Jump to content


RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE (ISSUE 397 - MAY 2014): Available to download now. Get the app from Apple Newsstand or GooglePlay, or click here to read it online now at Pocketmags.com - Print edition in shops from Friday, or click here to get it delivered by post in the UK or worldwide.

Rugby League World - April 2014
League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Kear sees the light on franchising


  • Please log in to reply
214 replies to this topic

#61 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,712 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 10:02 PM

QUOTE (The Parksider @ Jun 30 2010, 06:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The gap is too big between NL and SL for any meaningful promotion and relegation.


Sadly I agree with that 100%.

With the salary cap in the Championship be what, 450k, there or there abouts, your over a million off being with the top spenders in Super League and a good few hundred thousand from catching up with the lowest spenders. It must now be impossible to build a squad in the Championship that only needs a couple of additions to compete week in week out in Super League, so your talking wholesale changes to playing staff in what, an 8 to 10 week period, and then chances are you'll be picking up scraps from those relegated.

Scrap the salary cap and yes you could build a squad, but then as many on here will tell you that'll just lead to idiots bankrupting clubs chasing the impossible dream.

On Friday 28th March I'm taking part in the Wigan Streetsleep, raising money for The Brick charity who try to ensure nobody in Wigan finding themselves homeless spends a 2nd night on the streets and providing help and support via a foodbank.  Every penny counts so if you can spare anything at all its much appreciated - this link will take you to my sponsorship page thanks.


#62 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 39,806 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 11:04 PM

QUOTE (Terry Mullaney @ Jun 30 2010, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yes MD, what were Leeds, Saints, Bradford getting through the gates back then. It's all relative.
ision clubs
it is all relative.
I'm sure even you will understand that working out the averages for all first division clubs for that year would destroy most peaoples' will to live.
what I can offer you is the higheest lowest crowds for each clun in that division, apart from barrow, and bradford who's stats might well be inside one of the dogs

Hull: 20-569-8545
Hull KR: 13610-5006
Wigan: 12172-3883
Saints: 9438-1999
Widnes: 7841-2707
Cas: 6744-2234
Oldham: 5797-2437
Leigh: 9387-2958
warrington: 5173-2042
fev: 5148-1240
workington: 3067-435
halifax: 4104-984
carlisle: 3331-846

fev cas derbys that year: home 4134, away 3530. One would have thought that not only would they have been bigger, but that they would have been the biggest for both clubs considering the apparent significance of the game.

after rovers reached wembley and were involved in those much touted relegation games, they had crowds of 1728, 3153, 3753.

It is indeed all relative.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015

Keeping it local


#63 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,911 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 11:35 PM

QUOTE (l'angelo mysterioso @ Jul 1 2010, 12:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm sure even you will understand that working out the averages for all first division clubs for that year would destroy most peaoples' will to live.
what I can offer you is the higheest lowest crowds for each clun in that division, apart from barrow, and bradford who's stats might well be inside one of the dogs

Hull: 20-569-8545
Hull KR: 13610-5006
Wigan: 12172-3883
Saints: 9438-1999
Widnes: 7841-2707
Cas: 6744-2234
Oldham: 5797-2437
Leigh: 9387-2958
warrington: 5173-2042
fev: 5148-1240
workington: 3067-435
halifax: 4104-984
carlisle: 3331-846

fev cas derbys that year: home 4134, away 3530. One would have thought that not only would they have been bigger, but that they would have been the biggest for both clubs considering the apparent significance of the game.

after rovers reached wembley and were involved in those much touted relegation games, they had crowds of 1728, 3153, 3753.

It is indeed all relative.

What do you mean by 'even you will understand'? You really can't be civil when it comes to responding to my postings can you?

I didn't ask anyone to work out average figures for all first division clubs and I definitely didn't ask you unless your initials are MD. I mentioned three, one of which, Leeds, you haven't covered anyway.

With regard to derbies, it would appear that Wigan v Saints attracted 12172 and the reverse fixture at Knowsley Rd 9438 assuming they were the respective top gates of the two clubs. Much much lower than now.

Yes, as I said, it is all relative to the particular era.
Wedding Films For The Discerning by Picture House
Free Showreel DVD On Request

http://www.pictureho...ingfilms.co.uk/

#64 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 39,806 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 07:58 AM

QUOTE (Terry Mullaney @ Jul 1 2010, 12:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What do you mean by 'even you will understand'? You really can't be civil when it comes to responding to my postings can you?

