Country Cousins Dudded By NRL's Skewed Priorities (2016)

On Monday the NRL announced that the annual City v Country match will not be continuing after the 2017 fixture takes place in Mudgee.

It’s been stated that the game is to be replaced by sending NRL games to the bush every year instead.

While on the surface it sounds like a fair trade-off, it still isn’t a good decision in my view. To a lot of people in the bush, it’d be akin to killing State of Origin back in 1987 and taking the odd Sydney club game to Queensland instead. A lot of bush players want to represent the area they came from, and some cherish that jumper as much as any other.

Sydney has been keen to kill the game off for decades, usually for the same ignorant reasons: it’s an exhibition; Country always loses (in past years); It’s not an Origin selection trial anymore; it only attracts small crowds; blah blah blah.

No one stops to think of the impact that one game can have in these small area and the impact it will have when this contest is removed. Country people will turn up to watch their side take on the city slickers. While many may still turn up to watch two NRL sides play, the passion behind such games won’t be the same.

That’s not a criticism of the country people. It’s a commentary about how people want to see THEIR team play.

There’s no reason why the City v Country game cannot be retained and made into a more important fixture on the calendar, while also having NRL games played in the bush.

If I had my way, I’d have City v Country be more than a just a NSW game – make it a national game played in a different state every year.

Country players from around the nation would go up against players hailing from the city. Essentially make it capital cities versus the rest of Australia.

The NRL’s statement announcing this decision contained comments which only made the decision more perplexing – this excerpt from the official NRL release, in particular:

NSWRL CEO Dave Trodden echoed the sentiments of the CRL, saying that NSW city players had enjoyed playing in matches against the country teams.

“The Country v City clash is one of the most exciting days on the rugby league calendar for the host country town,” Mr Trodden said.

“This match will be a great opportunity for fans in the country to see some of the state’s best players in action as we say farewell to this special event.”

If it’s a special event, why kill it?

The fact that it is one of the most exciting days for the host town shows the value and importance of it to the people in the bush, so why kill it?

If the players enjoy the entire experience, why kill it?

No mention was made as to why it wouldn’t continue, though. Only talk about how there will be a big condescending celebration, akin to dancing on the grave of bush footy.

With our national side showing little interest in playing any other nations than England and New Zealand, Test matches are fast becoming more of a pointless exercise than City v Country, which actually has some benefit as it could very easily be used to help promote and strengthen the growth of the game nationally.

Now we will be left with the Country Rugby League constantly begging for one or two NRL games every year to try and fill the void of a game that was so incessantly disrespected by Sydney that it will soon no longer exist, but a game which meant a huge amount to those in rural NSW.

 ****This article appeared on Commentary Box Sports website on  November 23, 2016****

Four Nations Masks Stagnant International Game (2016)

International Rugby League at the moment is somewhat farcical. We have a system presently that’s anti-growth and exclusive, where the best teams in the world spend most of their time playing each other.

Since 2001, New Zealand has played 77 Tests – 39 of them against Australia, 10 against England and 13 against Great Britain. Just 15 of those Tests have been played against other Test sides.

It’s a similar trend for Australia, when you look at their record from 2005 until now. They’ve played 56 Tests in that time, 32 of which have been against New Zealand alone, while eight more have been against England and four against Great Britain. They’ve played just 12 times against other nations.

In the past, the onus was on the British, Australian and New Zealand sides to spread the game around their own country and the world – take it to new areas. This saw the game spread like wildfire through France in the mid 1930s.

The game was being proposed to be taken to the USA as far back as 1910 when NSWRL Secretary Edward Larkin first proposed the idea. By the 1960s the game had been played at the highest level in South Africa, international matches had been played in Italy by Australia, and an exhibition game between Australia and New Zealand had been played Stateside.

Tour games even went to new horizons. Every nation was working towards building and expanding the game and, sure, in some cases it didn’t work as well as in others, but the effort was being made.

Today, though, it seems that International football has become a do-or-die system, where nations that can afford to help and promote the game in emerging nations simply don’t bother. Presently we are in the middle of a Four Nations competition which, if we’re honest, is a glorified tri-series that offers a condescending moment in the sun for one nation, while they get beaten comprehensively by the three main sides.

More needs to be done by the three superpowers to promote the game – and it shouldn’t be too hard a task.

Australia, New Zealand and England seemingly have no interest in returning to the tours of the past, which were magnificent for promoting the game in new regions and were the highlight of most representative stars’ careers, instead opting for the simpler and more boring Four Nations, where we see the same three sides playing all the time.

Why not have two separate Four Nations competitions: one for Pacific teams and one for European Teams?

This would at least get more nations involved on the big stage on a more regular basis which could only be a good thing for the game. And let every nation have first choice over which players they will select, leave the rest for the three major nations to choose from. It will bring Australia, New Zealand and England back to the field a little and improve all the other nations significantly.

Samoa, Fiji and Tonga have made giant strides in recent years, yet Samoa – so impressive in the 2014 Four Nations – have not been grant a Test against one of the ‘Big Three’ in the two years since, while Fiji and Tonga will have had no internationals against the heavyweights between the 2013 and ’17 World Cups.

