Talk:National Rugby League

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Major breaches of the salary cap reduction[edit]

I would like to propose that the Major breaches of the salary cap section is reduced in size as it contains way too much detail. All the detail that is in this section is contained within each of the three dedicated articles so is basically repeated here. This section should be a brief summary - no more than 4 lines for each breach and then reference the dedicated articles.Anderch (talk) 05:52, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apologies for mistaken use of minor edit flag[edit]

Sorry about the use of the minor edit flag, but a deletion of referenced material without replacing it with similarly referenced material looks initially like vandalism, not a good faith edit. (And exactly how is this material original research if it has citations? I won't further object to its removal, however, not being interested in Rugby - as opposed to in fighting vandalism on Wikipedia.) Allens (talk | contribs) 13:12, 1 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[edit]

I think they changed the logo about a week ago, so why is the old one still up? TollHRT52 (talk) 13:17, 4 November 2012 (AEDST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.1.70 (talk)

Done. Bongomanrae (talk) 00:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NRL team table[edit]

Just wondering if anyone has an issue if I replace the current team list table with this. I think showing the singlets works for the AFL page as they are rarely changed and act as a logo of sorts for the teams. However NRL jerseys change quite regularly and every other sporting page I've seen just has the teams listed with a layout similar to the one below. Thoughts? Bongomanrae (talk) 00:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Colours Club Headquarters Stadium Founded Joined Head coach
Brisbane Broncos Red Hill, Brisbane, Qld Suncorp Stadium 1987 1988 Anthony Griffin
Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs Belmore, Sydney, NSW ANZ Stadium 25 Sept 1934 1935 Des Hasler
Canberra Raiders Bruce, Canberra, ACT Canberra Stadium 30 March 1981 1982 David Furner
Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks Cronulla, Sydney, NSW Toyota Park 1963 1967 Shane Flanagan
Gold Coast Titans Robina, Gold Coast, Qld Skilled Park 2006 2007 John Cartwright
Manly-Warringah Sea Eagles Narrabeen, Sydney, NSW Brookvale Oval 1932 1947 Geoff Toovey
Melbourne Storm Melbourne, Vic AAMI Park 1997 1998 Craig Bellamy
Newcastle Knights New Lambton, Newcastle, NSW Hunter Stadium 1987 1988 Wayne Bennett
New Zealand Warriors Penrose, Auckland, NZ Mt Smart Stadium 1992 1995 Matt Elliott
North Queensland Cowboys Kirwan, Townsville, Qld Dairy Farmers Stadium 1992 1995 Neil Henry
Parramatta Eels Parramatta, Sydney, NSW Parramatta Stadium 4 Nov 1946 1947 Ricky Stuart
Penrith Panthers Penrith, Sydney, NSW Centrebet Stadium 4 July 1966 1967 Ivan Cleary
St. George Illawarra Dragons Kogarah, Sydney, NSW WIN Jubilee Oval
WIN Stadium
23 Sept 1998 1999 Steve Price
South Sydney Rabbitohs Redfern, Sydney, NSW ANZ Stadium 17 Jan 1908 1908 Michael Maguire
Sydney Roosters Bondi Junction, Sydney, NSW Allianz Stadium 24 Jan 1908 1908 Trent Robinson
Wests Tigers Concord, Sydney, NSW Campbelltown Stadium
Leichhardt Oval
Allianz Stadium
27 July 1999 2000 Mick Potter

Personally, I prefer the existing layout.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 07:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If the jerseys were kept up to date then I say leave it but as no one is updating the jersey images, then change it, so many are out of date it makes the page look crappy. I will be doing this to the 2013 season page in a fortnight so lets keep it the same. Anderch (talk) 11:14, 6 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NRL Introduction[edit]

Just trying to clean up the intro for the page to make it easier for new fans to understand what the NRL actually is and not be overwhelmed with info. I've looked at the NFL page for some inspiration and tried to simplify the words/sentences used.
-Changed the opening sentence from three to just one. ;)
-Brief mention of founding+origins, not included things like the SL War as it's only the intro (it will be expanded upon further down & in history section).
-Removed the sponsorship sentence (sponsor will be changing for the 2013 season and will move to the sponsor or history section).
-Removed outdated info about the NRL Partnership as it's no longer relevant. Will be moved to NRL History page.
-Last paragrpah left mostly unchanged. Have moved the WCC info to the Season structure section.