I didn't ask anyone to work out average figures for all first division clubs and I definitely didn't ask you unless your initials are MD. I mentioned three, one of which, Leeds, you haven't covered anyway.

With regard to derbies, it would appear that Wigan v Saints attracted 12172 and the reverse fixture at Knowsley Rd 9438 assuming they were the respective top gates of the two clubs. Much much lower than now.

Yes, as I said, it is all relative to the particular era.


I think your first comment is a fair one, and I apologise.
But please bear in mind that;
time and time again you are provided with detailed information by me and others, and it doesn't seem to register: this occassion being an example.

you don't back up your own statements, but expect people to go to the trouble to back up theirs, which I have done in my last post.

crowds in the 70s-early eighties were lower, but Rovers were relatively low-significantly so compared to other clubs, bearing in mind that Rovers werea cup winning side and were involved in a relegation bttle-as I showed there was no significant rise in attendances during and after Rovers cup run and subsequent victory and it's attendant battle against relegation.

when it comes to civility, might I suggest that you check pout some of your own past comments, and Lowfield's lst post on thbis thread? Not that two(or more) wrongs make a right.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015

Keeping it local


#65 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 39,806 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 08:02 AM

QUOTE (LOWFIELD @ Jun 30 2010, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
what the helll as fev in 83 got to do with attendances in the last 3 weeks
would love to know how you managed to get the role of Rovers heritage officer when you show no regard for the clubs past efforts. your a disgrace

I was replying to Trojan's previous post. I believe the post was pertinnt.
as for your second comment...I wonder what Mr Mullaney thinks.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015

Keeping it local


#66 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,911 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 09:23 AM

QUOTE (l'angelo mysterioso @ Jul 1 2010, 08:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think your first comment is a fair one, and I apologise.
But please bear in mind that;
time and time again you are provided with detailed information by me and others, and it doesn't seem to register: this occassion being an example.

you don't back up your own statements, but expect people to go to the trouble to back up theirs, which I have done in my last post.

crowds in the 70s-early eighties were lower, but Rovers were relatively low-significantly so compared to other clubs, bearing in mind that Rovers werea cup winning side and were involved in a relegation bttle-as I showed there was no significant rise in attendances during and after Rovers cup run and subsequent victory and it's attendant battle against relegation.

when it comes to civility, might I suggest that you check pout some of your own past comments, and Lowfield's lst post on thbis thread? Not that two(or more) wrongs make a right.

I give up. Your last post bears out all that I've said. Attendances were lower generally then than they are now so logically clubs such as Rovers could expect proportionate increases if allowed access to SL. John Kear has realised that Licensing is not the way forward and good on him for admitting he was mistaken. Thanks for your efforts in supplying the figures.

Edited by Terry Mullaney, 01 July 2010 - 10:23 AM.

Wedding Films For The Discerning by Picture House
Free Showreel DVD On Request

http://www.pictureho...ingfilms.co.uk/

#67 LOWFIELD

LOWFIELD
  • Featherstone Rovers Forum
  • 3,776 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 10:57 AM

QUOTE (l'angelo mysterioso @ Jun 30 2010, 12:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
how come that didn't happen when fev were battling against relegation in 83, on top of which they won the cup: average attendance 2,600


Its like having a conversation with a young child this is. The crowds Fev got in 83 is irrelevant maybe if there was no relegation they would of been lower. Im saying the last 3 crowds Cas have had would of been significantly higher had relegation been at stake probably by 2k a game and at 18 a throw that is around 100,000 in just 3 games. The licencing system is costing the game millions per season. Im also been very conservative with my 2k estimate, as the game is money orientated it wont be long before the system is scrapped and 2 divisions are introduced

#68 dallymessenger

dallymessenger
  • Coach
  • 20,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 11:02 AM

yeah if franchsing was in les cats would be relegated now.

and barrow would be in SL ahead of widnes.

i can see why you guys like franchising so much.

the whole future of the sport should be based on one game.

