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
- - - - -

Eagles for SL


  • Please log in to reply
549 replies to this topic

#341 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,229 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 07:43 PM

Wasnt it the Bosman ruling?

It was.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#342 Marauder

Marauder
  • Coach
  • 11,808 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 07:46 PM

Wrong

John Whaling on behalf of the board of directors at Sheffield said the club "can't do everything because we are struggling with finance due to a downturn in the corporate market" . He appealed to the RFL for investment to "publicise the game in Sheffield and help grow Eagles crowds".

My view is they are badly lacking money and it's backed up by their own spokesperson on behalf of the board of directors.

I just don't dream these things up, I read and listen intently to what is said and what actually happens.

He has stated IMO what just about every sports club in the country will be suffering, I read more into it that The Eagles would like to be treated more in line with the expansion areas and receive funding to help develop the club to the next level without going into the red.
Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.



http://www.pitchero....hornemarauders/

#343 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,330 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 07:58 PM

1. He has stated IMO what just about every sports club in the country will be suffering.

2. I read more into it that The Eagles would like to be treated more in line with the expansion areas and receive funding to help develop the club to the next level without going into the red.


1. I know but even when they weren't suffering the recession they may have had more corporate money but only had 1,000 fans.

2. Yes I thought that was an angle especially when he referred to London and Crusaders.

Today there's several Welsh Superleague players and a growing number of Superleague players from London and the south east. These areas were and are receptive to Rugby League probably more so than Sheffield is, so that's probably why these areas were preferred to Sheffield.

But even those two clubs had to have money men before they were allowed in Superleague so the RFL IMHO are not going to bankroll Sheffield to see if they can create pro players from the area. As I said above if the RFL were to pay for a championship club to be in SL to expand the playing pool they'd probably get better results from Cumbria??.

Featherstone and Pontefract produce players in good numbers and they say Mr. Nahaboo will fund them, so that's another reason to sadly say it's a "no" to Sheffield.....

#344 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,229 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:00 PM

The salient part of my post, which you ignored was " in the future". If you feel that this recession is never ending then OK you are correct.

The recession could end tomorrow, it would make little difference to Sheffield or many other clubs.

Clubs were skint before the recession, they are just a bit more skint now and come the end of the recession they will go back to just being skint.

That may seem a bit flippant, but it is the reality. Nearly all clubs live on the borderline, even in the best of times, a recession doesn't cut a clubs income by 50% overnight and it doesn't jump by 50% when a recession is declared as over.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#345 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,330 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:10 PM

The salient part of my post, which you ignored was " in the future". If you feel that this recession is never ending then OK you are correct.


Sheffield didn't have much money throughout the Labour "boom years" either when they averaged 4,000 fans in Superleague, and eventually went bust.

To effectively argue once the country comes out of recession this will enable Sheffield to afford to compete in Superleague is a bit desperate.

#346 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,330 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:11 PM

The recession could end tomorrow, it would make little difference to Sheffield or many other clubs.

Clubs were skint before the recession, they are just a bit more skint now and come the end of the recession they will go back to just being skint.

That may seem a bit flippant, but it is the reality.


Apologies, I just missed your post before I repeated it.

#347 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,229 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:13 PM

Sheffield didn't have much money throughout the Labour "boom years" either when they averaged 4,000 fans in Superleague, and eventually went bust.

To effectively argue once the country comes out of recession this will enable Sheffield to afford to compete in Superleague is a bit desperate.


Also its not only Sheffield's fortunes that improve it's the fortunes of all of their competitors.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#348 Marauder

Marauder
  • Coach
  • 11,808 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:29 PM

1. I know but even when they weren't suffering the recession they may have had more corporate money but only had 1,000 fans.

2. Yes I thought that was an angle especially when he referred to London and Crusaders.

Today there's several Welsh Superleague players and a growing number of Superleague players from London and the south east. These areas were and are receptive to Rugby League probably more so than Sheffield is, so that's probably why these areas were preferred to Sheffield.

But even those two clubs had to have money men before they were allowed in Superleague so the RFL IMHO are not going to bankroll Sheffield to see if they can create pro players from the area. As I said above if the RFL were to pay for a championship club to be in SL to expand the playing pool they'd probably get better results from Cumbria??.

