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
- - - - -

Oldham /Salford


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
835 replies to this topic

#661 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:59 PM

What is not so positive is that the SL attendances are a much greater proportion of the total RL crowds. and that crowd increases are gravitating to only one competition, whilst the Championship is about level overall (but less of the total), the Challenge Cup and internationals have decreased.


OK the rise in SL crowds have destroyed the Challenge Cup crowds? Are you lot PM'ing each other with this particular gem?

Next SL has destroyed international crowds...

Did it also eat your Hamster?

#662 thundergaz

thundergaz
  • Coach
  • 2,693 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:00 PM

If it doesn't matter your not in SL .why do you want to breakaway Gaz??.

your letting the team down mate.......


What I'm trying to say is I would watch my team whatever league they are in and I don't care if its not SL I just want my team to survive and I think breaking away would give my club more income that's all as SL is becoming a joke for me I've never watched a SL game since the SL started as I don't believe in no relegation.

#663 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:02 PM

The attendance figures do not show a significant increase in the fan base in the UK over the period of SL.


There goes my Gillette yearbooks - I've swept them off the shelves into the bin.

Clearly they are all wrong

#664 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:03 PM

Cheers Padge - so whichever way it is cut, the crowds are up!


Oh no :wacko:

I'll have to get mi books back out of the bin.

#665 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 408 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:55 PM

There is no reason to exclude Catalan, unless of course you would like to skew the figures more to your own liking.

Should Crusaders be taken out of the figures, they didn't exist in 93/94 and they existed in 2011, should any club who hasn't existed since 1895 to present be excluded from any historic analysis after all they skew the figures for the period they existed.

The question was how many watched RL pre SL and how many now. Whether its France or Wales, Lancashire or Yorkshire or even Essex is irrelevant. The RFL had no authority over and got no money from the previous incarnations of Catalan, they are however responsible for Cataln and make money from Catalan. That is the big difference.


Couple of illustrative examples:

In your '93/'94 figures have you included the attendances of the Sheffield & Huddersfield? If so, why? They are no more relevant to the current Huddetsfield & Sheffield clubs than St Esteve/xiii catalan & laterly UTC are to the Dragons.

If, god forbid, Fev, Cas & Wakey merged tomorrow and were drawing average gates of 20k, could anyone plausibly claim that represented 20k new fans to the game? Thats the claim you're making with Catalans.

Without the figures to hand i'd wager that crowds for Catalans are at least double pre SL levels, admirable growth but theres no need use dubious figures to make growth in crowds look even larger than they are.

#666 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 408 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:59 PM

It doesn't matter to me as long as we have a team to watch every matchday. But what I would like to see is a breakaway like they have in darts so the CC clubs can get a decent stream of income.


What revenue, currently unavailble to champs clubs, would be made available as a result of a breakaway?

#667 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 08:22 PM

Theres no need use dubious figures to make growth in crowds look even larger than they are.


Why not get off yer bum and do the research yourself?

Come on give us some facts and figures yourself.

#668 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 408 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 08:38 PM

Why not get off yer bum and do the research yourself?

Come on give us some facts and figures yourself.


a) i do not have access to a resource that would provide the relevant information, namely the attendances of st esteve & xiii catalan in '93/'94 or UTC immediately prior to catalans' entry into into SL.

b. ) I dont need the exact figures to be confident that they are not zero. The point im making is really nothing more than suggesting it is wrong to suggest catalans crowds have grown to present levels from a zero staring point.

Im not sure shat you find so provocative about what I've said, care to expand?

Edited by intheshed, 06 December 2012 - 08:40 PM.


#669 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,378 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 08:42 PM

You read about Tony Abbott. The point is simple - very rich men have come into the game to support Superleague clubs with large amounts of money from £500K a year to up to a £1,000,000.

If Abbot ever decides he wants Superleague he can fill all the massive holes in Fax's SL application found by KPMG and be another one, same with Nahaboo.

The big investors want Superleague, not a semi pro club. Hence Superleague attracts major private investment which is one of it's big achievements.


You throw out challenges like some fairground brawler confident that you will not be challenged or beaten, then when two rich investors involved with two Cc club s are quoted to you, you immediately rubbish their involvement. Has it occurred to you that if either Fax or Fev were given an opportunity to be in SL, these two might step up and finance those two clubs like the others have in SL and like Davy, Wilkinson and Hudgell did for their respective clubs when they were in the Championships but with p and r.

The investors in SL that you trumpet are welcome but clearly not well heeled enough to survive at Salford, Hull KR, and Crusaders. Time will tell, but the signs are that London and Widnes will have to survive without the level of investor support they have had heretofore. The size of the wallet upon which Bradford are standing is not so definite either.