#69 LOWFIELD

LOWFIELD
  • Featherstone Rovers Forum
  • 3,776 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 11:06 AM

QUOTE (dallymessenger @ Jul 1 2010, 12:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
yeah if franchsing was in les cats would be relegated now.

and barrow would be in SL ahead of widnes.

i can see why you guys like franchising so much.

the whole future of the sport should be based on one game.


Why shouldnt les cats be relegated?
Why shouldnt Barrow be in instead of Widnes?
The future wouldnt be decided on 1 game, if the division below was funded as it should be relegation wouldnt be a disaster and the relegated clubs could regroup and get promoted

#70 dallymessenger

dallymessenger
  • Coach
  • 20,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 11:24 AM

QUOTE (LOWFIELD @ Jul 1 2010, 12:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why shouldnt les cats be relegated?
Why shouldnt Barrow be in instead of Widnes?
The future wouldnt be decided on 1 game, if the division below was funded as it should be relegation wouldnt be a disaster and the relegated clubs could regroup and get promoted


the clubs that arent in SL deserve to be where they are

if you average 2000 or less and have been around for a century or more, then that is pathetic

the RFL shouldnt kill off its expansion plans for clubs like this

Edited by dallymessenger, 01 July 2010 - 11:25 AM.


#71 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 14,697 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 11:32 AM

QUOTE (dallymessenger @ Jul 1 2010, 12:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
the clubs that arent in SL deserve to be where they are



Does that include my team Featherstone Rovers? We were in the old Div I and excluded from SL for the now non existent Paris. At the time we were drawing better crowds than Wakefield. Since Wakefield have been in Superleague (in controversial circumstances) their crowds have improved and ours have declined. If we had P&R this season there's a good chance we'd be promoted. But we won't be. If we were promoted and couldn't hack it and were relegated - ce la vie. We'd at least have had our shot, which is more than we've had so far. Promotion and relegation is the meat and drink of British sport. Any game without the carrot of promotion and the stick of relegation loses something for me.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#72 Crusade

Crusade
  • Players
  • 242 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 11:37 AM

QUOTE (The Parksider @ Jun 30 2010, 08:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
There's only ever been about 13 clubs capable of being in the GP and either Leeds have been adrift at the bottom, Rotherham have or someone like Bristol has gone bust. Whoever goes down tends to come straight back up. There's no real relegation battles in the GP save the odd year when someone doesn't do too well and has to overcome the relegation "patsy".
not bad for a competition that had no history and only just started in 1987. no real battle? sale, wocester, newcastle and leeds were still fight it out till the last game of the season. exeter chiefs and bristols were going hard in the championship which got good crowds for the two finals in both towns. it has work great for the english union comp so far.


#73 LOWFIELD

LOWFIELD
  • Featherstone Rovers Forum
  • 3,776 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 12:17 PM

QUOTE (dallymessenger @ Jul 1 2010, 12:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
the clubs that arent in SL deserve to be where they are

if you average 2000 or less and have been around for a century or more, then that is pathetic

the RFL shouldnt kill off its expansion plans for clubs like this


fool

#74 dallymessenger

dallymessenger
  • Coach
  • 20,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 12:27 PM

QUOTE (Trojan @ Jul 1 2010, 12:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Does that include my team Featherstone Rovers? We were in the old Div I and excluded from SL for the now non existent Paris. At the time we were drawing better crowds than Wakefield. Since Wakefield have been in Superleague (in controversial circumstances) their crowds have improved and ours have declined. If we had P&R this season there's a good chance we'd be promoted. But we won't be. If we were promoted and couldn't hack it and were relegated - ce la vie. We'd at least have had our shot, which is more than we've had so far. Promotion and relegation is the meat and drink of British sport. Any game without the carrot of promotion and the stick of relegation loses something for me.


maybe 20 years ago they suffered a bad turn

but today they arent a SL club.

the talk of a new ground could change that.



#75 dallymessenger

dallymessenger
  • Coach
  • 20,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 12:28 PM

QUOTE (LOWFIELD @ Jul 1 2010, 01:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
fool


the only club currently outside SL which is a SL club is widnes.

the rest all arent currently good enough for SL.

