Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Oldham /Salford


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
835 replies to this topic

#561 davewd

davewd
  • Facebook
  • 83 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 07:36 PM

This being the Salford / Oldham thread er Salford with money problems asking Salford City Council for 1.5 million bailout/loan thats a good linkup isnt it.

#562 Bleep1673

Bleep1673
  • Coach
  • 3,430 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:18 PM

Posted Image

Something for the Oldham Fans
Swinton RLFC est 1866 - Supplying England with players when most of your clubs were in nappies

#563 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,690 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:23 PM

End of year 2 - due to Fev's success at both levels, the first team and academy have trouble holding on to their better players. There are a lot of offers on the table for full-time contracts at various SL clubs and their academies. Fev lose 50-60% of their playing roster.


So Featherstone Rovers produce both senior and academy professionals for Superleague do they?

So successful are they that by this time next year Fev will lose over a whole team or more to Superleague clubs?.

What earthly evidence is there?

Oh yes I forgot - Zac.

#564 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,397 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:56 PM

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?

Why isn't it thriving and becoming a world wide game now? One reason why it didn't thrive in the past was the lack of mass communication like this forum. As things stand at the moment the rest of the media regard RL as being part of Sky, so we get limited pubilcity in competitive media. Ok the Sky coverage is good and the money's good, but it's a ghetto. We have all our eggs in the Sky basket. When they say jump we say how high?

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014


#565 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,397 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 08:57 PM

Posted Image

Something for the Oldham Fans

Watersheddings my favourite ground on the dark side!

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014


#566 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,397 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:03 PM

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

It's not a contention as far as Wigan fans go. Until 2009 I worked in Wigan and most of my workmates were Wigan fans, one was a former Wigan 'A' team player. In the early nineties many of them were fed up of Wigan's domination - it was as boring for them as it was for the rest of us.

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014


#567 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,493 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:08 PM

Why isn't it thriving and becoming a world wide game now? One reason why it didn't thrive in the past was the lack of mass communication like this forum. As things stand at the moment the rest of the media regard RL as being part of Sky, so we get limited pubilcity in competitive media. Ok the Sky coverage is good and the money's good, but it's a ghetto. We have all our eggs in the Sky basket. When they say jump we say how high?

No. Back then more people were likely to follow their local team as there was not a lot else to do entertainment wise so they had a captive audience - unlike today.

You also keep claiming that SKY is a ghetto...but more people have SKY than not these days. Its not like the early 90's. Believe it or not PL soccer is on SKY and the media don't ignore that.

And whilst RL is not taking over the world just yet, it is being played in countries unimaginable even 10 years ago. Its not doing bad RL.

#568 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,690 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:33 PM

Maybe a comparison between the last 17 years and the previous 17 will tell you how entrenched SL is becoming. Only 4 clubs have won the SL title but 8 won in the previous equivalent period.

Only 4 teams have one it in the last 22 years!! Which other sport has a record as bad as that other than the Scottish premier league?

Carry on regardless by all means.


Leicester and Wasps have pretty much dominated Union's elite division and they have more money amongst their clubs. So your wrong.

Nobody is "carrying on regardless" Hetherington is tabling the problem of the same clubs winning all the time and RFL/SL are looking at it in their review.

Why this happens is obvious, too much money/top players and consequently fans are concentrated in the top four clubs.

But as you point out this problem was with us years before Superleague came along, but carry on blaming Superleague regardless anyway.

The plan always was to get all clubs on an even keel money wise and player wise, this certainly isn't going to happen by bringing back P & R. Maybe it can happen if we can get 12 solvent clubs all spending the same cap. Perhaps this is what you are proposing?

You don't actually say??

#569 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,690 posts

Posted 04 December 2012 - 09:41 PM

It's like saying Rugby Union is not a national sport because it is generally a Southern sport apart from Sale.


That would be wrong of course, but Union is successful at pro level mainly in it's midlands/southern homelands with one northern outpost whilst RL is sucessful at pro level mainly in it's northern homelands with one southern outpost.

