are we supposed to do with the ground? I could not imagine the zoning will change, therefore no development. Our option would be acquire Sutherland Sharks soccer team and push for entry in A-League who are looking into promotion/relegation similar to remainder of world.


This would **** the NRL as they would not want to lose the shire to A-League, it is a big area to lose to quickest growing sport. We simply blackmail them. If anybody should go it should be the Bulldogs who are surrounded by other clubs.


Why is the ground losing money? It should be a licence to print money, surely couldn't be losing game day and remainder of time the overheads would be low. Why isn't it used for other events? We had an opportunity to have Sydney FC play a few games there earlier in year whilst theirs is being redeveloped, they played at Kogarah.
 

CrazyMatt

Jaws
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
19,327
Reaction score
378
Location
Colyton, Sydney
Whilst we own our own ground, the NRL would be reluctant to relocate us. What are we supposed to do with the ground? I could not imagine the zoning will change, therefore no development. Our option would be acquire Sutherland Sharks soccer team and push for entry in A-League who are looking into promotion/relegation similar to remainder of world.


This would **** the NRL as they would not want to lose the shire to A-League, it is a big area to lose to quickest growing sport. We simply blackmail them. If anybody should go it should be the Bulldogs who are surrounded by other clubs.


Why is the ground losing money? It should be a licence to print money, surely couldn't be losing game day and remainder of time the overheads would be low. Why isn't it used for other events? We had an opportunity to have Sydney FC play a few games there earlier in year whilst theirs is being redeveloped, they played at Kogarah.

The A-League won’t, and shouldn’t, look at bringing a shire team into the league considering Sydney FC have a considerable membership base there and the success of their temporary move to Kogarah. Look at the backlash against the Southern Expansion bid in the last round of expansions. Fans already feel that three “franchise” teams in Sydney is too many. The only way another Sydney team gets into the A-League is through promotion from the upcoming second division. That competition might be two or three years away and a promotion/relegation system would be even longer. Besides, entry into that second division would be very difficult for Sutherland considering that:
1. Wollongong Wolves are all but certain to win entry.
2. More popular and “traditional” teams like Sydney Olympic, Sydney Croatia is or Marconi will be considered over Sutherland.

An A-League team based out of Sutherland is a pipe dream and as long as Sydney FC exists, so it should be.
 

creg

Bull Shark
Joined
Mar 26, 2011
Messages
1,663
Reaction score
17
Location
Merimbula
How the **** do people function worrying about theoretically **** like this? The club has gone through an insane last few years of up and downs and has survived the lowest of lows. A couple of years playing games outside our home ground isn’t going to sink us, and if the NRL wanted us out I’m sure they could have by now. There are other entities associated with the development these days that would be advising and proving direction on the bigger picture and the way to do things best for the club, but firstly for the development.

Smoke a doobie and relax bro. Or maybe don’t, might make you more paranoid.
 

SF

Mako Shark
Staff member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
235
Location
Monty Porter Stand
The Sharks will re-develop their Leagues Club, which will force the NRL team to play out of Kogarah Oval - the home of bitter rivals St George Illawarra - the next two years.

Munro said plans to refurbish PointsBet Stadium was still a few years off.

"That's something we need to work out the next couple of years because the stadium needs re-generation,'' Munro said.

"It would end up being thereabouts in terms of capacity. It would be a maximum 20,000. You need over 12,000 to break even to cover all your costs, and there are a lot of costs to open up stadiums, but the sweet spot is between 12,000 and 20,000. There's definitely a demand for local stadia.''

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/a-...ofitable-not-just-pretty-20190829-p52m2d.html
 

Mr Ryan

Bull Shark
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
1,849
Reaction score
20
Did Parra get relocated after spending 2 years at ANZ?

What about the Roosters? They’ve already had 1 year away from home. The old stadium has been demolished, have they even started building the new one?

We are not the first team to be homeless for a couple of years.

We are also probably the only Sydney team who doesn’t take a home game somewhere else.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
5,168
Reaction score
174
Cows new stadium is already 2 years into construction. Plus is being built on a different site.

Decision to take us away from home was purely financial, and made sense when explained on the podcast, to me atleast. I wish it was only going to take a year though.

Agree with SF too. Last few home games have been shocking getting in and out of the ground with construction. A sold out game is going to be a straight up nightmare.

Would definitely recommend to all who haven't been in a while to avoid the wooloware station side like the plague if you can.
 

stormshark

Great White
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
4,794
Reaction score
69
Location
Phillip Island
I too am concerned, and the reference to "Spidey Sense" applies here also. Coupled with a potentially lean 2 years on (whichever) field (if we don't sort out our imbalanced roster sorted), I sense ongoing future trouble.
 

fishermanaxe

Grey Nurse
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
709
Reaction score
21
Location
Yogeytown
I mean , you can bury your head in sand and pretend everything is all rosy if you want to. But the fact is expansion/relocation is absolutely on the NRL commission’s agenda, the sharks seem to be a popular vote for the first to go, our financial position is somewhat questionable and it wouldn’t take much for the NRL to set some KPI’s that we couldn’t reach . Without question we are placing ourselves in an weaker position for the next two years.

If we make it through that period than I have no doubt we will be in a much better position. But to not consider every possible scenario would be negligent in their duties for anyone who hold a position on our board. It has nothin to do with paranoia - just reading the NRL landscape at the moment.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
20,844
Reaction score
808
Location
Wild West
I mean , you can bury your head in sand and pretend everything is all rosy if you want to. But the fact is expansion/relocation is absolutely on the NRL commission’s agenda, the sharks seem to be a popular vote for the first to go, our financial position is somewhat questionable and it wouldn’t take much for the NRL to set some KPI’s that we couldn’t reach . Without question we are placing ourselves in an weaker position for the next two years.

If we make it through that period than I have no doubt we will be in a much better position. But to not consider every possible scenario would be negligent in their duties for anyone who hold a position on our board. It has nothin to do with paranoia - just reading the NRL landscape at the moment.

Could have obliterated us with fines at the start of the year though and didn't.

Will definitely be a tough couple of years, especially if those who can go to most games choose not to, but we are doing this to improve ourselves, if NRL wanted us gone they could have cracked down much harder on the Flanno emails shenanigans
 

fishermanaxe

Grey Nurse
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
709
Reaction score
21
Location
Yogeytown
Could have obliterated us with fines at the start of the year though and didn't.

Will definitely be a tough couple of years, especially if those who can go to most games choose not to, but we are doing this to improve ourselves, if NRL wanted us gone they could have cracked down much harder on the Flanno emails shenanigans

Well yes, I suppose they could have. But it is also about timing. Relocation is something that simply couldn’t happen over night or over an off season. It needs planning. Perhaps the NRL weren’t ready for it then. The difference now is that we are showing them our hand and giving them time to prepare and facilitate. One good thing for us is that ****wit Beattie is gone by February- he was definitely a driver for change - if only for change sake- it was part of his MO.

By god I hope I’m wrong, but if I were on the NRL commission and had a mandate for either expansion or relocation - I’d be looking at the Sharks every move from now on.
 
Top