#76 Pride & Heritage

Pride & Heritage
  • Coach
  • 464 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 12:35 PM

To all of the pro franchise people. I can see your argument about the promoted team not being competitive enough etc. but this has been caused by the larger clubs in SL who are running the game getting away with feathering there own nests for years. Remember Gateshull and Shuddersfield mergers, the rules have been consistantly bent to favour the select few since the inception of SL. Why should the bigger clubs get 2 votes to 1??? Could you imagine it in any other walk of life? Like a general election for example? The game is a farce at the moment and needs to be run independently of the likes of Mr Hetherington at Leeds with vested interests in what decisions are made for the game as a whole.

Why not set a pool of cash aside from all of the SL clubs to finance the promotion of a team? Like the parachute payment made to Castleford when they were last relegated, but this time give the newly promoted team the cash to be competitive? Surely that is the best solution and will without doubt strengthen that club for the future. The greater the number of strong teams in the game the better the game will be!

Surely the answer is to make the gap between the top clubs and the bottom smaller not bigger, which has been the case for years. Yes, I'm a Batley supporter, a very small club, but it isn't that long ago we drew with St. Helens in the Challenge Cup and would have won it if it wasn't for a last minute touchline goal by Bobby Goulding to get them the draw. Can you imagine that happening in any sort of competition now between SL and the CH's? Don't you think that is why the attendances for the Challenge cup have dropped? Who the hell wants to watch a game where the result is a dead cert before a ball is kicked? Is the game any better for this gulf in class between all of the divisions? I know the arguement for continually strengthening the top tier is to make the international GB/England team stronger, but has this happened in the last 20 years? Can any of you give me any proof that this has worked in any way? I think not, we are no closer now than we were in the 80's to toppling the Aussies, it could even be argued after the last internationals we are now further away than we were. Have we even looked like winning a Tri Nations tournament or World Cup in the last few years?

How good is it for the sport to be dominated by 2 or 3 clubs for decades on end, is that an exciting prospect for enticing new fans to a minority sport? Wigan dominated in the 80's, Leeds and St. Helens almost exclusively ever since with the exception of an odd couple of years of Bradford doing well? We need to get the balance right and have 14 equally matched teams in SL with promotion and relegation brought back in, giving everyone something to play for, and without doubt this boys club smokescreen, known as the franchised system has to be scrapped. Please pull your heads out of the sand and realise that this franchise system is just a smokescreen to protect the few at the cost of all the others! It is not good for the game. That is the only way to strengthen the international game, by making players play to the best of their ability every week, as you would have a few stars in all of the SL clubs rather than the likes of Leeds, St. Helens etc. dominating the talent pool with enough strength in depth to fill 2 1st teams capable of finishing in the top 4 of SL.

If you think that the game is balanced at the moment, and everyone has a good chance of winning, I ask you how many of you would be willing to bet 100 on Salford beating Leeds in a couple of weeks time? Not as many as would bet 100 on Leeds winning I'll bet!

#77 Pride & Heritage

Pride & Heritage
  • Coach
  • 464 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 12:51 PM

QUOTE (dallymessenger @ Jul 1 2010, 12:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
the clubs that arent in SL deserve to be where they are

if you average 2000 or less and have been around for a century or more, then that is pathetic

the RFL shouldnt kill off its expansion plans for clubs like this


Why because expansion has been such a rip roaring success? Are you really so blind that you cannot see what a joke expansion has been? Gateshead, London, Celtic which one has been a success? Prior to them Bridgend and Kent Invicta, where are they now? Celtic pulling under 3000 fans for the Bradford, Wakefield and Catalans, if Batley were in SL, I'd bet we'd get more than 3000 fans every week! Wake up and take the blinkers off and don't believe the hype spouted by the RFL. I'll bet you think the Magic Weekends are a success too! laugh.gif

If you take away the dream of playing in the top tier then the fans disappear too. Our attendances halved over night when we were denied promotion at the inception of SL. We realised there was no way of us ever entering the top tier of the game once that decision was made, and that is what all sport is about isn't it, chasing the dream to be the best? Where would your team be in the lower divisions with nothing left to play for, no dream to chase and how many fans do think you'd be pulling every week?

Edited by Pride & Heritage, 01 July 2010 - 01:22 PM.


