Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - AU
The Guardian - AU
Sport
Nick Tedeschi

More NRL teams are an option but further expansion comes with associated risks

The Dolphins have so far been a success story after Wayne Bennett’s expansion team won their opening two NRL games.
The Dolphins have so far been a success story after Wayne Bennett’s expansion team won their opening two NRL games. Photograph: Darren England/AAP

Two weeks into the 2023 NRL season and the story that has captured the imagination like no other has been that of the remarkable early success of the Dolphins. The expansion team sit top of the ladder, having become just the third new outfit in 113 years – after the Brisbane Broncos and the Melbourne Storm – to win their opening two games.

So followed calls to further expand the competition, according to the Daily Telegraph, which reported that the ARL Commission is planning an expansion to 20 teams by 2032. ARLC chair Peter V’landys has never been backwards in shaking up the status quo and is driven by a desire to dominate.

The question now not only centres around whether can the NRL expand to 20 teams, but also whether the risk associated with such an expansion would be worth the potential rewards.

The story of the Dolphins – who were widely criticised for not signing a marquee player and started the year as the wooden spoon favourites – has been a boon for the NRL, but expansion is no certainty of success. Each case needs to be examined on its merits.

The adulation currently being directed at the Dolphins is deserved, but they have had some significant advantages. The club has a long history in a rugby league heartland in a city that loves the game arguably more than any other. They entered the NRL as the richest club in the league and signed arguably the greatest coach the game has known. But they received no salary cap advantages from HQ, nor did the NRL force clubs to release players.

It is not a model that will work elsewhere, and the NRL must look significantly at the framework surrounding expansion before committing to it. Rugby league has a long history of leaving expansion teams to their own devices.

But an 18th team, at least, seems entirely natural. First though, the NRL first needs to be clear on its reasons for expansion and what it needs to commit to in terms of support for any new franchise.

Additional broadcast revenue clearly informs decision-making here – more teams equals more games equals more advertising and subscription revenue. There also seems to be a desire to expand the game’s footprint both nationally and internationally. The Olympic Games, to be held in Brisbane in 2032, is seen as a great opportunity to showcase rugby league as Australia’s true national game.

Yet the risks are plentiful. Financial stability is the most obvious sticking point, so too talent depth, with the NRL needing to bring in pathways to get an additional 100-odd players up to standard.

The NRL finds itself in an excellent place at the moment when it comes to competitive balance. An expansion team sits atop the table. In the 16 games this season, 11 have been decided by 10 points or fewer. Parity is one of the NRL’s great selling points and expanding too quickly puts that at risk. In 1995, the most comparable year, the Cowboys conceded 60 twice and the Crushers scored three tries in their first four games. Four of the 20 teams won four games or fewer.

Location for any new addition to the NRL will also be critical. There has been talk about bringing in a Pasifika or a Papua New Guinean team – potentially based in Cairns or overseas. PNG would likely have their nose ahead given the Hunters have been around for a decade in the Q-Cup, but given the expense of flying entire teams to Pacific islands for games and the cultural differences of Fiji, Tonga and Samoa, there are serious flaws to that plan, despite its positive intentions.

Perth would be a logical choice for an 18th team, given it is a well-populated city that embraces its sporting franchises. The Reds existed for three years and were hardly a failure before becoming a victim of the Super League war. Western Australia is perhaps also the best fit for a revival of the Bears franchise, as there is no benefit in adding a new franchise to the already cluttered New South Wales market.

But the NRL cannot seriously look at expanding further into New Zealand, where the Warriors have not been a success on or off the field. The country has embraced them, but they have failed to make any serious inroads into rugby union’s preeminence in the country. It is also becoming increasingly difficult for the Warriors to not only attract big-name players but also to keep the best of their own young talent. Given the logistical and economic realities of New Zealand, it is hard to see how plonking a franchise in Wellington or Christchurch would work.

These are heady times for the NRL. Expansion is certainly an option, but it comes with significant risk and the league needs to tread with care.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.