Featherstone and Pontefract produce players in good numbers and they say Mr. Nahaboo will fund them, so that's another reason to sadly say it's a "no" to Sheffield.....

To build a club of strength you would need to have several areas in place, to me it looks like Sheffield have chosen their route and the order they saw fit, from recent results you have to say their route is working towards Super League.

Sheffield Eagles still have at lease one development officer funded by themselves where in contrast the RFL have pulled their funded ones from many areas.
Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.



http://www.pitchero....hornemarauders/

#349 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,229 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:49 PM

To build a club of strength you would need to have several areas in place, to me it looks like Sheffield have chosen their route and the order they saw fit, from recent results you have to say their route is working towards Super League.

Sheffield Eagles still have at lease one development officer funded by themselves where in contrast the RFL have pulled their funded ones from many areas.

Different clubs will take different approaches, that's a given. For me there is only one approach, you build a strong club (business) and from that you build a team. The recent traditional approach is to build a team and hope some business follows to pay for it.

A lot of early rugby clubs were formed from successful businesses forming sporting clubs, not from sporting clubs trying to become successful businesses.

Edited by Padge, 16 October 2012 - 08:52 PM.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#350 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,229 posts

Posted 16 October 2012 - 08:50 PM

Kokup

Edited by Padge, 16 October 2012 - 08:51 PM.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#351 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,330 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 06:46 AM

"I'd be surprised if anyone is spending less than us. I'm not a millionaire sugar daddy chucking money in the pot"
Andrew Glover, League Express 15th October 2012 exploding the myth that he's loaded.

I think he's trying to say that a well run club can indeed hack it in SL without a sugar daddy.


He also said the salary cap was too high (an extremely interesting comment).

He also conceded that if the cap was lowered the big clubs should be given dispensation to pay for the game's marquee players.

But regardless of his mooted changes for the salary cap system Andrew Glover got 8,000 fans into Belle Vue and I'd guess he'll project more at Newmarket.

It may well be the case "a well run club can indeed hack it in SL without a sugar daddy" and the RFL have given Mr. Khan a chance to also prove that, but part of "well run" includes 10,000 crowds.

Not 1,600 or 2,000 or even 4,500. So again let's all face the reality.

Edited by The Parksider, 17 October 2012 - 06:49 AM.


#352 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,806 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:45 AM

The transfer system didn't collapse, it was declared illegal, probably when someone in the Sports Ministry twigged the slave trade had been abolished.


It collapsed because it was illegal.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#353 RP London

RP London
  • Coach
  • 12,678 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:53 AM

1. I know but even when they weren't suffering the recession they may have had more corporate money but only had 1,000 fans.

2. Yes I thought that was an angle especially when he referred to London and Crusaders.

Today there's several Welsh Superleague players and a growing number of Superleague players from London and the south east. These areas were and are receptive to Rugby League probably more so than Sheffield is, so that's probably why these areas were preferred to Sheffield.

But even those two clubs had to have money men before they were allowed in Superleague so the RFL IMHO are not going to bankroll Sheffield to see if they can create pro players from the area. As I said above if the RFL were to pay for a championship club to be in SL to expand the playing pool they'd probably get better results from Cumbria??.

Featherstone and Pontefract produce players in good numbers and they say Mr. Nahaboo will fund them, so that's another reason to sadly say it's a "no" to Sheffield.....


As i have said a few times on here i dont think the eagles are ready but i dont think that that means they never will be..

As i have also said i think Sheffield is receptive to a Rugby League club, if done correctly whch it blatantly was not last time around. The fact it is a football city is not great but there is also the fact that for the majority of the season RL is a summer sport and so you dont have to wrestle people away from football to watch RL they can actually do both which is great.. now it is a case of exploiting that fact..

anyway as i say i broadly agree eagles are not ready yet but i take issue with the "never will be" style arguments..

the reason i say that is becuase i dont want this to decsend again into the above..

