RFL needs to reform access to SL for Co-Op C. Clubs

[London Dick]

Woo hoo page 7 before someone types teams like Batley, our Northern Rail Cup win must be boosting our profile as we usually get mentioned in page 1 or 2 in a debate like this.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Local rivalry encourages and facilitates the home fan to attend the away game because it's a bus ride away and everyone's talking the game up locally.

Getting a Trad RL fan to double up his support is a great way of extracting more money out of the same people.

Surely Hull White Star should be resurrected then they could extract double money from Hull and HKR whilst those two equally "double their money".

We could go for three clubs in Hull, and then have the local rivalry of Salford, Wire, Wigan, Saints and Widnes....

Add Leigh to that. Six local rivals, getting double money from the fans locally.

Bradford, Keighley, Hunslet, Leeds and Bramley could complete the Superleague of local rivalries.

Hey a Superleague of Leeds/Bradford...... Hull......... Central trad West Lancs.....

14 team Superleague played in three small geographical areas based on your "alternative" opinion.

You really were looking up your own bum there.

Hull needs to have one club that can win trophies, and needs to be playing clubs from all over the country.

RL should not be a "local game for local people"

You know, if you had bothered to read the second paragraph, you would see I have covered your points:

On the flip side, I also think that too many clubs in an area can dwindle this interest, and every game just seems the same. West Yorkshire for example has too many clubs. Local derbies don't seem to generate too much interest because they happen nearly every other week. The interest (as well as support base) is diluted rather than complimented.

You could have saved yourself a lot of time and effort instead of typing an overly long reply to a point that was never made!

[Blind side johnny]

You clearly haven't understood the point. A cap of 300k means that almost all clubs can make it. If you're spending the same as almost all the other clubs, how exactly are you supposed to show your superiority? It's a lottery based on which coach can get the best out of his 300k. Theoretically Wigan or Leeds could get relegated to the Championship and would stand no better chance of winning it on the pitch than Halifax would.

People who are calling for a return to P&R are arguing for something that we've never had before. P&R with a low enough salary cap that nearly all if not all the teams can spend up to it. This would mean that teams couldn't show their superiority as a club which is effectively Communism, reducing everybody to the same level.

If we went back to the normal system where there was room in the salary cap for difference then Widnes would inevitably finish higher in the league as we have the resources and the money to make a difference. This is what used to happen almost all the time with P&R.

Just an aside but I don't think many people understand the difference between the SL salary cap and those in the CC.

In SL ALL of a player's income counts towards the cap as they are contracted full-time professionals.

In the Championship the vast majority of players are part-time and only their payments for playing for & representing the club count towards the cap. Quite correctly their incomes from outside of the game don't count, no matter who their employer is. Naturally this allows a n umber of quite imaginative situations to develop which could enhance the incomes of key personnel without impacting on the cap.

And before anyone asks, if you think that all of the Championship clubs' players' incomes are rigorously audited by RFL officials, then you are wrong.

Edited September 10, 2010 by Blind side johnny

[Saint Toppy]

Are we gonna get one of these threads every week for at least the next 4 years (or maybe 7 years or longer if Leigh fail to meet the criteria for a 2015 application)

The RFL have set their stall out and at least until 2015 the franchise system is here to stay.

Instead of incessantly whinging about it the supporters of the clubs not currently in SL should get behind their club and start helping them to build for a future application.

As well as failing on the pitch Leigh don't meet the criteria for average attendance so why aren't 'supporters' like Lobby out doing something about that like drumming up support throughout the town ?

Also Leigh don't have an academy (another fail) because they claim they can't afford to run one - so where's Lobby out organising regular fundraising events to help the club start one.

Lobby - you might get a bit more sympathy on here if you were prepared to put your money or your time, where your mouth is, instead of just sitting on the sidelines an whinging.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

RL should not be a "local game for local people"

Even though your reply was completely pointless as it had nothing to do with what I said (and the usual "Hull should have one club/merge as they will be stronger" rubbish), I'm not sure I fully agree with your point either.

