Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world 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
- - - - -

Eagles for SL


  • Please log in to reply
549 replies to this topic

#241 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,189 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:37 PM

Remind me what Mo Lindsay's current role is within the RFL.


What's that got to do with it?

Lyndsay recognised there were too few fans and players, and too many clubs.

He proposed that there be less clubs so they can have more resources.

The clubs decided to stay as they were with the larger ones adopting a policy of taking resources off the smaller ones.

SL clubs sell season tickets and take the best juniors from nearby championship club areas.

So it answer Griff's surprise that the Championship isn't being done any favours.

Now have you got anything of you own to post?

Edited by The Parksider, 11 October 2012 - 08:55 PM.


#242 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,174 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:58 PM

What's that got to do with it?

Lyndsay recognised there were too few fans and players, and too many clubs.

He proposed that there be less clubs so they can have more resources.

The clubs decided to stay as they were with the larger ones adopting a policy of taking resources off the smaller ones.


And he no longer works for the RFL.

#243 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,189 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:00 PM

And he no longer works for the RFL.


So what?

What he proposed has been steadily acted on this last 17 years.

#244 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,174 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:07 PM

So what?

What he proposed has been steadily acted on this last 17 years.


Has it heck as like.

If it had then Hull KR would hardly have been promoted. "Merger by stealth" was working and now it isn't.

Edited by Northern Sol, 11 October 2012 - 09:08 PM.


#245 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,189 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 06:36 AM

Has it heck as like.

If it had then Hull KR would hardly have been promoted. "Merger by stealth" was working and now it isn't.


You therefore totally failed to see HKR's steady demise to the point of 1,000 fans attending a Chorley game and all the best kids in Hull packed into Hull FC and FC's Challenge Cup victory and Superleague appearance at Old Trafford.

So merger by stealth was classically happening there, so it WAS heckers like.

Still history shows us nothing doesn't it.

Along come Hudgell with a few million and stalls the process. Then his money runs out and the best players run out after it.

Open your eyes, stop sniping at me, and post your own opinions.

#246 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,777 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 08:35 AM

Your post is true.However, do you think they will still guarantee a Championship Club a SL place for the following licencing period.? If they do, it will almost certainly be given to the SL club ejected for the Championship team this time around in my opinion.


The RFL have stated that a minimum of one Championship Club will be promoted - subject to meeting the licensing standards,

The rider is always going to be there - get used to it.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#247 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,174 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 08:54 AM

You therefore totally failed to see HKR's steady demise to the point of 1,000 fans attending a Chorley game and all the best kids in Hull packed into Hull FC and FC's Challenge Cup victory and Superleague appearance at Old Trafford.

So merger by stealth was classically happening there, so it WAS heckers like.

Still history shows us nothing doesn't it.

Along come Hudgell with a few million and stalls the process. Then his money runs out and the best players run out after it.

Open your eyes, stop sniping at me, and post your own opinions.


My own opinion is that you are talking nonsense.

Hull KR were in danger of becoming an FC feeder team and the RFL had the perfect excuse to block their entry to SL i.e. the state of their stadium, they could have even relegated them the last time licences were decided.

They chose not to.

Mo Lindsay doesn't run the RFL anymore and the world has moved on. Perhaps you should too.

Edited by Northern Sol, 12 October 2012 - 08:55 AM.


#248 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,189 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 10:15 AM

My own opinion is that you are talking nonsense.

Hull KR were in danger of becoming an FC feeder team and the RFL had the perfect excuse to block their entry to SL i.e. the state of their stadium, they could have even relegated them the last time licences were decided.

They chose not to.

Mo Lindsay doesn't run the RFL anymore and the world has moved on. Perhaps you should too.


Your opinion is ALWAYS that I am talking nonsense. You need to stick to the actual debates.

You have entirely ignored the facts and twisted them just to try to score your customary point.

Hull.K.R. were sinking as fast as Hunslet in the face of Leeds or Halifax in the face of Fartown and Bradford.

The process of the big clubs taking players and fans from the small clubs is something entirely perpetrated by the bigger clubs.

You have ("whoosh") completely missed the point that Mo Lyndsay covered the need for less clubs to have a bigger share of the
quality players and paying fans (a sound analysis, that is so important to the game even 17 years on, even though Mo is somewhere other than the RFL). He then went on to suggest merger so that this process could happen in an atmosphere of unity and inclusiveness. Nice one Mo.

Then the CLUBS (note that) said "No we are not going to merge" and set about fighting each other for the "Elite" places in the SKY sponsored Superleague.

It was, is, and still remains the CLUBS who are slugging this out. Mo and the RFL supported merger and inclusivity.