What i would like to know is this:
You say Welsh players, and players from London and the South East.. you seem to be saying that the Welsh Super League club helped Wales and hte London Super Legaue club is developing London and the South east, which i broadly agree with and they have both done a fantastic job with getting juniors through from those two areas.. however my issue is this:
London Bronocos/Harlequins manage to get juniors through (but only now) from an area as large as London and the South East, Britains Capital City, biggest city and hugely populous are as a whole (South East in 2011 census is 8.6 million, London is also in census 2011 8.17million, combined at 16.7 million!)
Wales RFL and Welsh Super Legaue has got juniors coming though a whole Country.. population give or take 3 million...
Yet Sheffield have to do this with kids just in Sheffield?? Yorkshure & Humber in 2011 census has a population of 5.28million Sheffield is somewhere around the 550k mark!!!

This seems mightily unfair...

#354 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,330 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:28 AM

I take issue with the "never will be" style arguments..


So why are you quoting me then??

The quote in terms of the "view that no team, ever, anywhere, no matter what they do can ever be fit for SL".

Is entirely Keighley's quote, keighley's words and wrongly attributed to me.

Oddly I agreed at one point if Sheffield find a big money man they could get straight in SL.

Why not use what I HAVE said when addressing me.

We may then have a fair and sensible debate.

#355 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,330 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:45 AM

1. You say Welsh players, and players from London and the South East.. You seem to be saying that the Welsh Super League club helped Wales and the London Super League club is developing London and the South east, which i broadly agree with and they have both done a fantastic job with getting juniors through from those two areas.

2. London manage to get juniors through from 8.6 million.
Wales got juniors coming though (from) 3 million.

3. Yet Sheffield have to do this with kids just in Sheffield around the 550k mark
This seems mightily unfair...


1. I'm pleased you agree. Superleague clubs do stimulate the junior game in their areas and in having junior development and academies you can get results against the odds given we're a third choice footballing code.

2. Yes you have highlighted why it's important to try to get Superleague clubs representing whole regions then they have a bigger population to go at to develop the game. It's Mo Lyndsay point.

I'd guess London will go on to produce far more Superleague professionals than say Leigh or York, by a country mile.

3. "They don't have to" do this exactly. But if they pick up juniors from Wakefield and Huddersfield which they do, where existing clubs already have systems in place they are not doing anything to expand the professional player base. So the RFL probably would like Sheffield to concentrate on the whole of south Yorkshire.

HOWEVER put yourself in the position of the RFL if say Hughes pulls his funding out and the RFL move to centrally funding SL clubs who can develop players in new areas?.

Their position will be that they would favour funding London first, and Wales second if the purpose was to grow the junior game and get professional players coming through from that. I suggested West Cumbria as a good place (if central funding was the policy) to put Superleague in terms of getting kids playing and coming through as professionals. I guess they have a lower population than Sheffield.

So what exactly do you see as unfair?

There's too much one eyed focus here. Sheffield eagles for SL? I'd say featherstone first

Sheffield Eagles for SL to develop players if money was available?? I'd say go back to South Wales first, feeding the International side is paramount and infinately more important than trying to get sheffield to supply SL players.

#356 RP London

RP London
  • Coach
  • 12,678 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:06 PM

So why are you quoting me then??

The quote in terms of the "view that no team, ever, anywhere, no matter what they do can ever be fit for SL".

Is entirely Keighley's quote, keighley's words and wrongly attributed to me.

Oddly I agreed at one point if Sheffield find a big money man they could get straight in SL.

Why not use what I HAVE said when addressing me.

We may then have a fair and sensible debate.



I did the rest was a general comment to try to stop someone using it for other purposes..

#357 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,330 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:18 PM

I did the rest was a general comment to try to stop someone using it for other purposes..


Fair enough RP not having a go just need to point out there are people bending what I am saying.

And that is if sheffield have no money they won't get in SL.

And if Sheffield is a good place to expand the pro player base fine, it's just London and Wales are better places to do that if the money is available.

But it's not.

#358 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,806 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:23 PM

Even with the parlous state of the finances of some of the current $uperleague sides, it's difficult to see anyone from outside who's a better bet.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#359 RP London

RP London
  • Coach
  • 12,678 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:35 PM

1. I'm pleased you agree. Superleague clubs do stimulate the junior game in their areas and in having junior development and academies you can get results against the odds given we're a third choice footballing code.


try using my words... i broadly agree with you on your last point.. but i wouldnt agree that just Super League clubs stimulate the junior game.. i think ALL clubs help stimulate the game.. somer are not doing a great job but they still help.

