Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

New man at Cas


  • Please log in to reply
107 replies to this topic

#81 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 02:13 PM

The very origins of this game were based on fairness and a rebellion against discriminatory behaviour by those in power.


Long time since I read the original professor of RL Trevor Delaney, but I don't think once the RU were dealt with the NU clubs were particularly "fair" to each other. Where's Stevie May and Padge etc........

#82 petesmithfan

petesmithfan
  • Coach
  • 1,386 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 02:30 PM

This is not all about you. We all have a duty to the wider game as fans of whatever team we support. You should be terrified at the prospect of 500 fans turning out to see any respectable side and of RL as a whole taking any kind of backward step.

People like you are at the root of the problem of the sport of rugby league in the UK as I see it. Blinkered, selfish, unambitious, anchored to the past. Just thoroughly depressing.

What an amazingly stupid comment. Of course people are selfish, in general they support ONE team. Do you really expect supporters of individual teams to forsake their own team for the good of the game!!! GET A GRIP you may think you understand sport, but you obviously do not understand human nature

VIVA THE FEVOLUTION


#83 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 03:04 PM

Long time since I read the original professor of RL Trevor Delaney, but I don't think once the RU were dealt with the NU clubs were particularly "fair" to each other. Where's Stevie May and Padge etc........


Maybe not but the original split was based on those principles.

The first tour to Australia, which saved the whole game in that country, was also a common enterprise for a common good, albeit with a profit in mind.

What about picking black players for our clubs and national teams when other sports would not. Fairness and equal treatment have a long history in RL.

The help given to Jean Gallia to establish the game in France and the tours made to France to help establish the game there was also altruistic.

More recently, the wholesale gift, cheap transfers of players to the reformed Bradford Northern in 1964 was an example of fairness and decency.

The BARLA tours to every point of the compass were also examples of collective action for the greater good.

What about your beloved Hunslet. Without the goodwill of other clubs letting them play at their grounds during the wanderings of their exodus from South Leeds, they would have died long ago.

The latest plans to wreck the greater game for the sole benefit of SL is not such an edifying performance, hence my disilliusionment in part with RL.

#84 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,181 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 04:05 PM

You say they are plans to wreak the greater game?

They can just as easily be interpreted as plans to strengthen the foundations of the game and to benefit the lower league clubs with an unprecedented level of player talent and top level support.

But you choose to hate the game, and see only negatives.


#85 sidnee

sidnee
  • Coach
  • 3,964 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 04:13 PM

You do not speak on behalf of anyone else.



I wasn't speaking on behalf of anyone, where did I say that?????

What I referred to was what I have seen and heard over many, many years. FACT


Anyway, who are you to say everyone has got it wrong while your 'vision' is right?


You appear remarkably like another poster on these forums who also won't accept there is another option to their own view.

We can all start digging and quoting the negatives of each others clubs, (your own club would take a long time to type up), but some posters prefer to look to the future and see the positives that their clubs are achieving. These positives create a feel good factor and gain momentum, and heaven forbid, may put a club below sl in a more favourable position to a current member!

Can't be having that can we!!
The weak conform, the strong survive.

#86 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 05:41 PM

You say they are plans to wreak the greater game?

They can just as easily be interpreted as plans to strengthen the foundations of the game and to benefit the lower league clubs with an unprecedented level of player talent and top level support.

But you choose to hate the game, and see only negatives.


I withdraw that comment. They are not intended to deliberatley wreck the game. They are intended to save the SL clubs from expenses they cannot afford, ie reserve teams. This has been done at the expense of the lower level teams who have been reduced to parasites living off the body of their host SL club. Cut them off and they will die. They will survive but they may as well rename them Bulls A, Leed A., Saints A etc. Their independence is gone.

I think this is a negative. If they really wanted to help the lower leagues they would have increased their grant money, not castrated them. The value of the player support is questionable. They will be at the mercies of the needs of the parent SL club. this will not be a positive to building a team for the Championship club.

Who are you to suggest that I hate the game ? Do you know me ? Do you know how long I have followed RL ? You should not throw accusations at people just because their views do not correspond with yours.