Each man for himself as Padge so eloquently puts it.

Hudgell was HKR's man and what he used to fight off his clubs demise was money. £Millions of it literally. This is the stuff that everyone needs to run clubs, to run successful SL teams even? HKR had the money, won the league, gained promotion and they brought that money into Superleague and provided a competetive club.

The RFL did not have a policy of engineering heavily cashed up clubs out of superleague (are you mad?) to attain their desired hope of less clubs each with more of the resources. Clubs who could spend full salary cap year on year were what the RFL could not find in enough numbers. They can't even find them now can they?

I'm sure Mo being a smart man knew that his vision for a low number of clubs having the lions share of resources could either come about through merger OR the clubs slugging it out. Either way it was not his problem to sort nor was it his successors problem to sort.

Now Hudgell's money has run out it seems Pearson is in for the kill.

So sorry Solly - No point here for you......

#249 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,777 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 10:20 AM

Mergers don't work because they are not what the punters want.

So they reduce revenue to the game as a whole.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#250 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,189 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 10:35 AM

Mergers don't work because they are not what the punters want.

So they reduce revenue to the game as a whole.


Griff - when did you take a vote from the "Punters" and at which clubs?

Revenue as "income" is always offset by costs.

Let's say you have two clubs in one city. One get's 11,000 fans and the other gets 7.000 fans.

The first breaks even or makes a small loss, the second loses £500K a year.

They merge and 5,000 fans abandon the game but new fans take interest.

You may then get one club in the city who could make a profit and go on to make bigger profits.

Let's take three clubs along an infamous river. Collectively they have large revenues, from 17,000 fans but they all play in dumps and lose their best players to bigger clubs.

The revenue is high but one goes bust the second claims they are in dire straights and the third runs at a loss even in the Championship.

Three lots of costs more than eat away any revenue.

ANYWAY as I say you forgot costs against revenue (I know you knew this) and you can't speak for others.

BTW the clubs i used as an example above are entirely fictional :D

#251 sheddings69

sheddings69
  • Coach
  • 786 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 11:41 AM

Griff - when did you take a vote from the "Punters" and at which clubs?

Revenue as "income" is always offset by costs.

Let's say you have two clubs in one city. One get's 11,000 fans and the other gets 7.000 fans.

The first breaks even or makes a small loss, the second loses £500K a year.

They merge and 5,000 fans abandon the game but new fans take interest.

You may then get one club in the city who could make a profit and go on to make bigger profits.

Let's take three clubs along an infamous river. Collectively they have large revenues, from 17,000 fans but they all play in dumps and lose their best players to bigger clubs.

The revenue is high but one goes bust the second claims they are in dire straights and the third runs at a loss even in the Championship.

Three lots of costs more than eat away any revenue.

ANYWAY as I say you forgot costs against revenue (I know you knew this) and you can't speak for others.

BTW the clubs i used as an example above are entirely fictional :D


They'd be lucky to get 500 turning up!!

#252 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,189 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 12:23 PM

They'd be lucky to get 500 turning up!!


You may or may not be right, but I'd agree merger isn't a great idea.

Certainly not if you can squash your local rivals by taking all the best players and new fans in the area.

#253 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,174 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 01:14 PM

Your opinion is ALWAYS that I am talking nonsense. You need to stick to the actual debates.

You have entirely ignored the facts and twisted them just to try to score your customary point.

Hull.K.R. were sinking as fast as Hunslet in the face of Leeds or Halifax in the face of Fartown and Bradford.

The process of the big clubs taking players and fans from the small clubs is something entirely perpetrated by the bigger clubs.

You have ("whoosh") completely missed the point that Mo Lyndsay covered the need for less clubs to have a bigger share of the
quality players and paying fans (a sound analysis, that is so important to the game even 17 years on, even though Mo is somewhere other than the RFL). He then went on to suggest merger so that this process could happen in an atmosphere of unity and inclusiveness. Nice one Mo.

Then the CLUBS (note that) said "No we are not going to merge" and set about fighting each other for the "Elite" places in the SKY sponsored Superleague.

It was, is, and still remains the CLUBS who are slugging this out. Mo and the RFL supported merger and inclusivity.

Each man for himself as Padge so eloquently puts it.

Hudgell was HKR's man and what he used to fight off his clubs demise was money. £Millions of it literally. This is the stuff that everyone needs to run clubs, to run successful SL teams even? HKR had the money, won the league, gained promotion and they brought that money into Superleague and provided a competetive club.

The RFL did not have a policy of engineering heavily cashed up clubs out of superleague (are you mad?) to attain their desired hope of less clubs each with more of the resources. Clubs who could spend full salary cap year on year were what the RFL could not find in enough numbers. They can't even find them now can they?