#78 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 14,697 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 01:02 PM

QUOTE (Pride & Heritage @ Jul 1 2010, 01:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
To all of the pro franchise people. I can see your argument about the promoted team not being competitive enough etc. but this has been caused by the larger clubs in SL who are running the game getting away with feathering there own nests for years. Remember Gateshull and Shuddersfield mergers, the rules have been consistantly bent to favour the select few since the inception of SL. Why should the bigger clubs get 2 votes to 1??? Could you imagine it in any other walk of life? Like a general election for example? The game is a farce at the moment and needs to be run independently of the likes of Mr Hetherington at Leeds with vested interests in what decisions are made for the game as a whole.

Why not set a pool of cash aside from all of the SL clubs to finance the promotion of a team? Like the parachute payment made to Castleford when they were last relegated, but this time give the newly promoted team the cash to be competitive? Surely that is the best solution and will without doubt strengthen that club for the future. The greater the number of strong teams in the game the better the game will be!

Surely the answer is to make the gap between the top clubs and the bottom smaller not bigger, which has been the case for years. Yes, I'm a Batley supporter, a very small club, but it isn't that long ago we drew with St. Helens in the Challenge Cup and would have won it if it wasn't for a last minute touchline goal by Bobby Goulding to get them the draw. Can you imagine that happening in any sort of competition now between SL and the CH's? Don't you think that is why the attendances for the Challenge cup have dropped? Who the hell wants to watch a game where the result is a dead cert before a ball is kicked? Is the game any better for this gulf in class between all of the divisions? I know the arguement for continually strengthening the top tier is to make the international GB/England team stronger, but has this happened in the last 20 years? Can any of you give me any proof that this has worked in any way? I think not, we are no closer now than we were in the 80's to toppling the Aussies, it could even be argued after the last internationals we are now further away than we were. Have we even looked like winning a Tri Nations tournament or World Cup in the last few years?

How good is it for the sport to be dominated by 2 or 3 clubs for decades on end, is that an exciting prospect for enticing new fans to a minority sport? Wigan dominated in the 80's, Leeds and St. Helens almost exclusively ever since with the exception of an odd couple of years of Bradford doing well? We need to get the balance right and have 14 equally matched teams in SL with promotion and relegation brought back in, giving everyone something to play for, and without doubt this boys club smokescreen, known as the franchised system has to be scrapped. Please pull your heads out of the sand and realise that this franchise system is just a smokescreen to protect the few at the cost of all the others! It is not good for the game. That is the only way to strengthen the international game, by making players play to the best of their ability every week, as you would have a few stars in all of the SL clubs rather than the likes of Leeds, St. Helens etc. dominating the talent pool with enough strength in depth to fill 2 1st teams capable of finishing in the top 4 of SL.

If you think that the game is balanced at the moment, and everyone has a good chance of winning, I ask you how many of you would be willing to bet 100 on Salford beating Leeds in a couple of weeks time? Not as many as would bet 100 on Leeds winning I'll bet!



Not a lot wrong with that IMO.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#79 dallymessenger

dallymessenger
  • Coach
  • 20,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 01:21 PM

QUOTE (Pride & Heritage @ Jul 1 2010, 01:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why because expansion has been such a rip roaring success? Are you really so blind that you cannot see what a joke expansion has been? Gateshead, London, Celtic which one has been a success? Prior to them Bridgend and Kent Invicta, where are they now? Celtic pulling under 3000 fans for the Bradford, Wakefield and Catalans, if Batley were in SL, I'd bet we'd get more than 3000 fans every week! Wake up and take the blinkers off and don't believe the hype spouted by the RFL. I'll bet you think the Magic Weekends are a success too! laugh.gif

If you take away the dream of playing in the top tier then the fans disappear too. Our attendances halved over night when we were denied promotion at the inception of SL. We realised their was no way of us ever entering the top tier of the game once that decision was made, and that is what all sport is about isn't it, chasing the dream to be the best? Where would your team be in the lower divisions with nothing left to play for, no dream to chase and how many fans do think you'd be pulling every week?


the most succesful RL competition in the world was built on a closed shop.

the NFL has no P&R.

RL in england cant afford P&R either.

for P&R to work you need lots of well funded and widely supported clubs

RL doesnt have it

#80 dallymessenger

dallymessenger
  • Coach
  • 20,928 posts

Posted 01 July 2010 - 01:23 PM

clubs just have to realize that to enter SL now they have to do more than have 1 good season on the field and win the Championship GF.

on field success is only a small part of the franchise criteria.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users