#87 Kenilworth Tiger

Kenilworth Tiger
  • Coach
  • 9,005 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 09:00 PM

But this is the crux of the problem. Your best player doesn’t want to play for you. Your best young player (Clark) doesn’t want to play for you. We have a similar issue with our best young player at Hull KR. Why is this? These clubs just don’t have the resources or appeal for the very best other than as a stepping stone to better things. And Chase told you the issue was Millward, did he? Well of course he’d say that! What’s he going to tell a fan face-to-face? “I made a mistake and have decided I want to play for a contender”. Get real! Whatever else might have gone on with him, his heart clearly isn’t in it anymore. Show me a player whose heart isn’t in it playing for Leeds, Wigan, Saints or Wire, regardless of who’s coaching them.

And I mean no disrespect but getting excited over a membership scheme!!?? In what way does this even put Cas on a steady financial footing, let alone make them a real player? It’s very simple – we need sides in SL that sell themselves to new punters rather than having to scratch desperately for every available penny from their dwindling hardcore. Face facts - teams like Cas and to a lesser extent Hull KR are, sadly, an embarrassment to SL.

I’m excited by the idea of a merged West Yorks team and the rivalries they’d have with Leeds and Bradford (I also think Hudds should join with Halifax to create 4 powerhouse SL sides for the region). There’d be no hierarchy there. Leeds with its massive metropolitan borough might have a slight edge but the other 3 could eat into their fanbase by virtue of being just as competitive. Gareth Ellis would have signed for said team (did Cas even bother to pick up the phone?) then you could parade him alongside a happy Chase and the returning Shenton (who you signed anyway but somewhat less securely, going off recent events and what must he now be thinking?) as your 3-pronged poster boy assault on the sports media. Add Wakey's calibre players (Aiton & Mathers in particular) and the run of the rhubarb kids for the rest of eternity and that’s a team worth watching, that wouldn’t need fraught press conferences or desperate membership scheme whip rounds every few years and which could quite conceivably put the entire Cas/Wakey/Fev district firmly on the worldwide sporting map.

No use at all?


You know,there's a certain je ne sais quoi about your posting style that really reminds of sombebody. He was a cock as well

Edited by Kenilworth Tiger, 12 October 2012 - 09:01 PM.

Now then, it's a race between Sandie....and Fairburn....and the little man is in........yeees he's in.

I, just like those Castleford supporters felt that the ball should have gone to David Plange but he put the bit betwen his teeth...and it was a try

Kevin Ward - best player I have ever seen

Posted Image

The real Mick Gledhill is what you see on here, a Bradford fan ........, but deep down knows that Bradford are just not good enough to challenge the likes of Leeds & St Helens.


#88 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 09:51 AM

Who are you to suggest that I hate the game ? Do you know me ? Do you know how long I have followed RL ? You should not throw accusations at people just because their views do not correspond with yours.


Of course you don’t hate the game, I think Ant will withdraw that. I don’t think anyone on here hates the game by the very fact they are on here, but what we do perhaps do is take out our frustrations on each other.

Like you I was a staunch fan of a championship club whose dream dies 10 years ago, since then I’ve still enjoyed the game and been fortunate enough to have a lad who loves the game and supports the games most successful club.

Our opinions merely differ because our passions for the game differ often extensively, but nobody hates the game

#89 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,358 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 11:23 AM

What an amazingly stupid comment. Of course people are selfish, in general they support ONE team. Do you really expect supporters of individual teams to forsake their own team for the good of the game!!!



Of course I do. You’ve said it yourself. “The good of the game”. All selfish interests are and must be secondary to this. I support Hull KR but have come to the recent conclusion that a merged Hull side would be better for both the region and Super League, in the name of progress. Which obviously leaves your argument in tatters.

A lot is made of history and “I’ve supported x team for y years” blah blah blah but the fact is that if Featherstone, Castleford and Hull KR did not exist we would not be clamouring to invent them. Furthermore, the Super League landscape would be better balanced and the game more credible, unpredictable and thus marketable as a result. The Aussies realise this, the Yanks realise this, the French realise this with their glorious Catalan amalgam built for the 21st rather than the 20th Century, so why do we not realise this? This is the billion dollar question for me. The secret is convincing people like me and Kenilworth Tiger that our 30-odd years of following HKR and Cas weren’t in vain, rather they paved the way for something bigger and better. If we cut the apron strings and embrace a bigger, better team in the name of progress then we’re heroes after a fashion. We sacrificed and gave back for the greater good rather than clinging on to a lost cause through vain hope and bitterness. That’s a good thing, isn’t it? I’d be proud to do that. The rugby league Gods will smile on us for the rest of our days.