The National Rugby League (NRL) is the highest level of professional rugby league football in Australia, and is widely considered the preeminent professional rugby league football competition in the world.

The NRL traces its origins to 1908 when nine clubs created the New South Wales Rugby Football League in Sydney, Australia. Today it consists of sixteen clubs, fifteen from Australia and one from New Zealand. It is regarded as the world's elite rugby league championship and, per season, is the single most viewed and attended rugby football competition in the world.

NRL matches are played over twenty-six regular season and four finals series rounds throughout Australia and New Zealand, from autumn until spring. The season culminates in the premiership-deciding game, the Grand Final, traditionally one of Australia's most popular sporting events and one of the largest attended club championship events in the world.[1] The National Rugby League is governed by the Australian Rugby Football League (ARL).


Thoughts? Bongomanrae (talk) 01:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This one is too short. The existing one is better IMO.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 07:39, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is there anything in particular you'd add, keeping in mind that it is an introduction to the league? Bongomanrae (talk) 11:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just to add, the shortened intro above is still longer than the introductions for other domestic competitions such as the Super 15, A-League, NBL, netball, baseball and the three domestic cricket comps. Bongomanrae (talk) 05:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NRL clubs section[edit]

I think this section needs some better flow aswell. At the moment it's cut in half by the NRL map and NRL club table. I think first of all it should be joined together either above or below the map. I think we should try and cut the subsections out of it as the Foundation Clubs section is two sentences and the Famous Rivalries section consists of two links. I've done my best to try and form it all into one paragraph to be placed above the NRL map, what do you think?


The NRL consists of sixteen clubs, fifteen in Australia and one in New Zealand. The majority of clubs come from the eastern states of Australia, reflecting the population distribution in Australia generally and also that the origins of Australian rugby league football began in Sydney. The league operates on a single group system, with no divisions or conferences and no relegation and promotion from other leagues.

All but four clubs (the Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks, Gold Coast Titans, New Zealand Warriors and the North Queensland Cowboys) have won the premiership. For a complete list of all teams no longer competing in the NRL see here


Bongomanrae (talk) 01:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Personally, I don't share your enthusiasm for shortening this article while creating several other even shorter and needless articles. I'd be putting tags requesting merges back to this article on all the 'see also' articles you have here.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 07:42, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WP:AGF I didn't create the Expansion or Rivalry articles although I have edited them, nor do I think shortening articles for the sake of it is a good idea. There is however a lot of chaff on the NRL page which has accumulated piecemeal over the years (some of the tv broadcast info I removed today was from 2003) as there has been no real direction in the editing.
I prefer to consolidate smaller articles into one larger (but not too large) article so there is more useful information on each page (ie: the old state league pages before I got to them). In cases like this where we have subsections which consist of two links or isolated/dead sentences I think we'd be better off if we could at least integrate it into a one full paragraph, especially when it is a Top-Importance article.
FTR I think integrating the expansion article back onto the NRL main-page wouldn't be a bad idea but the Rivalries page looks like it is too in-depth to be merged successfully. Bongomanrae (talk) 11:09, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NRL History & Salary cap sections[edit]

At the moment these two sections dominate the NRL page. I think the Salary cap section should definitely be moved to a specific page (One already exists here: NRL salary cap) and a concise couple of sentences left as a subsection. This may cause controversy but I think the majority of the year-by-year history sections should be moved to the History of the NRL page so editors can go into as much detail as they'd like. A paragraph or two should be all that is required on the mainpage imo, between the introduction and the clubs sections. Just enough to inform the reader and if they want to read further they can follow the link. Something simple like the following is all that is really required on the main page imo.