If something different doesn’t happen soon, then people will grow tired of watching Australia and New Zealand play each other all the time. And once the major sides stop getting interest at the international level, we then have a major issue that will impact all nations that may not be easy to reverse.

****This article appeared on Commentary Box Sports website on  November 11, 2016****

Finding The Contenders 'Sweet Spot' (2016)

There’s a scoreline every club gets to where they seemingly know – or perhaps it’s just a statistical phenomenon – that they are unbeatable from. With the finals in the do-or-die stages, this sweet spot becomes a vitally important number, as it signifies a point where success is virtually guaranteed.

The following data is based on the last 50 games for each of the remaining finalists. All of these sides, with the exception of Penrith, have a success rate of at least 56 percent. Penrith’s is at 48 percent.

Melbourne – 14
Last 50 games – Round 2, 2015 to Finals week 1, 2016
Won 34, Lost 16 = 68%

Melbourne has not won a game when they have scored less than 14 points. Ten of their 16 losses have come when they have failed to reach 14 points. After this point they have won 36 games and lost just 6. The Storm’s highest losing score is 22, which happened twice: against Manly in Round 2, 2015 (lost 24-22) and against Parramatta in Round 14, 2015 (lost 26-22). Since then, their highest losing score has been 16.

Melbourne’s win percentage over the last 50 games reaches 50% when they score 20 points. They have scored 30-38 points 7 times, 40-49 points 3 times and 50+ once.

24 of Melbourne’s last 50 scores fall between 14 and 22 points.

Canberra – 21
Last 50 games – Round 26, 2014 to Finals week 1, 2016
Won 28, Drawn 1, Lost 21 = 56%

The Raiders are an impeccable pointscoring machine, however they seem incapable of grinding out low-scoring wins. They have scored 20 points or less on 18 occasions and lost every time. However, once they pass 20 points they have won 28 games, drawn one and lost just 3 times. The highest score Canberra tallied yet still lost was 34 against the Bulldogs in Round 11, 2015 (they lost 41-34). Since then it drops down to 24.

Canberra’s win percentage over the last 50 games reaches 50% when they score 38. They have scored 30-39 points 12 times, 40-49 points twice, 50-59 points 3 times and reached 60 points once.

23 of Canberra’s last 50 scores fall between 20 and 30 points.

Cronulla – 15
Last 50 games – Round 2, 2015 to Finals week 1, 2016
Won 33, Drawn 1, Lost 16 = 66%

The Sharks have long held the title as kings of grinding football, regularly winning games by small margins. This season has seen their attack come to the fore. They have 3 wins and 10 losses when they have scored 14 points or less, but from 15 points onwards they have 30 wins, 1 draw and 6 losses. Their highest losing score was 22 against the Titans back in Round 4, 2015. Since then it has been 18.

Cronulla’s win percentage over the last 50 games reaches 50% when they score 25. They have scored 30-39 points 10 times, 40-49 points twice and reached 60 points once.

24 of Cronulla’s last 50 scores fall between 12 and 22 points.

North Queensland – 17
Last 50 games – Round 4, 2015 til Finals week 1, 2016
Won 35, Lost 15 = 70%

The Cowboys are another strong attacking outfit who have haven’t lost once they pass 20 points. They have passed 20 points on 27 occasions, equal with the Broncos and bettered only by Canberra (who have achieved the feat 28 times). Once they reach 17 points they have won 34 games and lost just 4. Their highest losing score was 20 back in Round 4 this year when they lost to Brisbane, 21-20.

The Cowboys’ win percentage over their last 50 games hits 50% when they score 30 points. They have scored 30-39 points 15 times, 40-49 points 5 times and 50+ once.

25 of North Queensland’s last 50 scores fall between 18 and 30 points.

Brisbane – 19
Last 50 games – Round 3, 2015 to Finals week 1, 2016
Won 34, Lost 16 = 68%

The Broncos have a similar record to the Cowboys. Both have six wins when scoring less than 20 points. Brisbane has lost 1 game more though in this period. When Brisbane have scored 19 points or more they have won 28 games and lost just 3. Their highest score when losing was 28 against Cronulla in Round 9 this year. Their next lowest was 22.

Brisbane’s win percentage over their last 50 games reaches 50% when they score 26 points. They have scored 30-39 points 8 times, 40-49 points 6 times and 50+ once. 26 of Brisbane’s last 50 scores fall between 14 and 26 points.

Penrith – 19
Last 50 games – Preliminary Final, 2014 to Finals week 1, 2016
Won 24, Lost 26 = 48%

Penrith have a very poor record when they are kept to 18 points or less, where they have won just two of 23 games. Their form is completely reversed after this point though, where they have 22 wins and 3 losses. Their highest losing score was 26, which they scored when they lost 34-26 to the Wests Tigers in Round 17 this year. They have lost 5 games when scoring 20 points or more.

Penrith’s win percentage over their last 50 games fails to reach 50%, thanks largely to a poor 2015 season. They have scored 30-39 points 7 times, 40-49 points 3 times. Two of those 40-point scorelines have come in the last 5 weeks.

26 of Penrith’s last 50 scores fall between 12 and 24 points.

 ****This article appeared on Commentary Box Sports website on  September 16, 2016****