838 replies to this topic

[Ackroman]

Answer me this then Parky, why does what you call sporting communism work in every other competitive sport in this country? Sport is all about change not maintaining the status quo. In Union even the ultra posh Harlequins were relegated. In cricket Yorkshire have been relegated and promoted. Even a powerful side like Lancashire have been relegated. It's called dynamism and its good for us all. What we have at the moment, effectively an oligarchy will kill the game either sooner or later because the fans will tire of the same old same old winning every year. In the late eighties (and I know this for a fact, I worked with a good number of them) even the Wigan fans began to tire of their team winning everything every year.

I never really thought that removing P&R was ultimately about fear of change but it seems it is and is one that will create sterility.

If well held and respected theories are correct, it seems to me that traditionalist thinking in RL is the one open to change and new ideas. It is the ideas to keep things the same, not to develop from within and share the opportunities to strengthen the whole sport that looks old fashioned imperious behaviour.

If we are to believe that it is because there's only so much money to go around then it has to be spent wisely which seems to me isn't the case.

Secondly the RFL could do with looking at how well some Championship clubs have developed there infrastructures forced on them by the possibility of extinction. Without significant investment or opportunity to progress some clubs have really burned a candle for RL. It's those that scoff the loudest that CC clubs aren't ready for SL for whatever reason that preach due to fear. How can you compare or make a judgement when some clubs haven't been in the top flight for over 17 years in the name of progression?

These clubs have shrugged there shoulders and thought "well if SL don't want us and there's no money then we best go find some". The CC clubs haven't sat back on their laurels. They spent some time wondering what the hell but have also made progress with there stadiums, marketing and community programs to keep afloat. What they haven't done is stand still living off a 17 year contract. The sad fact is that if you took SL away only 2 or 3 clubs in the CC would notice. That is not healthy for the game of RL.

Edited by Ackroman, 04 December 2012 - 09:03 AM.

[JohnM]

Answer me this then Parky, why does what you call sporting communism work in every other competitive sport in this country? Sport is all about change not maintaining the status quo. In Union even the ultra posh Harlequins were relegated. In cricket Yorkshire have been relegated and promoted. Even a powerful side like Lancashire have been relegated. It's called dynamism and its good for us all. What we have at the moment, effectively an oligarchy will kill the game either sooner or later because the fans will tire of the same old same old winning every year. In the late eighties (and I know this for a fact, I worked with a good number of them) even the Wigan fans began to tire of their team winning everything every year.

Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal, ...and the very short term, so far, Man City....their fans world wide never cease to tire...

Edited by JohnM, 04 December 2012 - 09:03 AM.

[Ackroman]

DP

Edited by Ackroman, 04 December 2012 - 09:03 AM.

[Johnoco]

Can someone answer me this then? Why did RL not thrive and become a nationwide sport during the many years when everything was decided on the pitch? (even allowing for RU bans)

Why did the serious money men not come forward instead of the chancers that (in general) appeared? Why did someone like Batley or Rochdale never become big teams?

[saints10coach]

Batley The Gallant Youth and Rochdale Hornets success in the 20's says they did.

[saints10coach]

Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal, ...and the very short term, so far, Man City....their fans world wide never cease to tire...

Drop the four football teams you mention to the Championship and then deny promotion and see how long it takes.

[Johnoco]

Batley The Gallant Youth and Rochdale Hornets success in the 20's says they did.

I could well be wrong here but I thought Rochdale had never won a trophy? And even if so, there's been plenty of time since the 1920's to develop.(not a dig at Rochdale this)

Batleys success came in a different world practically, although they had some recent silverware in the NRC.

[Johnoco]

Drop the four football teams you mention to the Championship and then deny promotion and see how long it takes.

Not a valid comparison at all. Any team that gets relegated from the PL gets more money than the whole of RL. So they aren't exactly going to struggle for spare change.

[The Parksider]

1. Answer me this then Parky, why does what you call sporting communism work in every other competitive sport in this country?

2. Sport is all about change not maintaining the status quo.

1. In other sports they do not share the sponsorship and TV money out from the top to the bottom of the pile. Your confused here and I do not mean that nastily.

2. It's also about attracting money to promote the sport and make it a strong sport that people want to watch and play. Again your obsessed here for P & R. I do not mean that nastily. P & R won't solve all the games I'lls or create a vibrant sport. History shows that but stuff history eh?