Defunct sporting sides are pretty cool anyway and we can still wear our old shirts like I’m sure the Catalan crowd do. I was in Vancouver recently and they still do a neat line in Mike Bibby Vancouver Grizzlies jerseys. When you speak to basketball fans there there is occasionally some anger and bitterness but also a sense that there wasn’t quite the fanbase or infrastructure to make them viable. They get it, you know, “it” being the practicalities and mechanics of modern pro sport. They don’t like hierarchy, they either want in with as much chance to win all the marbles as everyone else or to stand back and let others better equipped do so. And they know that they have no more right than anyone else to their own pro teams, but also that all existing sides can and should be subject to constant scrutinity and live or die on their own merits. I admire all of that. It’s worth a million of the empty-headed, profoundly damaging “Never!” cries we repeatedly hear on this forum from bitter fans of tiny teams no-one outside of a 10 mile radius wants to watch on Sky Sports who feel they have some weird claim on and duty to events of more than 100 years ago.

We really all need to ask ourselves the very simple question “Do we want this game to grow and compete with and ultimately surpass football and the other sports currently in front of us in the pecking order?” If the answer is “yes” then we have to confront these issues head on NOW rather than waste another minute propping up dying teams. If the answer is “no” then we should really ask what we’re doing here in the first place and if the game really needs us.

#90 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,358 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 11:26 AM

You know,there's a certain je ne sais quoi about your posting style that really reminds of sombebody. He was a cock as well


Hmm. I thought you were a bit better than that but fair enough.

Enjoy your pointless little team with its revolving door playing staff and terrible facilities. I'll probably still watch next year's 9 team SL and just largely ignore Cas, like the rest of the UK.

#91 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 11:56 AM

Hmm. I thought you were a bit better than that but fair enough.

Enjoy your pointless little team with its revolving door playing staff and terrible facilities. I'll probably still watch next year's 9 team SL and just largely ignore Cas, like the rest of the UK.


Seeing as how you like to draw parallels with American sport, I will quote you the New England Patriots. 3o years ago they were the laughing stock of the NFL. They had terrible teams, they were strapped for cash, they played in a decrepit stadium with cinder parking lots and overflowing urinals. They play a a very small town, Foxboro, Massachusetts. Did the NFL vote to kick them out when the league expanded. Heck no,the NFL value their franchises however underachieving they might be.

The right investor came calling. The team is now a perrenial powerhouse, 6 super bowl appearances and three wins in the last few years. They have a brand new state of the art stadium in the same small town, which is filled to capacity each and every game. They have built a retail complex bringing in millions on their property next to the ground.

Do you see any parallels with Castleford, i.e. small town, old stadium, money troubles. But you want them gone. Shame on you.Don't go looking for a job with the NFL.They are one money man from being able to win it all.

"Pointless little team" that's low and insulting. How were they doing when Hull had to amalgamate with Gateshead to survive and the 2nd division, thats SECOND division didn't want them in it.

I am willing to bet that the name of Castleford is known throughout Britain because of that pointless little team, unlike say, Harrogate, who nobody has ever heard of.

#92 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 12:44 PM

Of course I do. You’ve said it yourself. “The good of the game”. All selfish interests are and must be secondary to this. I support Hull KR but have come to the recent conclusion that a merged Hull side would be better for both the region and Super League, in the name of progress. Which obviously leaves your argument in tatters.

A lot is made of history and “I’ve supported x team for y years” blah blah blah but the fact is that if Featherstone, Castleford and Hull KR did not exist we would not be clamouring to invent them. Furthermore, the Super League landscape would be better balanced and the game more credible, unpredictable and thus marketable as a result. The Aussies realise this, the Yanks realise this, the French realise this with their glorious Catalan amalgam built for the 21st rather than the 20th Century, so why do we not realise this? This is the billion dollar question for me. The secret is convincing people like me and Kenilworth Tiger that our 30-odd years of following HKR and Cas weren’t in vain, rather they paved the way for something bigger and better. If we cut the apron strings and embrace a bigger, better team in the name of progress then we’re heroes after a fashion. We sacrificed and gave back for the greater good rather than clinging on to a lost cause through vain hope and bitterness. That’s a good thing, isn’t it? I’d be proud to do that. The rugby league Gods will smile on us for the rest of our days.