Sport in itself is based on the local aspect of things. Locally connecting with their communities. If you make everything inter-community, people may not be bothered as much. You need to have the odd bit of intra-community to spark up that initial interest. Something that gets people talking in that community. Something that brings a conflict of interest often brings more attention to it.

Is it a coincidence that the "pure" sport of football (with its P&R which all the purists rave about) has its strongest clubs bunched together? They all have a local derby, and in fact most of them have their closest and most traditional rivals in the league: Man Utd/City, Liverpool/Everton, Arsenal/Spurs, Newcastle/Sunderland, Villa/Birmingham, WBA/Wolves, Chelsea/Fulham, Wigan/Bolton.

RL shouldn't be a local game for local people. But it shouldn't NOT be as well. It needs to offer a bit of everything to everyone, not a lot of the same. Intra-county, inter-county, inter-region and inter-national.

Which team are Catalans, Crusaders and Harlequins REALLY looking forward to getting one over on every season?

[The Parksider]

Which team are Catalans, Crusaders and Harlequins REALLY looking forward to getting one over on every season?

Just about every M62 club as a matter of fact.

Every time they take an M62 scalp it says that our game is getting somewhere.

As for the rest of the rubbish you wrote I'm happy to agree with it Wellsy

Enjoy tonights game........

[Big Picture]

Is it a coincidence that the "pure" sport of football (with its P&R which all the purists rave about) has its strongest clubs bunched together? They all have a local derby, and in fact most of them have their closest and most traditional rivals in the league: Man Utd/City, Liverpool/Everton, Arsenal/Spurs, Newcastle/Sunderland, Villa/Birmingham, WBA/Wolves, Chelsea/Fulham, Wigan/Bolton.

RL shouldn't be a local game for local people. But it shouldn't NOT be as well. It needs to offer a bit of everything to everyone, not a lot of the same. Intra-county, inter-county, inter-region and inter-national.

Which team are Catalans, Crusaders and Harlequins REALLY looking forward to getting one over on every season?

Rivalries are a big part of all sports. Is Everton still Liverpool's main rival, or do Liverpool fans get up more for games against Man Utd or Chelsea these days? Was Birmingham ever Aston Villa's main rival or is that an assumption?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Just about every M62 club as a matter of fact.

Every time they take an M62 scalp it says that our game is getting somewhere.

As for the rest of the rubbish you wrote I'm happy to agree with it Wellsy

Enjoy tonights game........

So the answer then is no-one. They have no main rivals and no big game. Nothing to stir up the extra interest. Is this holding them back? There is a pretty fair argument for it.

[The Parksider]

So the answer then is no-one. They have no main rivals and no big game. Nothing to stir up the extra interest. Is this holding them back? There is a pretty fair argument for it.

You are always losing the plot.

Flatcappers and fervent expansionists should be the new rivalry in Rugby league.

As for M62 rivalries they have been done to death. Our local one Leeds.v.Bradford once hit 25,000 fans but is nothing today.

Rugby League needs to have new rivalries, over larger areas. It needs according to some fans Catalans.v.Toulouse, Scorpions.v.Crusaders and Skolars.v.Quins.

But sadly the game is bereft of money and we'll have to just try to get ourselves up for yet another "Hull Derby"

not again....... Yawn.............

If you think RL derby games are the modern cutting edge attraction that will bring the rest of Britain to the edge of their DFS seats, and form the catalyst for a brave new RL world then think again.

Have a great time tomorrow Wellsy..........

[The Parksider]

You need to have the odd bit of intra-community to spark up that initial interest. Something that gets people talking in that community. Something that brings a conflict of interest often brings more attention to it.

The first Hull Derby shut out thousands of fans (more fans than it accomodated) and was attended by 9450. Smart bit of business that.

For most of the other big sides that would have been a bad crowd.

The second Hull Derby in a 25,000 stadium managed 22,337.

No sell out there then.

Shame there aren't 20,000 plus fans at the KC every week. There sure are the numbers in Hull to achieve that.

But the numbers accomodate two clubs rather than the biggest and best club the RFL have ever seen........