I'm all for "change, not maintaining the status quo".

Ackroman acccuses me (I assume) of being one of "Those on here defending entrenchment into a 12 club comp". What I defend is the logic of doing this in the absence of the money or will for better solutions, and this is always the problem on here. It's so easy to moan at everything but not easy to pick out a solution that stands some scrutiny.

Keighley and I had a decent debate about this once he'd stopped trying to have a go at me because he thought I was an SL apologist like you and Akroman do. We agreed that one idea to get P & R going was to increase SL to 16 clubs and cut the salary cap to about £1M.

That way the gulf between SL and the CC would be reduced by £600,000. I've toyed with the idea of providing some funding to clubs serious about SL. I personally feel those who talk about it just to get their fans going and those who try to do it through great efforts and expense are worlds apart. Sheffield and Fev are serious for instance. halifax and Leigh - Maybe?

But if the game can recognise a club serious for Superleague who cannot get there because their non-performing SL rivals are busy failing in SL then maybe some SL money should be given to give the CC club a chance of staying up if they win promotion. So I'm against the crackpot idea of giving Hunslet a penny but I'd be happy to see Fev get a £1M for entry to SL.

I don't see P & R as this great thing at the moment because it will be an utter mess unless the structure of both funding and competition is changed.

The discussion I had with keighley wasn't one anyone (including you) bothered to enter into. Probably because on here you have to be "all for superleague" or "all for the championship".

This leads to stupid ideas like lets share SKY money amongst every club, or stupid ideas like Parky doesn't want CC clubs to go up lets all have a go at him .

I've posted long and hard about Fev going up ( another whoosh over the heads of people like you) and said they should just go up purely on fairness alone - they have never had a go and stuff "minimum standards" which amazingly you support ). I just wish they could go up with a targetted SKY payment to give them a start . I'd also wish for them to have 3 years to get going and build up.

But oh no, we can't have that they have to sink or swim in one year because the next applicant is waiting behind them, and so it will come to pass that the same clubs will pass each other up and down year on year. Back to stupid again.........

[saints10coach]

I could well be wrong here but I thought Rochdale had never won a trophy? And even if so, there's been plenty of time since the 1920's to develop.(not a dig at Rochdale this)

Batleys success came in a different world practically, although they had some recent silverware in the NRC.

Hornets won the Challenge Cup in 1922, they are celebrating by wearing a kit of the same design next season. I think they may have one the Lancashire Cup in the 70's as well. I think Batley were the first club to win the CC.

[JohnM]

Drop the four football teams you mention to the Championship and then deny promotion and see how long it takes.

Trojan's point was that "the fans will tire of the same old same old winning every year." My contention is that it is not true.

On your completely separate point of fans deserting relegated teams, that certainly was not the case with Wigan RLFC nor with Manu and Man C

[Johnoco]

Hornets won the Challenge Cup in 1922, they are celebrating by wearing a kit of the same design next season. I think they may have one the Lancashire Cup in the 70's as well. I think Batley were the first club to win the CC.

OK. So what prevented them being a big club from there?

[intheshed]

1. In other sports they do not share the sponsorship and TV money out from the top to the bottom of the pile. Your confused here and I do not mean that nastily.

Not sure its an entirely relevant comparison given the actual sums of money involved & available but in football that does actually happen, with tv money if not sponsership.

Under the current premier league deal around £100m per season is paid to football league clubs under what are broadly termed solidarity payments. A large amount of this is parachute payments to relegated clubs, which can total £48m over 4 years but each championship club not in receipt of parachute payment gets over £2m per year, league 1 & 2 clubs getting around £250k. It looks like roughly 10% of total tv revenue is 'shared'

[The Parksider]

I have for a long time now conceded p and r should have standards attached. Your arguments did, in fact, persuade me that that was essential.

We do not have standards based p and r now. We have a standards based licencing system. This is not guaranteed to promote suitably qualified candidates.

First it is a three yearly excercise which is too long to ensure any significant movement from one competiton to the other.

Secondly, although a club might satisfy the criteria, it's application might be deemed to be not as strong as an incumbent SL club, and it might be rejected in favour of that incumbent.