Defunct sporting sides are pretty cool anyway and we can still wear our old shirts like I’m sure the Catalan crowd do. I was in Vancouver recently and they still do a neat line in Mike Bibby Vancouver Grizzlies jerseys. When you speak to basketball fans there there is occasionally some anger and bitterness but also a sense that there wasn’t quite the fanbase or infrastructure to make them viable. They get it, you know, “it” being the practicalities and mechanics of modern pro sport. They don’t like hierarchy, they either want in with as much chance to win all the marbles as everyone else or to stand back and let others better equipped do so. And they know that they have no more right than anyone else to their own pro teams, but also that all existing sides can and should be subject to constant scrutinity and live or die on their own merits. I admire all of that. It’s worth a million of the empty-headed, profoundly damaging “Never!” cries we repeatedly hear on this forum from bitter fans of tiny teams no-one outside of a 10 mile radius wants to watch on Sky Sports who feel they have some weird claim on and duty to events of more than 100 years ago.

We really all need to ask ourselves the very simple question “Do we want this game to grow and compete with and ultimately surpass football and the other sports currently in front of us in the pecking order?” If the answer is “yes” then we have to confront these issues head on NOW rather than waste another minute propping up dying teams. If the answer is “no” then we should really ask what we’re doing here in the first place and if the game really needs us.


You have come to the conclusion that a merge team is better so petersmithfan's hopes are in tatters. Have you thought that maybe your conclusions are wrong.?

The Aussies do not realise that amalgamations are good and small market teams should be dispensed with. They went down that road and got rid the Souths but, due to the bloody mindedness of South's fans, had to reinstate them. They found Russell Crowe and where are they now, in the top echelon of the NRL. They made Manly and North merge. How did that work out? Manly are now a stand alone club in a very small catchment area but were recently NRL champions. They are still regretting that they lost Norths and a vacuum exists in that area so much so that they are looking to reincarnate them as Central Coast. St Georges, Illawarra. I am sure I read somewhere that Illawarra is the poor relation in that marriage and has been neglected and ignored to the point that the area regrets the merger ever took place.

The Yanks do not realise this either. What amalgamations have taken place in their sports leagues.?They move franchises from time to time but it has not proved your point. The Giants baseball moved to California, the Mets replaced them in new York. The Baltimore Colts moved to Indianapolis, but the Ravens replaced them in Baltimore. The Cleveland Browns moved but the present Browns franchise replaced them. The Green Bay Packers are in the smallest market in the league and are owned by the town but are a storied franchise. The Kansas city Royals are in a small market and have not won in years but nobody is suggesting replacing them by say, Charlotte.

Furthermore, dual team cities are alive and well in New York, Chicago and Oakland/San Francisco.

The French have tried one amalgamation. So far, so good.I 'll give you that but was it forced on them by SL pressure?..

Bitter fans harking back a hundred years. Really. Arn't Featherstone, Halifax. Leigh et al still alive and kicking as we speak? Greed is not necessarily good. Big is not necessarily better. How are Yugoslavia doing these days ?

Are you really suggesting that algamating Castleford, Wakefield and Featherstone or Hull and Hull KR will put us in a position to surpass football ? Are you really suggesting that if we cannot surpass football we should close down the sport and cease to exist.? If you are, you should immediateley go and get a Hull City season ticket because that will just never, ever happen.

#93 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,358 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 01:10 PM

Seeing as how you like to draw parallels with American sport, I will quote you the New England Patriots. 3o years ago they were the laughing stock of the NFL. They had terrible teams, they were strapped for cash, they played in a decrepit stadium with cinder parking lots and overflowing urinals. They play a a very small town, Foxboro, Massachusetts. Did the NFL vote to kick them out when the league expanded. Heck no,the NFL value their franchises however underachieving they might be.

The right investor came calling. The team is now a perrenial powerhouse, 6 super bowl appearances and three wins in the last few years. They have a brand new state of the art stadium in the same small town, which is filled to capacity each and every game. They have built a retail complex bringing in millions on their property next to the ground.

Do you see any parallels with Castleford, i.e. small town, old stadium, money troubles. But you want them gone. Shame on you.Don't go looking for a job with the NFL.They are one money man from being able to win it all.