2. Yes you have highlighted why it's important to try to get Superleague clubs representing whole regions then they have a bigger population to go at to develop the game. It's Mo Lyndsay point.

I'd guess London will go on to produce far more Superleague professionals than say Leigh or York, by a country mile.


that is like telling a blind man he cannot see.... the point seems to be missed here.. i am not making a statement on its own it is combined to point 3..

3. "They don't have to" do this exactly. But if they pick up juniors from Wakefield and Huddersfield which they do, where existing clubs already have systems in place they are not doing anything to expand the professional player base. So the RFL probably would like Sheffield to concentrate on the whole of south Yorkshire.



of course they are expanding the player pool.. those players would not have been picked up otherwise and you can miss some great players who mature later on.. as long as it is not solely where they are looking i dont see it as an issue.. if they can get some west yorkshire lads into the academy who have a more fundamental grounding in thegame than the ones they pick up from the more expansionist areas then this will help those kids newer to the game to improve..

HOWEVER put yourself in the position of the RFL if say Hughes pulls his funding out and the RFL move to centrally funding SL clubs who can develop players in new areas?.

Their position will be that they would favour funding London first, and Wales second if the purpose was to grow the junior game and get professional players coming through from that. I suggested West Cumbria as a good place (if central funding was the policy) to put Superleague in terms of getting kids playing and coming through as professionals. I guess they have a lower population than Sheffield.

So what exactly do you see as unfair?


what i see as unfair is you comparing sheffield to london and wales.. not the RFL but you.. you have come out and said that London and the South are doing this and Wales have produced that yet they have a much bigger population area to go at when YOU restrict Sheffield to Sheffield.. The RFL are not doing this as far as i am aware.. as far as i know they are seeing Sheffield as being able to tap into the North Midlands and further a field as well as south Yorkshure itself..

Sheffield are doing a great job in producing players but you seem to want to belittle them in what they do and say its not good enough becuase they havent got a team of pure Sheffielders.. where as London has them from all over the boroughs and yet they are doing well..

Why do we have to go with a hypothetical situation anyway.. IF this happens then why should they be in.. well what IF that doesnt happen? what IF i win the Euro Millions and plough it into RL??? you can do What ifs until you are blue in the face.. lets try and keep this to the actual situation... Eagles have ticked a box and may apply.. Wales have not and wont.. London already have a Super Legaue team so we are talking about the eagles here not everyone else..

There's too much one eyed focus here. Sheffield eagles for SL? I'd say featherstone first



and yet they have an even smaller catchment than sheffield.. but i would agree they are higher up on the list of the other bits and peices needed for Super League.. but why is it an either or why not both? and 2 teams get the chop?

Sheffield Eagles for SL to develop players if money was available?? I'd say go back to South Wales first, feeding the International side is paramount and infinately more important than trying to get sheffield to supply SL players.

and yet Wales havent ticked the box to allow them to apply, they dont have a team in the position and if the Eagles bring in the money then its eagles that get the go.. thats not that hard to understand... Wales would be great, Sheffield would be great.. both would be better.. but this doesnt make sense as a point, Eagles get the money you cant just hand it to wales..


Please this is a thread about Eagles for the next liscnece round not some hypothetical what if competition or debate about eagles vs clubs that dont exist or havent ticked the box.

#360 RP London

RP London
  • Coach
  • 12,678 posts

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:42 PM

Fair enough RP not having a go just need to point out there are people bending what I am saying.

And that is if sheffield have no money they won't get in SL.

And if Sheffield is a good place to expand the pro player base fine, it's just London and Wales are better places to do that if the money is available.

But it's not.


there are i agree but i was not one of them there..

I would change your "if sheffield have no money" i dont think its important to "have money" per ce.. as long as they dont lose money they could do it on a shoe string and still add to the comp to be honest.. London and Wales may well be better places but Wales have gone bust and London already has a super league club.. they need to generate their own money surely.. you want sheffield to generate their own money so why is it different for others....

All i ask is you give Sheffield a fair crack fo the whip and in every thing that you have said be it their junior catchment or their finances i dont see this fairness from you.. to be honest which is a shame..

but i think we are going to be going around in circles.. i dont want us in before we are ready as it woudl potentially kill the club but i just dont see why there is the attitude that has appeared on this thread..