Under p and r with standards that would not happen. Provided a club won the CC grand final and met the minimum agreed standards it would be in SL the next season. The club which finished bottom of SL, whether or not it was deemed to have a slightly more qualified business plan than any propsective promotee, would be relegated.

So what standards? Currently it's............

2500 fans average
Working academy
£1,000,000 turnover

That currently rules all Championship clubs out of superleague. So that's it under your system there's no P & R at all?????

"Provided a club won the CC grand final and met the minimum agreed standards it would be in SL the next season".

OK so not only does a club have to spend money on attaining the minimum standards, they have to also spend money to win the Grand final - is this because it's what is done on the pitch that counts??

OK you relegate a club. Under the current system Les catalans could have gone down, Widnes could have gone down, Salford could go down. If Superleague clubs like this go down who goes up next year???

It used to be Salford, Huddersfield and Cas who always bounced straight back up. They'd meet your "standards" no problem.

All we would get with this "standards" nonsense is Championship clubs with no money replacing SL clubs with money one year, with the bottom SL club going down (like Widnes would have done this time and they HAVE MONEY).

Now to year two - who goes up? I'd guess Widnes they have the standards and the money.......

Who goes down??? The poor Championship club who only had one year to make or break most likely .

Sure they may just squeeze in in 13th. place (which is where your destructive wishful thinking comes in), but the likelihood is down back to the championship. Then what do they do because they have no money - it's all gone on standards, winning the grand final AND to that one year tilt at SL.

So who then meets the standard?? Certainly not Widnes because they have gone back up.

Nobody?? There's the problem with standards all you will get in ten years is approximately nowhere. In fact you may ruin the best championship clubs such that they bog off to be feeder clubs to survive.

All your doing is thinking of an idea and not following it all the way through. If we want P & R we have to create the right conditions for it.

Not wishful think a system that will probably destroy Sheffield and Featherstone, and knock back the development of widnes as a force again for no great reason.

Edited by The Parksider, 04 December 2012 - 11:44 AM.

[The Parksider]

In football that does actually happen, with tv money

But not evenly across the clubs from top to bottom. Sorry i confused you.

I do think the idea of some money for clubs outside SL is good but not parachute payments - more promotion payments - because surely if we have annual P & R we will all want the promoted club to succeed???

And I mean succeed in reality, not in wishful thinking dreams.

And let's not have anyone dredging up that tired old argument - "well HKR did it" (they did it with £millions of investment)

Edited by The Parksider, 04 December 2012 - 11:45 AM.

[saints10coach]

Trojan's point was that "the fans will tire of the same old same old winning every year." My contention is that it is not true.

On your completely separate point of fans deserting relegated teams, that certainly was not the case with Wigan RLFC nor with Manu and Man C

Nor was it with Oldham, when we used to have the opportunity of winning our place back immediately. Any team that comes down now has to wait 3 years before they even get a chance of being assessed for re-entry.

[saints10coach]

OK. So what prevented them being a big club from there?

What or who is to say they were not. Their honours board does not suggest they were. But I always remember them as being a competitive team. They used to attract decent crowds in the past too.
Challenge Cup Winners: 1921-22.
Lancashire League Winners: 1918-19
Lancashire Cup Winners: 1911-12, 1914-15, 1918-19
Runners-up: 1912-13, 1920-21, 1965-66, 1991-92
Stones Bitter Division 2 Runners-up: 1989-90, 1997
John Player Trophy Runners-up: 1973-74
BBC Floodlit Trophy Runners-up: 1971-72
Salford Sevens Winners: 1990.

[Johnoco]

I'm not knocking them for one second but big team they never have been. Pretty famous, yes but they've never been a Wigan or a Saints have they? The question is, how come if everything was much more equal back then?

[saints10coach]

I'm not knocking them for one second but big team they never have been. Pretty famous, yes but they've never been a Wigan or a Saints have they? The question is, how come if everything was much more equal back then?

Rochdale had a football team in the Football League back then, St Helens and Wigan did not. So as RL became the predominant sport in the other two towns, in Rochdale it did not.

[Johnoco]

Rochdale had a football team in the Football League back then, St Helens and Wigan did not. So as RL became the predominant sport in the other two towns, in Rochdale it did not.

Leeds and Bradford had dominant soccer teams in town. In Bradfords case two.