In season 2013 the NRL salary cap for the top 25 contracted players is 5 million[2]

The NRL treats breaches of the salary cap seriously and has gained worldwide attention for the punishment dealt to the Melbourne Storm for their systematic breaches between 2006-2010. [3] [4]


In 1908 several rugby union players and officials met and created the New South Wales Rugby Football league. Between 1982 and 1995 the league expanded interstate and internationally, with the goal of forming a national competition. However in the mid-1990's the Super League War occurred and by 1997 there were two separate leagues running in competition. The unification of these competitions under the banner of the National Rugby League occurred in 1998. Etc


  1. ^ Schwarz, David (2 September 2009). "Spike TV To Telecast National Rugby League Playoffs and Championship Game". Thomson Reuters. Reuters. Retrieved 19 September 2009.
  2. ^ "NRL Clubs Finally Receiving a Piece of !b Television Pie". The Daily Telegraph. 1 November 2012.
  3. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/sports/rugby/24iht-RUGBY.html?_r=0
  4. ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/apr/22/melbourne-storm-stripped-nrl-titles

Thoughts? (Be gentle)... Bongomanrae (talk) 01:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article outline[edit]

Does anyone want to discuss a general outline of the article? It's a bit of a mess atm but I think if we decide on a framework it'll be a lot easier to keep organised.

  • Intro
  • History
  • Clubs
  • Season Structure
    • Preseason
      • World Club Challenge
      • All Stars Match
    • Premiership season
    • Finals series
    • Grand Final
      • Grand Final traditions
  • Players
    • Salary cap
    • Judiciary
    • Banned substances policy
    • Indigenous players
  • Records
  • Awards
    • Premiership trophy
    • JJ Giltinan Shield
    • Clive Churchill medal
    • Dally M Awards
  • Audience
    • Attendance
    • Television
      • Detiled Oz coverage
      • NRL related tv shows
    • Radio
    • Print
    • Internet/new media
    • Video games
    • Merchadise
    • NRL Theme songs
  • Sponsorship
  • See Also/refs/links/templates/etc


Thoughts? Bongomanrae (talk) 04:35, 5 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Non-traditional venues[edit]

This is a bit messy atm, it's just a list of bullet points. Anyone want to discuss how we should organise it? ie: List by club, list by venue or list by season? Bongomanrae (talk) 23:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Also section[edit]

Would anyone object if we trimmed it down? The links to the state federations and state comps are kind of redundant since they're all in the template at the bottom of the page. Links to PNGRFL, NZRL, The Kiwis, Pacific Islands RL, World Cup etc are also not really relevant to the NRL or am I missing something? Bongomanrae (talk) 01:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Go for it :) Mattlore (talk) 20:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New premiers table[edit]

Just putting this up if anyone would like to use it here or on the History page.

Bongomanrae (talk) 11:13, 19 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Playing the NRL vs AFL game in the article. Not a very mature thing to do.[edit]

In the 2006: A unique year section, there's a bit talking of record TV ratings "particularly capturing Melbourne on Grand Final night". I was accused of being paranoid for removing it. I submit that the opposite is true. The ratings were great, but only a paranoid NRL fan would want to single out Melbourne in that sentence, presumably as part of trying to prove that NRL is better than AFL, a pointless and ultimately stupid goal to aim for. (Note that I am note taking sides with that statement. Just pointing out the futility of playing that game.)

The sports do not really compete with one another. Each is successful on their respective sides of the Barassi Line. The NRL Grand is timed at least partly to achieve great TV ratings. The AFL Grand Final is not (it's held at the same time it was before TV was invented), and is not even on the same weekend.