"Pointless little team" that's low and insulting. How were they doing when Hull had to amalgamate with Gateshead to survive and the 2nd division, thats SECOND division didn't want them in it.

I am willing to bet that the name of Castleford is known throughout Britain because of that pointless little team, unlike say, Harrogate, who nobody has ever heard of.



If you want to talk NFL then I’ll quote you one of my favourite ever sporting quotes from the Cleveland Browns owner in 1955: “We are 30 fatcat Republicans voting socialist”. This was summing up the league’s decision to NOT follow a free market hierarchical pattern (NY Giants had a solo megabucks TV deal lined up, which they were persuaded to reject) and instead pool resources to create the most competitive and exciting product, which to this day bears ever increasing dividends.

2 words: revenue sharing. The NFL ensures that the Green Bay (100,000 population) franchise gets a cut of every Dallas Cowboys jersey that is sold. Moreover though, Green Bay serves the much wider Wisconsin area and doesn’t (unlike Castleford) have a ton of competitors on its doorstep. Similarly, New England is a huge metropolitan (and sport-mad) area. That they had a poor team once isn’t in dispute but that they and Green Bay are roughly as attractive to investors as the franchises in New York, Chicago et al also isn’t and is ultimately the reason both have had great periods of success.

It’s all about latent fanbases and placing teams where they can and should work (ie London). Your argument only serves to work against you I’m afraid. Castleford Tigers can never and will never be a success in the modern era. They’re small fry in an overly congested marketplace and nothing more than a historical curio known to long-standing RL fans over about 35 and precisely no-one else. And damaging to the league as a competitive entity.

#94 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 02:18 PM

If you want to talk NFL then I’ll quote you one of my favourite ever sporting quotes from the Cleveland Browns owner in 1955: “We are 30 fatcat Republicans voting socialist”. This was summing up the league’s decision to NOT follow a free market hierarchical pattern (NY Giants had a solo megabucks TV deal lined up, which they were persuaded to reject) and instead pool resources to create the most competitive and exciting product, which to this day bears ever increasing dividends.

2 words: revenue sharing. The NFL ensures that the Green Bay (100,000 population) franchise gets a cut of every Dallas Cowboys jersey that is sold. Moreover though, Green Bay serves the much wider Wisconsin area and doesn’t (unlike Castleford) have a ton of competitors on its doorstep. Similarly, New England is a huge metropolitan (and sport-mad) area. That they had a poor team once isn’t in dispute but that they and Green Bay are roughly as attractive to investors as the franchises in New York, Chicago et al also isn’t and is ultimately the reason both have had great periods of success.

It’s all about latent fanbases and placing teams where they can and should work (ie London). Your argument only serves to work against you I’m afraid. Castleford Tigers can never and will never be a success in the modern era. They’re small fry in an overly congested marketplace and nothing more than a historical curio known to long-standing RL fans over about 35 and precisely no-one else. And damaging to the league as a competitive entity.


I absolutely agree with you re revenue sharing and have posted on it's merits before.

However, the same could be said to you, as you have said to me, namely your very argument serves to work against you. If we had revenue sharing, the smaller market teams, like Castleford would be successful. What is the over 35 point about. Do Castleford not have childfren and young men and women in their fan base?

The New England sucess only really took off when Mr Kraft took over and heavily invested in the team. If Castleford find the money they can do the same.

RL only has one team in a big City, with even a semi dominant position and that is Leeds. The USA has multiple multi million population cities at the disposal of the NFL. The UK does not and RL, in particular, has always operated more in the small town to small City milieu. We will never be in the position of the NFL sizewise but we can mimic them on a smaller scale and Castleford are a viable SL member using that scenario. Their catchment area is larger than their town just as New Englands is much larger than Foxboro. There are enough hinterland villages around Castleford to sustain the supporter base.

That they are in trouble now is indisputable but who is to say this is permanent. Is Widnes much bigger than Castleford with Warrington in the living room, never mind on the doorstep ? Money is the key. Other examples are Wakefield, London, Hull, Hull KR, Wigan, Warrington and yes, even Leeds, our one big city club. Bradford are the embodiment of the paucity of your big team argument. They had the crowds, the fan base and a City to themselves but they went bust. I repeat, money is the key. London, jeez London, there it's all about the money. Without it they would be history. Fanbases are fine but if they are latent and you can never unlock those latent numbers, what good does it do ?