Now how can we resurrect Hull White Star??

[The Parksider]

Sport in itself is based on the local aspect of things. Locally connecting with their communities.

When I went to Salfords stadium in Barton Wellmeister I was shocked and then resigned to the signpost on the road. The road was a one way street to Warrington.

So Salford have moved out of the M60 centre almost into central trad west Lancs where the local game for local people can enjoy the Wire - Saints - Wigan - Widnes - Salford - Wigan - Wire - Saints - Widnes - Salford - Wire - Saints - Wigan - Widnes - Salford - Wigan - Wire - Saints - Widnes - Salford -Wire - Saints - Wigan - Widnes - Salford - Wigan - Wire - Saints - Widnes - Salford-Wire - Saints - Wigan - Widnes - Salford - Wigan - Wire - Saints - Widnes - Salford derby games.

Let's hope they meet in the cup and play offs as well, the tills will be ringing a plenty.

Whilst 95% of the rest of the country can get on with enjoying their soccer and RU..........

Post post note" If the Lancs derby's really take off I advocate the inclusion of Leigh In SL as soon as possible.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

You are always losing the plot.

Flatcappers and fervent expansionists should be the new rivalry in Rugby league.

As for M62 rivalries they have been done to death. Our local one Leeds.v.Bradford once hit 25,000 fans but is nothing today.

Rugby League needs to have new rivalries, over larger areas. It needs according to some fans Catalans.v.Toulouse, Scorpions.v.Crusaders and Skolars.v.Quins.

But sadly the game is bereft of money and we'll have to just try to get ourselves up for yet another "Hull Derby"

not again....... Yawn.............

If you think RL derby games are the modern cutting edge attraction that will bring the rest of Britain to the edge of their DFS seats, and form the catalyst for a brave new RL world then think again.

Have a great time tomorrow Wellsy..........

I'll ignore the rest because you're just being flippant and detracting from the point.

Isn't the point in bold the point I was making? Clubs that stand in outposts on their own generate little interest, but working together with another rival club in the same area can see them benefit off each other.

Someone made a point about London struggling to have one club let alone two. Not everyone in London will be a Harlequins fan. And most people in London won't even be able to get to Harlequins, so if there was a second London club, it wouldn't have any affect on the first (in terms of taking their custom away). But that rivalry interest could help both clubs. Look at the ZP (or whatever it is these days) when the London clubs play each other. Huge interest.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

The first Hull Derby shut out thousands of fans (more fans than it accomodated) and was attended by 9450. Smart bit of business that.

For most of the other big sides that would have been a bad crowd.

The second Hull Derby in a 25,000 stadium managed 22,337.

No sell out there then.

Shame there aren't 20,000 plus fans at the KC every week. There sure are the numbers in Hull to achieve that.

But the numbers accomodate two clubs rather than the biggest and best club the RFL have ever seen........

Now how can we resurrect Hull White Star??

Are you drunk? Normally what you type is just of a weird opinion, but this is actually factually completely incorrect.

The first Hull derby attracted a sell-out at the KC (23,002). The second one was at Millennium Stadium. The third one was a sell-out at Craven Park (which isn't a lot, but there's nothing we can do about that). And the fourth one sold at the KC again. So I have no idea what you're on about.

There is no figures to support your argument that Hull would be better if it had one club. None what so ever. But there are plenty to argue it.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

When I went to Salfords stadium in Barton Wellmeister I was shocked and then resigned to the signpost on the road. The road was a one way street to Warrington.

So Salford have moved out of the M60 centre almost into central trad west Lancs where the local game for local people can enjoy the Wire - Saints - Wigan - Widnes - Salford - Wigan - Wire - Saints - Widnes - Salford - Wire - Saints - Wigan - Widnes - Salford - Wigan - Wire - Saints - Widnes - Salford -Wire - Saints - Wigan - Widnes - Salford - Wigan - Wire - Saints - Widnes - Salford-Wire - Saints - Wigan - Widnes - Salford - Wigan - Wire - Saints - Widnes - Salford derby games.

Let's hope they meet in the cup and play offs as well, the tills will be ringing a plenty.