Yes, we have a source, a Sydney one, obviously with a target audience that favours NRL. It delivers what its readers want to see. Surely there was more to say about the great ratings than the situation in Melbourne. I submit that just saying there were terrific ratings is a more civilised claim than trying to prove something about NRL being successful in Melbourne. THAT'S where the paranoia is on display. HiLo48 (talk) 07:28, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I see it, the gist of the original text was noting the support of the game, with the unusualness of that support coming in a non-traditional league area. Its tone could have been more neutral. I see no references to the AFL, or the AFL Grand Final, and no references to the relative merits of each sport.
Explicit references to the AFL and the AFL Grand Final aren't needed. It's an obvious part of the context to any informed reader. The absence of explicit mentions surely doesn't mean that readers were meant to ignore the reality that Melbourne is the home of AFL and that the AFL Grand Final is a (possibly?) comparable event just a week later. HiLo48 (talk) 08:53, 30 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Rugby league - the game they play in Melbourne" is the title of the article. Oh, but only a paranoid Sydney Morning Herald journalist "would want to single out Melbourne in that sentence, presumably (as though it wasn't clear you're being presumptuous) as part of trying to prove that NRL is better than AFL". Your disagreement is not with me. It's with a published, third-party source. And we all know who wins that disagreement every time. Apart from what you've typed above, do you know what else makes it obvious that you're not at all serious about this (or possibly any other) Wikipedia article? You've put that Herald article as the footnote on the end of this sentence: "The game itself once again enjoyed strong support, with more record TV ratings.[16]" yet nowhere in the source is any record mentioned. I'll fix it now.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 08:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I give up. Keep playing your Rugby League is better than AFL game. Including that content simply shows your immaturity. But because of that immaturity, you won't understand what I am trying to achieve with the article. One day it might become a better one, with less fan based hype and nonsense. HiLo48 (talk) 08:26, 31 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Transfers sections in NRL season articles[edit]

I think the transfers section in the 2013 article is too long and indeed that this detail is not needed in a season article. If deemed encyclopedic, the information could instead be included in a specific transfers article or perhaps the 2013 club articles. In any case, there are currently two separate sections in the 2013 article for transfers (one for each year), which is illogical.Eldumpo (talk) 09:41, 24 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This has also bothered me for a while. I wish people would put it in the club's relevant season article, e.g. 2013 Brisbane Broncos season where it belongs. I used to go around putting {{merge}} on sections like that. I also wish people would put such info in either a section entitled 'pre-season' or 'post-season' once moved to the club's season article. It's often formatted so lazily that readers can't even tell which club the 2013 season was played at.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 06:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General Article Clean up[edit]

I have been cleaning up the whole article and moving things around so it flows better but there are a couple of sections that I think need to be moved or deleted.

  • Major breaches of the salary cap is too detailed and long winded - there are individual pages for these stories so most of this info should be moved there.
  • the Audience section - do we seriously need this much detail? this section is way to long and needs to be culled. We don't need to know what time the NRL is on TV.
  • A more concise statistic section, not necessarily detailed but less wordy.
  • Deletion of the "History of the NRL" page and merge with this main article.

Thoughts? Anderch (talk) 04:29, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Most of what you're doing seems fine. I do get really concerned when referenced content (including sources) are simply deleted (e.g. [1]). You need a very good reason to do that. Moving it can be understandable. Deleting, less so.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:15, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wrote the stats section, but your version is better.