It too suffers from the same clubs winning their league, so these comparisons are valuable when people say Superleague is a failure. The other code suffers the same problems with more money at their disposal.

Edited by The Parksider, 04 December 2012 - 09:42 PM.


#570 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,397 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 08:34 AM

That would be wrong of course, but Union is successful at pro level mainly in it's midlands/southern homelands with one northern outpost whilst RL is sucessful at pro level mainly in it's northern homelands with one southern outpost.

It too suffers from the same clubs winning their league, so these comparisons are valuable when people say Superleague is a failure. The other code suffers the same problems with more money at their disposal.


Except of course their representative side seem to stand more chance of beating or at least competing with the best. Whereas despite all the claims over the life of SL that it would make us more competitive internationally, if anything the reverse is the case with ours.
Face it although the Sky money has been welcome, generally it's been bad for the game. We are up a cul de sac with no easy way out. We'd have been better to bite the bullet in 1995 but we didn't presumably because the likes of Wigan, Leeds, Bradford and Saints had too much to lose. If you substitute Wire for the Bull the same situatin pertains in the game today. They are the rich boys and they're not going to allow anyone else the chance to displace them, so we have what we've got. Until of course when sooner or later Sky tire of RL and the whole edifice collapses.

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014


#571 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,831 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 08:43 AM

Except of course their representative side seem to stand more chance of beating or at least competing with the best. Whereas despite all the claims over the life of SL that it would make us more competitive internationally, if anything the reverse is the case with ours.
Face it although the Sky money has been welcome, generally it's been bad for the game. We are up a cul de sac with no easy way out. We'd have been better to bite the bullet in 1995 but we didn't presumably because the likes of Wigan, Leeds, Bradford and Saints had too much to lose. If you substitute Wire for the Bull the same situatin pertains in the game today. They are the rich boys and they're not going to allow anyone else the chance to displace them, so we have what we've got. Until of course when sooner or later Sky tire of RL and the whole edifice collapses.

There's not actually any substance in your post. Its just waffle. Basically you're not happy with no p&r, why not just stick to that rather than trying to link things together and bring greed into it.
The success of the national team is quite different to the success of the top league. NZ is a perfect demonstration of this. Of course a strong league can assist but it isnt a direct correlation.

#572 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,690 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 09:59 AM

Face it although the Sky money has been welcome, generally it's been bad for the game. We are up a cul de sac with no easy way out. We'd have been better to bite the bullet in 1995 but we didn't presumably because the likes of Wigan, Leeds, Bradford and Saints had too much to lose. If you substitute Wire for the Bull the same situatin pertains in the game today. They are the rich boys and they're not going to allow anyone else the chance to displace them, so we have what we've got. Until of course when sooner or later Sky tire of RL and the whole edifice collapses.


I certainly like your analysis of the problem with Superleague. Those at the top seem to be rather intransigent towards the changes that could make superleague a much much better competition. I think Hetherington recognises this - wether he can get people to do anything about it is another matter.

He'll certainly use your analysis that SL could collapse if things just drift on (albeit I'm not sure SKY care about what people say SKY see as "filler"). We know there'll be no "even competition" anymore, unless there are changes, now that we have seen over the last 12 months how SL clubs have struggled and few rich people have bothered to come in to help.

I'm not sure what bullet should have been bit in 1995 Tro? Mergers?? or the rejection of SKY's demands for an elite competition to take all of the TV money?

Mergers (of all the new fans, money, sponsors and best players) by stealth continue to very slowly come about. The collapse of cas and HKR can advance Wakefield and Hull's cause, but after 17 years it's a shame on SLE that they do not have their house in any sort of order.

As for a rejection of the SKY demands/money I do challenge anyone to set out how that would have done anything but sent the game into a busted regional oddity, therefore i disagree SKY money has been bad for the game.

It has however been very badly used.......

Edited by The Parksider, 05 December 2012 - 10:01 AM.