Damaging as a competitve entity you say. Didn't Catalans go from worst to first ( well almost).? Didn't Huddersfield and Wakefield and even Crusaders go from basket case teams to playoffspots.? Didn't the mighty Hull miss the playoffs. Castleford can improve in that area. Who is to say they can't. History says they can.

So, Castleford can be our Green Bay or Buffalo. In a country as small as ours and as dominated by soccer as it is, both big in relative terms like Leeds are important but we must have smaller clubs like Castleford, Widnes and Huddersfield in the equation as well. Four team leagues don't cut it.

#95 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,358 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 02:37 PM

You have come to the conclusion that a merge team is better so petersmithfan's hopes are in tatters. Have you thought that maybe your conclusions are wrong.?

The Aussies do not realise that amalgamations are good and small market teams should be dispensed with. They went down that road and got rid the Souths but, due to the bloody mindedness of South's fans, had to reinstate them. They found Russell Crowe and where are they now, in the top echelon of the NRL. They made Manly and North merge. How did that work out? Manly are now a stand alone club in a very small catchment area but were recently NRL champions. They are still regretting that they lost Norths and a vacuum exists in that area so much so that they are looking to reincarnate them as Central Coast. St Georges, Illawarra. I am sure I read somewhere that Illawarra is the poor relation in that marriage and has been neglected and ignored to the point that the area regrets the merger ever took place.

The Yanks do not realise this either. What amalgamations have taken place in their sports leagues.?They move franchises from time to time but it has not proved your point. The Giants baseball moved to California, the Mets replaced them in new York. The Baltimore Colts moved to Indianapolis, but the Ravens replaced them in Baltimore. The Cleveland Browns moved but the present Browns franchise replaced them. The Green Bay Packers are in the smallest market in the league and are owned by the town but are a storied franchise. The Kansas city Royals are in a small market and have not won in years but nobody is suggesting replacing them by say, Charlotte.

Furthermore, dual team cities are alive and well in New York, Chicago and Oakland/San Francisco.

The French have tried one amalgamation. So far, so good.I 'll give you that but was it forced on them by SL pressure?..

Bitter fans harking back a hundred years. Really. Arn't Featherstone, Halifax. Leigh et al still alive and kicking as we speak? Greed is not necessarily good. Big is not necessarily better. How are Yugoslavia doing these days ?

Are you really suggesting that algamating Castleford, Wakefield and Featherstone or Hull and Hull KR will put us in a position to surpass football ? Are you really suggesting that if we cannot surpass football we should close down the sport and cease to exist.? If you are, you should immediateley go and get a Hull City season ticket because that will just never, ever happen.


I'm only really a casual observer of NRL so by no means any expert with regard to how they drew up their teams, however what I do know is that they have a terrifically competitive league where just about all of the 16 sides have made a GF in the last 10 years and none of their sides seem to have any issue keeping hold of their calibre players. So rather than pick at them in any way I think we should really just doff our cap to them in admiration. I saw a list of the 50 best players as drawn up by their media at the start of last season and you only had to get to about no 26 before the 16th and final team got a name on the board - and that team was St George-Illawarra, champs just a year earlier. Mind-boggling, mouth watering stuff. If we drew up a similar list for SL I'd suggest maybe 6 of the 14 teams wouldn't even have an entrant and the top 20 would be a total Leeds/Wigan/Wire/Saints love-in. And this of course feeds back into debates about our national team vs theirs and the lack of intensity of our 27 rounds.

It's clear also from even a cursory look at NRL that they have some huge companies sponsoring their sides - does this perhaps plug the occasional gap where bums on seats might otherwise not? Obviously if Cas had a Vodafone or a Suzuki on their doorstep they would be a significantly more viable SL proposition. But they don't and we don't in general so as I see it the only way to make a competitive league out of SL is to ensure that we position our sides where they have a fair crack at a good-sized fanbase. And whether you like my suggestions or not, I am offering a viable solution, whereas as I see it you are merely offering optimistic hope to fans of Cas and the like that "things can be good again".

Re: revenue sharing, yes I like it, I also have no issue with "small market" sides but what is the RFL doing to help them? You're bailing them out by not following that argument through and instead taking ire with me when essentially we have the same end goal for SL but perhaps different ways of achieving it. I like your optimism but I don't totally share it with regard to sides like Cas and mine. In a more cash rich sport, yes, but I simply feel we need to contract in order to expand.