I'm sure Mo being a smart man knew that his vision for a low number of clubs having the lions share of resources could either come about through merger OR the clubs slugging it out. Either way it was not his problem to sort nor was it his successors problem to sort.

Now Hudgell's money has run out it seems Pearson is in for the kill.

So sorry Solly - No point here for you......


On the contrary, it was my point that the RFL are trying to promote "the big clubs in a big league" when Hull KR became one of those, they were in.

THe whole "merger by stealth" business was forgotten about if it ever existed.

So long as the new guy has cash then Hull KR have nothing to fear.

#254 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,189 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 02:09 PM

1. THe whole "merger by stealth" business was forgotten about if it ever existed.

2. So long as the new guy has cash then Hull KR have nothing to fear.


1. Well you again turn a complete blind eye to Hull raiding HKR's playing roster.

2. Nobody has anything to fear if they can pay full salary cap at the Mo (geddit?) If 20 clubs could do it the "geography" element of the license may come into play, THEN the RFL may cut out a club if there were two in the same place.

#255 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,384 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 03:41 PM

The RFL have stated that a minimum of one Championship Club will be promoted - subject to meeting the licensing standards,

The rider is always going to be there - get used to it.


If you think they will move more than one team from the Championship to SL next time around, then let me tell you about this bridge in Brooklyn I have for sale.

#256 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,174 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 03:53 PM

1. Well you again turn a complete blind eye to Hull raiding HKR's playing roster.

2. Nobody has anything to fear if they can pay full salary cap at the Mo (geddit?) If 20 clubs could do it the "geography" element of the license may come into play, THEN the RFL may cut out a club if there were two in the same place.


I didn't turn a blind eye when players move the other way either.

If there were 20 big clubs but then the RFL's justification for licensing would no longer exist since it would be possible to have automatic P & R between the top two divisions.

#257 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,777 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 04:42 PM

Griff - when did you take a vote from the "Punters" and at which clubs?


Same time as you took a vote on your views. ;)

Nevertheless, the 1995 mergers didn't happen because of supporter opposition. Fact. If you can remember so far back .....

I don't disagree with most of what you say.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#258 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,384 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 05:23 PM

Griff - when did you take a vote from the "Punters" and at which clubs?

Revenue as "income" is always offset by costs.

Let's say you have two clubs in one city. One get's 11,000 fans and the other gets 7.000 fans.

The first breaks even or makes a small loss, the second loses £500K a year.

They merge and 5,000 fans abandon the game but new fans take interest.

You may then get one club in the city who could make a profit and go on to make bigger profits.

Let's take three clubs along an infamous river. Collectively they have large revenues, from 17,000 fans but they all play in dumps and lose their best players to bigger clubs.

The revenue is high but one goes bust the second claims they are in dire straights and the third runs at a loss even in the Championship.

Three lots of costs more than eat away any revenue.

ANYWAY as I say you forgot costs against revenue (I know you knew this) and you can't speak for others.

BTW the clubs i used as an example above are entirely fictional :D


What if your hypothesis was wrong and the entirely fictional chairman of the club with the 11 000 attendance stated that his imaginary club would actually lose the same 5,000,000 pounds this season.

What if an imaginary investor was found for the second fictitious club who stemmed the losses but the other club continued to lose half a million a year. Things are not set in stone. Things change.

Hunslet and Swinton were once big. Both teams in your imaginary city might once have been bankrupt but the league might have bailed one out by sacrficing an expansion club to save the first club from being in the 2nd division which didn't even want them.

The other may have been abandoned to the mercies of the administrator.

The original SL who were formed following mo"s inspired vision bears little realtaionship to the current SL. a third of the teams are gone from it. Things change. Where is your evidence that new fans would jump on board an amalgamated club. If they are there, why are they not supporting one or both of the current clubs.?

#259 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,865 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 05:26 PM

If you think they will move more than one team from the Championship to SL next time around, then let me tell you about this bridge in Brooklyn I have for sale.

Wondering into the realms of totally unsubstantiated gut feelings, I'd be surprised if there is a "next time", got a gut feeling that change is in the air.

#260 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,777 posts

Posted 12 October 2012 - 05:27 PM

Hunslet and Swinton were once big. Both teams in your imaginary city might once have been bankrupt but the league might have bailed one out by sacrficing an expansion club to save the first club from being in the 2nd division which didn't even want them.


Absolutely. Nothing is forever. It'll be interesting to see who's in $uperleague twenty - or even ten - years from now.

If we can keep the thread going that long. ^_^
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users