#573 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,690 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 10:04 AM


Except of course their representative side seem to stand more chance of beating or at least competing with the best. Whereas despite all the claims over the life of SL that it would make us more competitive internationally, if anything the reverse is the case with ours.


Which begs the questions that I trust you will answer..

1. How competetive would we be today internationally without SKY money??
2. Will P & R improve international competetiveness??

#574 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,493 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 10:23 AM

I'm fairly certain that if RL had rejected the SKY money, Australian clubs would also have rejected theirs and would not have advanced one inch from that point. :rolleyes:

#575 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,831 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 10:48 AM

Im not really sure how having money has made things worse.
Sure, make the argument that money could have been spent better, but i see no evidence or logic as to how the money has put us in a worse spot.

#576 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,999 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 12:34 PM

Im not really sure how having money has made things worse.
Sure, make the argument that money could have been spent better, but i see no evidence or logic as to how the money has put us in a worse spot.

It helps if you measure it against some criteria.

International competitiveness Has it improve. Do we have more teams to play that can compete?
Domestic competitiveness. Do we have more talent in the playing rosta's.
Inclusivity - how broad a brush do we have. How many clubs are pushing to get included in the money.
Accessibilty for fans. Where can we watch it? Do we flick channels that is wall to wall RL. Is it round the corner for most fans.
Cost. Is it cheap enough to access
Variety - Do we see enough different teams
Trophies - Do we see enough valid competitions
Exposure - Do we push it and do we get treated fairly in the press. Do we sell good stories or fight fires over bad.
Assets - What grounds do we own. What brands and market places do we exist in
What do clubs owe against what they own.

IMO the money has gone into building squads to compete in SL and not a lot else. A lot of clubs sold their crown jewels to build and fund those squads rather than admit it was bar that was too high other than for 4 or 5 teams.

#577 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,690 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:20 PM

It helps if you measure it against some criteria.

1. International competitiveness Has it improve?
2. Do we have more teams to play that can compete?
3. Domestic competitiveness?.
4. Do we have more talent in the playing rosta's?.
5. Inclusivity - How many clubs are pushing to get included in the money?.
6. Assets - What grounds do we own.
7. What brands and market places do we exist in
8. What do clubs owe against what they own.

IMO the money has gone into building squads to compete in SL and not a lot else.


1. No
2. The odd two
3. poor
4. No
5. None
6. fewer
7. None
8. More .......... :( Oh dear

IMO the money has gone into building squads to compete in SL which was what the money was contractually paid to SLE to do.

To create a professional elite.

From which we have:-

1. Boosted gates considerably
2. Showcased RL on SKY across the country
3. Given youngsters across the country a career path to pro RL
4. Created professional academies
5. Boosted the junior game in SL areas
6. Brought seriously rich investors into the game
7. Given RL the respect of being a professional sport
8, Created a vehicle for the revival of the game in London and France....... :) Oh joy

If you choose your own criteria you can make anything look really bad.......Or really good......

The REAL question is what state would the game have been in if the clubs had refused the deal by insisting the money be paid to SLE for things SKY didn't want to provide it for.

That's the comparison.

Compare RL today with what it would be today if we had turned SKY down.

#578 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,493 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:21 PM

Why, when people decry International competition at the top do they never acknowledge just how far the Aussie comp has moved on and the quality of their team?

They have recently signed a billion dollar deal. How close is the English comp to securing anything like that sort of deal? Not very.

Its like our 100m runners being told they are useless because they can't beat Bolt. They may actually be pretty good, but compared to him seem worse.


#579 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,690 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:25 PM

Why, when people decry International competition at the top do they never acknowledge just how far the Aussie comp has moved on, They have recently signed a billion dollar deal, and the quality of their team?


Plus it's a major national sport over there. But the above is not the question, when the real intent of the decrying is to rubbish Superleague .

The question is just how competitive would we be today without superleague?

#580 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,493 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:32 PM

With pro RU and the rise of the PL, Cricket etc I don't think it is unrealistic to say RL could easily be on a par with the French competition now, were there no SKY deal. I won't argue for a second that the money could have been better spent but that's another story.