Whilst 95% of the rest of the country can get on with enjoying their soccer and RU..........

Post post note" If the Lancs derby's really take off I advocate the inclusion of Leigh In SL as soon as possible.

Again, you're not replying to any point that I have made. Do I have to quote my original post again?...

On the flip side, I also think that too many clubs in an area can dwindle this interest, and every game just seems the same. West Yorkshire for example has too many clubs. Local derbies don't seem to generate too much interest because they happen nearly every other week. The interest (as well as support base) is diluted rather than complimented.

So why on Earth you keep using this "let's have Wigan, Saints, Wire, Widnes, Leigh, Salford, Swinton, Rochdale, Oldham, etc. in the league" argument I will never know. The point was covered in the ORIGINAL post I made. You've not said something there that has made me consider something else. It was already considered. And I shall say it again because apparently it hasn't been made clear enough...

I think too many clubs can dwindle interest.

But I also think that there needs to be a rivalry. There needs to be a main team that the fans and players want to get one over on more than anyone else in the league. Not eight. Not ten. Just one.

Basically, IMO there is an optimum number of clubs for an area. A stand alone club suffers from depression, but a crowded club is strained.

[StevieM13]

No other sport has the problems of RL.

We have a League with an average of 9,000 against one with an average of 2,000. The drop is massive. Relegation can mean the end of a club. We also don't have enough clubs viable in the lower divisions to compete in Super League. Whether or not the principle is right, you cannot promote a team like Batley, Dewsbury or Hunslet.

Outside of Football, where clubs go from a League averaging about 30,000 to one averaging about 20,000, what other major professional UK sports have P&R?

Oh yeh Rugby Union...

What are these problems? The differential in crowds is perhaps something to do with the polarisation of money in SL and the removal of P&R meaning fans of championship clubs don't bother as much as they may if the RFL wasn't attempting to cut the Championship leagues loose.

Relegation, be it through P&R or having a licence revoked will signal the end of a club, and that's simply again because all the money is polarised in SL. Why is RL the only major sport in the country not to use P&R?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

What are these problems? The differential in crowds is perhaps something to do with the polarisation of money in SL and the removal of P&R meaning fans of championship clubs don't bother as much as they may if the RFL wasn't attempting to cut the Championship leagues loose.

Relegation, be it through P&R or having a licence revoked will signal the end of a club, and that's simply again because all the money is polarised in SL. Why is RL the only major sport in the country not to use P&R?

Stop ranting. It's affecting your ability to think.

How can the difference in crowds be due to P&R being taken away? Think about it. The crowds are similar now to what they were throughout the last decade of P&R. So that's not why.

Why is Rugby League the only major sport in the country not to use P&R? Because it isn't. Cricket is considerably bigger and doesn't.

[StevieM13]

Stop ranting. It's affecting your ability to think.

How can the difference in crowds be due to P&R being taken away? Think about it. The crowds are similar now to what they were throughout the last decade of P&R. So that's not why.

Why is Rugby League the only major sport in the country not to use P&R? Because it isn't. Cricket is considerably bigger and doesn't.

What are the problems that are exclusive to RL? Do you not understand what perhaps means? A system of two up two down is employed in the county championship and many other leagues at all levels.

[JohnM]

Why is RL the only major sport in the country not to use P&R?

Can anyone confirm this From Wikipedia, "The English Premier Ice Hockey League commonly abbreviated to EPIHL, or simpy EPL, is a senior ice hockey league in England, and is run and administered by the English Ice Hockey Association. The league currently consists of 10 teams predominantly based in Southern England, and is generally considered to be the second tier league below the Elite Ice Hockey League although there is no promotion or relegation between the two."

also

"There is no promotion and relegation between the EBL and the British Basketball League, which operates a franchise system."

Edited September 11, 2010 by JohnM

[The Parksider]

I think too many clubs can dwindle interest.

But I also think that there needs to be a rivalry. There needs to be a main team that the fans and players want to get one over on more than anyone else in the league. Not eight. Not ten. Just one.