What on earth is Provan-Summons?[edit]

It's a very strange name for a championship trophy. If it's a sponsor's name, it doesn't belong in this article on the whole history of the league. HiLo48 (talk) 10:52, 19 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Norm Provan and Arthur Summons are the men depicted in the NRL trophy.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 12:02, 19 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is a global encyclopaedia. It would help comprehension of this article quite a lot if that was explained in the article. There's no point writing an article with content that will only be understood by people who already know a lot about the subject. Right now we have a cowboy IP editor rudely editing and reverting without explanation and with added insults. Not helpful. HiLo48 (talk) 12:16, 19 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The second sentence of National_Rugby_League#The_Provan-Summons_Trophy reads, "It is a three-dimensional cast of a famous photo called The Gladiators, which depicted a mud-soaked Norm Provan of St. George and Arthur Summons of Western Suburbs embracing after the 1963 Grand Final."--Gibson Flying V (talk) 12:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Had a bit of a 'what-the...?' when I noticed this revert. HiLo48, no offence but if you don't know what the Provan-Summons Trophy is then maybe you should do a quick search before reverting edits on the NRL page. Here's a link from the NRL to get you up to speed. http://www.nrl.com/nrl-trophy-named-after-provan-and-summons/tabid/10874/newsid/74176/default.aspx Bongomanrae (talk) 13:05, 19 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You have missed my point completely. If I couldn't tell what on earth the name of the trophy meant, then none of our readers will know either, unless they already know a lot about the subject matter. Encyclopaedia articles have to be written for people who don't already know everything about the subject, not just insiders. Gibson Flying V has made a very good edit to address the problem. HiLo48 (talk) 18:53, 19 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi again HiLo, I see this has happened once more. Reverting edits on subjects you're unsure about is not always the most helpful way to add to articles. If you see something you think may be wrong just leave a note on the talk page for a more experienced or knowledgeable editor to fix it. Cheers Bongomanrae (talk) 00:07, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Audience section - lacking something[edit]

The Audience section tells me far too much about TV coverage, a tiny bit about online and radio coverage, and absolutely nothing about actual bums on seats at the games. I think the article would gain from such content. (And maybe just a little bit less about the TV coverage?) HiLo48 (talk) 10:20, 25 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wording changes to avoid further reverts[edit]

"is one of the most viewed and attended rugby football competitions in the world." to "is the most viewed and attended rugby football club competition in the world." This is a simple change. The NRL is unquestionably the most attended club competition in either rugby code, supported by List of sports attendance figures which is linked in the See Also section. Specifying that it's a club competition helps separate it from popular non-club competitions like State of Origin or the Six Nations.

"one of the country's largest attended sporting championship games" to "one of the world's largest attended sporting championship games." Another simple change supported by List of sports attendance figures.