So. It's not so simple. Stop being so SL centric and full of bitterness and bile towards any ambitious CC clubs ( Except Fev of course who you have consistently championed so you can claim to be a fan of CC elevation to SL). SL has helped the game but it is far, far from being a panacea for the games ills and has more problems than sucesses. It's very future is uncertain if you look at the number of shakey and underfunded clubs in it's ranks. It's apparent inability to continue to finance players development dosn't look too confident a message to be sending to the world either.

SL is a work in progress and that progress is far from certain. The SL might just have to temper it's overeaching ambition to be a fully pro league, whether we like it or not. Money rules. If SL clubs continue to falter like they have in the past couple of years, the game might need some stable CC clubs to halt the slide.

#670 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,081 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:04 PM

It doesn't matter to me as long as we have a team to watch every matchday. But what I would like to see is a breakaway like they have in darts so the CC clubs can get a decent stream of income.

Do tell me where this decent stream of income is going to come from.

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.


#671 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:12 PM

You throw out challenges like some fairground brawler confident that you will not be challenged or beaten, then when two rich investors involved with two Cc club s are quoted to you, you immediately rubbish their involvement.


So when these two rich investors throw their hat in the ring and start putting money in to underpin an application to Superleague, and when they get in Superleague like O'Connor and Hudgell did by actually showing the cash then we will STILL have all the big rich investors in Superleague.

And I will STILL go round saying Superleague attracts rich investors with serious money, hence it's a good thing for the game.

And I will still say nobody rich is interested in semi pro RL.

Your so quick to see if you can have a go at me that you forgot what we once spoke about. This was an all inclusive 16 club SL (you you miserable devil only wanted 14 in it) with a lower salary cap and P & R. Naturally as Fax had an application in last time and just missed out and Rovers are seriously itching to get in they'd be my 15th. and 16th. choice and Nahaboo and Abbott could out some serious money in but not so much it'd break them like it's broken Hudgell.

Such a league, with a lower cap, which I supported with you would include Fev and Halifax.

I thought we had something positive going there Mr. K. But it's all gone back to SL bashing :lol:

#672 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:20 PM

I'm not sure shat you find so provocative about what I've said, care to expand?


With pleasure my good sir.

There are figures and articles easily available to see if under Superleague more fans watch the game, to see where all the professional players come from, and to see how much Superleague has attracted in revenue from TV and private investors enthused by pro-RL.

I'm quite happy to spend some time and effort putting these together to see if we can agree some facts, I'm quite happy to table them. and people are quite happy to pick them to bits and contrive to tell me they are all wrong.

If they are wrong and it's not a fact that Superleague attracts lots more fans, TV money, Private money and quality players - everything our games needs - then perhaps those who argue with the figures can do their own figures and show me what the real facts are?

When they don't do this I suspect it's because they really know the truth, but just don't like it.

I'm not bothered but Padge makes some very big efforts in this direction and it's quite unfair to call his efforts "dubious"

#673 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,166 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:23 PM

There is no reason to exclude Catalan, unless of course you would like to skew the figures more to your own liking.

Should Crusaders be taken out of the figures, they didn't exist in 93/94 and they existed in 2011, should any club who hasn't existed since 1895 to present be excluded from any historic analysis after all they skew the figures for the period they existed.

The question was how many watched RL pre SL and how many now. Whether its France or Wales, Lancashire or Yorkshire or even Essex is irrelevant. The RFL had no authority over and got no money from the previous incarnations of Catalan, they are however responsible for Cataln and make money from Catalan. That is the big difference.


If you are talking about whether there are more speccies in the UK for pro and semi-pro rugby league then there is every reason to exclude Catalan as they are not in the UK, Bridgend and Wrexham are in the UK so it would be odd to exclude Crusaders.

#674 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,081 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:23 PM

Couple of illustrative examples:

In your '93/'94 figures have you included the attendances of the Sheffield & Huddersfield? If so, why? They are no more relevant to the current Huddetsfield & Sheffield clubs than St Esteve/xiii catalan & laterly UTC are to the Dragons.

If, god forbid, Fev, Cas & Wakey merged tomorrow and were drawing average gates of 20k, could anyone plausibly claim that represented 20k new fans to the game? Thats the claim you're making with Catalans.

Without the figures to hand i'd wager that crowds for Catalans are at least double pre SL levels, admirable growth but there's no need use dubious figures to make growth in crowds look even larger than they are.

The figures quoted, and the figures used for all charts presented are the official figures for ALL clubs under the auspices of the RFL, nobody has been deliberately added in nor anyone deliberately left out.