Basically, IMO there is an optimum number of clubs for an area. A stand alone club suffers from depression, but a crowded club is strained.

Your just too ahead of me Wellsy

Right. Superleague could aim for two clubs in one area then move on. Let's try it....

Wigan/Saints

Oldham/Rochdale

Leeds/Bradford

Toulouse/Catalans

Hull/HKR

Crusaders/Scorpions

Quins/Skolars.

BINGO.....................

Fits absolutely perfectly mate, good one, we have the next round of licenses and you heard it here first.

Give Hull a cheer from me.........

[l'angelo mysterioso]

, so any prat on here who says the usual #### "why not just watch your team for the rugby and find your level" can go forth and fornicate

I disagree with a lot of ewhat you say, but have always shown you respect

if that is the level of respect you show to fellow forum members who dare to disagree with you, then I suggest you take your own advice.

[Lobbygobbler]

Can anyone confirm this From Wikipedia, "The English Premier Ice Hockey League commonly abbreviated to EPIHL, or simpy EPL, is a senior ice hockey league in England, and is run and administered by the English Ice Hockey Association. The league currently consists of 10 teams predominantly based in Southern England, and is generally considered to be the second tier league below the Elite Ice Hockey League although there is no promotion or relegation between the two."

also

"There is no promotion and relegation between the EBL and the British Basketball League, which operates a franchise system."

So we want to be like two foreign sports with tiny crowds?

[Lobbygobbler]

Stop ranting. It's affecting your ability to think.

How can the difference in crowds be due to P&R being taken away? Think about it. The crowds are similar now to what they were throughout the last decade of P&R. So that's not why.

Why is Rugby League the only major sport in the country not to use P&R? Because it isn't. Cricket is considerably bigger and doesn't.

I thought cricket did?

By the way the crowds for the bigger clubs in the co-op champ are lower than they were under P&R. This will decreased further after the next round ater the likes of Fax, Leigh, Fev, and Barrow become more demoralised with the prospect of another 4 years in the wilderness. The likes of Batley Dewsbury etc are already minimal because they accepted their fate 10 years ago.

Watch this space.....

[l'angelo mysterioso]

So we want to be like two foreign sports with tiny crowds?

who do you want rugby league to be like?

soccer? I'm afraid not because rugby league doesn't have the worldwide profile, the wealth or the infrastructure.

how about rugby union: again we don't have the worldwide profile or the wealth, or the friends in high places: but you can bet that within the next five years that they will stop 'promotion and relegation' to their main competition.

The issues that rugby league has to deal with are long standing, and have never been properly addressed. We have limited wealth, limited geographic and demographic spread, a limited international profile. We have clubs that can't sustain themselves at the top level of the game, your club being a classic and notorious example.

I could call you a prat and tell you to go forth asnd fornicate, but I wont. I'll leave that kind of intolerant oafishness to you.

[Lobbygobbler]

who do you want rugby league to be like?

soccer? I'm afraid not because rugby league doesn't have the worldwide profile, the wealth or the infrastructure.

how about rugby union: again we don't have the worldwide profile or the wealth, or the friends in high places: but you can bet that within the next five years that they will stop 'promotion and relegation' to their main competition.

The issues that rugby league has to deal with are long standing, and have never been properly addressed. We have limited wealth, limited geographic and demographic spread, a limited international profile. We have clubs that can't sustain themselves at the top level of the game, your club being a classic and notorious example.

I could call you a prat and tell you to go forth asnd fornicate, but I wont. I'll leave that kind of intolerant oafishness to you.

So you'll be happy to have 14 pro teams followed by a near amateur sub-1k crowd environment

[The Parksider]

So you'll be happy to have 14 pro teams followed by a near amateur sub-1k crowd environment

I wouldn't be happy with that. I would want enough new clubs around the country backed by big money men who find the couple of million a year to fund such a club peanuts - after all you can't get a single premier quality soccer player for that. Money goes a lot farther in Rugby.

I'd want the 14 to be the best of far more than 14 and even get to two fully pro divisions.

Truth is you could possibly do that if you shared the SKY money