"It is the second most watched sports league on Australian television" to "It is the most watched sports league on Australian television," This is directly supported by the source used, comparing the 120M who watched the NRL to the 111M who watched the next closest league, the AFL. Looks like someone has unhelpfully changed it in the past but it was never reverted. Bongomanrae (talk) 00:43, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Three things for now. I'm heading out and will try to address these in more detail later. 1. Have you read WP:PEACOCK? Using boasting style language is not very encyclopaedic. Use the numerical facts and let readers decide for themselves. 2. You did nothing about the dead link. When you make an absolute claim and cite it to a dead source, it doesn't look good. 3. TV ratings are always arguable on something as complex as sports seasons. Linking to an article about just such a dispute is pointless. HiLo48 (talk) 01:14, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No need for special articles, for peacockery goodness just read the opening paragraph here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFL_Grand_Final
Yes, that's bad. Feel free to try cleaning up. Might have a go myself. It's sad that sorts fans from all codes seem to feel such a need to hype up their game in articles here. We should state clear facts, and let the audience work out significance. But back to this topic. We shouldn't use a bad article elsewhere as justification for making this a bad article. The one that will always impress me the most is a least florid and peacockish one. HiLo48 (talk)
OK, I've cleaned up that first paragraph over at AFL Grand Final, so now we clean the crap from this one. OK? HiLo48 (talk) 10:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Using the bare minimum of words to describe sourced, empirical facts is not peacocking. I suggest you re-read the Peacocking article. If you have an issue with a reference you can always search for another source and use that instead. Bongomanrae (talk) 01:49, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The one real source there is about a dispute. You cannot rationally use one side's figures from a dispute as a reliable source. HiLo48 (talk) 08:46, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The cumulative numbers in that article are not in dispute. They are the final figures presented by OzTam and RegionalTAM. Bongomanrae (talk) 22:08, 6 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Those figures are all very cherry picked. Not an apples to apples comparison. And that's impossible because of the different TV coverage polices of the codes. But you probably haven't looked into that. HiLo48 (talk) 07:40, 9 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Apples to apples comparisons are exactly what OZTAm and RegionalTAM provide. They are completely independant of the television programs they compile statistics on and that is why they are the industry standard. I'm not really sure why this is hard to understand? However I am content with the recent change to the wording of the article. Bongomanrae (talk) 02:20, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't want to go too far into this on this page, but it's important to be aware of the different goals of the two sporting associations. The AFL has historically not had the same obsession with numbers of TV viewers as the NRL. In fact, for a long time, the AFL actually prohibited TV coverage of some games, in order to not harm physical attendances at the actual games. Even now, the AFL's approach is more one of maximising financial returns from the media (including international and Internet coverage), and keeping ground attendances up, rather than pure numbers of viewers. The timing of the respective Grand Finals is relevant here. The NRL GF is timed to get maximum number of TV viewers. The AFL GF is still held at its 150 year old traditional Saturday afternoon time to keep the at-the-ground fans happy. The NRL Sunday night time slot definitely attracts more viewers, but does that really prove it's more popular? I'm not here to fight over that claim (which could easily go off topic). Just wanted to add some facts and thoughts to the discussion. HiLo48 (talk) 02:41, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What a bizarre comment. In the future can you please try to keep to the topic at hand, which in this case the impartiality and transparency of the television industry in Australia. If you'd like to talk about your personal opinions on certain subjects maybe posting on a forum instead of an encyclopedia would also be a good idea. Bongomanrae (talk) 02:58, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would dare to suggest that the purpose of the multiple examples of TV audience claims in this article is primarily to demonstrate that the NRL is doing better than the AFL. I would also dare to suggest that it's not that simple. As I said, I don't want a fight, but if the implied claim is not proven by the information in the article, that information becomes of lesser value, and perhaps undue. Calling my comment bizarre is unhelpful. HiLo48 (talk) 03:52, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You (and the vandal/s, strangely enough) continually bring up the AFL. I'd just like to remind you that there are more than two sports leagues in Australia, and that is why the NRL's high viewer figures are notable. Bongomanrae (talk) 04:21, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And that's where things go very silly. This is ONLY about competition with the AFL. Stop pretending otherwise. The source is about comparison with the AFL. I happen to think such comparisons are all very silly and pointless. It's some Rugby League fans who are pushing the issue. HiLo48 (talk) 05:19, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
HiLo it doesn't matter if the AFL exists or not, the fact remains the same. I'd also urge you to try and keep the conversation civil and on-topic if you can, as I note you've been banned quite a few times for personal attacks and anti-social behaviour on Wikipedia. Bongomanrae (talk) 05:35, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This IS stupid. I have said nothing uncivil. You certainly have now. I have never been banned. I have been blocked by a stupid justice system here for getting in the way of POV pushing. The "NRL is better than AFL" game, which this IS all about, IS POV pushing, and stupid. But I think it's a silly game. You deny it exists. I've said my piece. So let's stop talking about it. HiLo48 (talk) 05:41, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It was just a warning HiLo, I didn't want to see you telling people to "fuck off" again. Just keep in mind that this is an article about the National Rugby League and no-one else seems to have an issue with the NRL's television ratings being included (well, aside from some vandals). The only editor to have mentioned the AFL is you, who coincidentally is a fan of an AFL team and who doesn't know the name of the NRL trophy or other basic facts about the game. I'm not saying you're pushing an agenda but I would advocate a more cautious approach to editing subjects you're not confident about. Bongomanrae (talk) 06:14, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can stick your warning where it fits. HiLo48 (talk) 06:45, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But I asked a serious question in my Edit summary for my most recent change to the article. Can we get hold of more up-to-date data than 2010? HiLo48 (talk) 03:58, 10 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on National Rugby League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:41, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on National Rugby League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:48, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on National Rugby League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on National Rugby League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:11, 26 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