Edited by DeadShotKeen, 13 October 2012 - 02:39 PM.


#96 Kenilworth Tiger

Kenilworth Tiger
  • Coach
  • 9,005 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 03:43 PM

this thread is comedy gold!

Seems one or two on here know more about Cas than anybody at Cas - so I guess you've got say "fair play lads"
Now then, it's a race between Sandie....and Fairburn....and the little man is in........yeees he's in.

I, just like those Castleford supporters felt that the ball should have gone to David Plange but he put the bit betwen his teeth...and it was a try

Kevin Ward - best player I have ever seen

Posted Image

The real Mick Gledhill is what you see on here, a Bradford fan ........, but deep down knows that Bradford are just not good enough to challenge the likes of Leeds & St Helens.


#97 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 03:58 PM

this thread is comedy gold!

Seems one or two on here know more about Cas than anybody at Cas - so I guess you've got say "fair play lads"


One poster is saying you should be removed because you have money problems and are in a small market. I am championing your cause. The only knowledge of Cas that both are relying upon is the publicly published statements stating they have serious money problems and the fact that you are, in fact, a small market team.

If you are in possession of some localised knowledge re Castleford that is relevant to these points of view, feel free to enlighten us. Also, please explain what is so humerous or comedic about our views. Your contribution to the explanation or solution to Castlelford's dilemma is eagerly awaited.

#98 Kenilworth Tiger

Kenilworth Tiger
  • Coach
  • 9,005 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 04:28 PM

Ok, we are no more "small market" than Wakefield, Salford, London, Hull KR, Huddersfield, or Widnes

So that will be an 8 team league next year.

We haven't got " serious money problems" - we cannot compete at the top level at the moment without a backer or doing a Bradford - a different thing altogether.

I wasn't actually having a go at you keighley and apologise if that came across as it did.
Now then, it's a race between Sandie....and Fairburn....and the little man is in........yeees he's in.

I, just like those Castleford supporters felt that the ball should have gone to David Plange but he put the bit betwen his teeth...and it was a try

Kevin Ward - best player I have ever seen

Posted Image

The real Mick Gledhill is what you see on here, a Bradford fan ........, but deep down knows that Bradford are just not good enough to challenge the likes of Leeds & St Helens.


#99 OMEGA

OMEGA
  • Coach
  • 1,323 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 05:55 PM

Ok, we are no more "small market" than Wakefield, Salford, London, Hull KR, Huddersfield, or Widnes


That's only because throughout the last 80 years or so, you've periodically punched above your weight while Salford, Widnes and especially Wakefield in the last 40 years have been woefully mismanaged and underfunded.

Moving forward and into a modern sporting landscape, the potential Castleford has to be much more than they are now is severely limited while the likes of Salford and Wakefield have huge amounts of untapped potential that could, with the right management, see them challenging the likes of Wigan and Leeds in much the same vain as Warrington currently are.





#100 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 13 October 2012 - 07:58 PM

That's only because throughout the last 80 years or so, you've periodically punched above your weight while Salford, Widnes and especially Wakefield in the last 40 years have been woefully mismanaged and underfunded.

Moving forward and into a modern sporting landscape, the potential Castleford has to be much more than they are now is severely limited while the likes of Salford and Wakefield have huge amounts of untapped potential that could, with the right management, see them challenging the likes of Wigan and Leeds in much the same vain as Warrington currently are.


Cas are "severely limited" by what?

As a "classy" brand the club don't "punch above their weight" quite the reverse,

They attract a weight of support that in relation to the size of the town indicates one in six Cas people support the club.

Which isn't the case at all. People travel from far and wide (relatively speaking) to see an exciting club/team.

AFAIK several people In Selby are Leeds fans several are Cas fans.

If we work on your assumptions then Everton should not exist?

You say "The likes of Salford have huge amounts of untapped potential".

They have had this potential for years, but they are not "tapping it".

The question for you is this.

If Salford and Castleford were grand finalists and Challenge cup finalists ever year for the next three years which club would have the highest attendances????

Because as it stands both clubs have no chance of any final appearance yet the small town produces bigger attendances than the big dual city...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users