a map would be nice[edit]

it is easier to understand where teams are located when there is a map - thankyou14:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.43.216.190 (talk)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on National Rugby League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:47, 9 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on National Rugby League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:02, 3 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on National Rugby League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:00, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Commons file used in this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The file ScaleWidthWyIxNDAiXQ-NRL-TelstraPremiership-GRAD.png on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for speedy deletion. View the deletion reason at the Commons file description page. Community Tech bot (talk) 02:07, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NBC Sports rights in United States?[edit]

...Something seems fishy about this claim about NBC Sports having gained rights to this league in the United States. A few minutes ago, I saw a commercial advertising the NRL on Fox Soccer Plus stating it to be the home of the NRL, a commercial I'm sure would not have aired had the United States rights actually transferred over to NBC Sports. Is there a solid source that can back up this "NBC Sports has rights to the NRL in the United States" claim? Thanks. --76.92.157.20 (talk) 08:39, 8 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Competition Naming[edit]

Let me get this straight... It states between 1908 to 1994 was the NSWRL, then it passed from NSWRL to the ARL (1995-2002?) then from the ARL to the NRL (2003-2021?). Adamdaley (talk) 01:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ARL was 1995-1997 with the single season of Superleague also in 1997, then NRL 1998 on. Essentially it's all the same thing, with the SL jammed in there as well.

  • So my years in my original post is wrong? Cause I'm getting cards graded and would like to know what is when, NSWRL until 1994; ARL until 1997; including Super League; NRL since when? 1998? Adamdaley (talk) 10:35, 20 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NSWRFL (1908-1983) NSWRL (1984-1994) ARL (1995-1997) SL (1997) NRL (1998-2021)

I am not a rugby league aficionado. But I am interested in this timeline. And I am now totally confused. Can anybody please write out this timeline with a few more, plain English words, making it understandable to outsiders? HiLo48 (talk) 08:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@HiLo48: From 1908–1994 the competition was named the NSWRL. In 1995, the name then changed to the ARL and that name lasted until 1997. In 1997, due to the Super League War, the Super League also ran concurrently as a top level rugby league competition that year. Then in 1998, the two tournaments merged together again to create the NRL, which it has been known as since. Hope this helps. WDM10 (talk) 02:38, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Up until 1983 (not 1984 as I mentioned before, now fixed), it was the NSWRFL (New South Wales Rugby Football League). Though I suppose technically these are all names of the organisation that ran the competitions.
True good point, though these are generally seen as the same there was that difference in name. WDM10 (talk) 06:08, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @WDM10: - The cards I've got graded are all NSWRL (1960s - 1983). Would this still be correct (graded as NSWRL) rather NSWRFL? Adamdaley (talk) 22:35, 23 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not clear what you are saying, the NSWRFL and NSWRL are the same thing, just a minor name variation.

Is it at all possible that someone who actually knows this history could put themselves mentally in the position of someone who knows nothing at all about it, and write this history out fully, using words rather than abbreviations, initialisms and acronyms? This is a global encyclopaedia. Write it for the outsider, not insiders.

That's what the article is for, you could start there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Local Potentate (talkcontribs) 07:10, 22 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

fit wiki link[edit]

Hi I was wondering if someone could make a wikipedia bio or fix the current one about the ceo of the nrl andrew abdo as there seems to be a problem with the current one 112.213.204.139 (talk) 06:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Video games section[edit]

The article says the NRL began in 1998, however several video games are listed prior to the NRL existing. None of these were NRL licensed titles:


This content belongs in Rugby league in Australia instead Rulesfan (talk) 05:57, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]