Because the figures don't suit some peoples agenda they want to massage the official figures as set down in the record books to alter the facts.

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.


#675 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:24 PM

You throw out challenges like some fairground brawler


Fairground brawler :lol: :lol: :lol:

The challenge I threw out to all the axe grinders was this.........

"Where do you think Rugby League would be today if the game had rejected the SKY offer of millions of pounds a year to stage an elite competition"

Oddly, no matter how many times I asked that nobody really wanted to answer that apart from you, so well played.

#676 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,044 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:05 PM

Maybe size matters. In this brave new world of the 21st century, it about real bums on seats, vitual bums on seats i.e subscribing viewers and ultimately pound notes...income, expenditure and value. By any measure Id say that the economic value of our game is at a record high.

#677 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 11:21 PM

A measly 5 teams have won the Premier League in the last 20 years. And that's with all their billions of pounds and thousands of players to pick from.

They have all that wealth and global fame and yet only one more team have won it than a comp like SL, which struggles for money and coverage. It's rubbish.


Eeeeh I forgot to quote the fact above. Worth a second look.

And don't forget Wasps and Leicester's dominance of RU's elite.

Still everyone's bored with Superleague that's why they don't bother to go to games once they've bought their season tickets.

I also forgot that after Wigan won the RL Challenge cup every year from it's inception in 1897 to 1995, under Superleague seven different clubs have actually won it.

I forgot Sheffield which proves beyond doubt you cannot rely on my facts and figures.

Edited by The Parksider, 07 December 2012 - 06:41 AM.


#678 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,425 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 11:38 PM

"Where do you think Rugby League would be today if the game had rejected the SKY offer of millions of pounds a year to stage an elite competition"

Rugby League is more than just the Pro League. The amateur game has benefitted little from Sky or SL. In fact the way the clubs have raided amateur clubs giving next to nothing in return it possibly has damaged the amateur game to an extent. A club like Siddal or King Cross park has to put up with SL clubs coming along and taking a good 5 or 6 players a year. And what do they get in return? Maybe a couple of hundred pounds if lucky. And the amateur game and grassroots rugby has seen the game throw away money trying to help Crusaders, London, Bradford, Keighley etc whilst it sees many development officers disappear. Instead of money being invest to help, not just improve standards, but help develop clubs that money has been thrown at the Pro game. I dont see how SL or Sky money has benefitted the amateur game at all. The amateur game probably would be just as it is with or without the Sky money that came. None of the clubs saw any of that money. The facilities at clubs has come from other areas like Sport England, Local Government etc. Sky money has played next to no role in the improvement in playing facilities. Any the amateur game has actually seen a drop in numbers and Sport England has decided not to give the game millions of valuable cash due to the not so good numbers. Whilst its clear the game is spreading nationwide much of that is nothing to do with SL or Sky but the work of volunteers and development officers around the place. Many amateur clubs in the heartlands are facing problems. Clubs like Todmorden, Sowerby Bridge, Sowerby Spartans, Deighton Woolpack, Shipley, Huddersfield YMCA, Moldgreen, Prospect Warriors from the Pennine League have folded during the SL years. others only run with one team instead of 2 or 3 like yesteryear. These problems are of course nothing to do with Sky/Sl. But you claim the amateur game is in a better state because so many people play because of Sky/Sl for me is wrong as you dont seem to know too much about the state of the amateur game or Junior rugby and the concerns of many at this time. In answer to your question the amateur game would be somewhere around where it is today.

SL has benefitted a few Pro clubs, but more so Players and their agents. The Pro game was on its knees, but it still as a whole not learnt its lessons and the clubs are still in a similar mess as before. Sl has been around for 17 years. Probably a good billion pound has come into SL via Sky, Various Sponsors, The fans via tickets, merchandise etc plus RFL money and private investors over that period. And the game is still a minority sport whos profile has shrunk on the National stage. Clubs still overpaying players with money they dont have. Still thinking short term instead of long term and making decisions which effect other parts of the game like amateur and International Rugby League. There is no doubt advancement has been made but it certainly hasnt seen major benefits for the Pro game as we still see the majority of Sl struggling to cope with being Full time and such poor decisions like axing the U20 comp to save money doesnt help other parts of the game at all. And I cant see things changing in the future because clubs fail to invest and build off the field with the money they have or receive and instead waste money on players or trying to keep the wolf from the door. Crowds have increased but that only tells half the story. If like Huddersfield and Bradford etc who have thrown tickets out for nothing or low prices that may mean less money coming in. A big crowd doesnt automatically mean more money coming in. And also no doubt the overheads are getting higher each year especially with inflation, the rising cost of utility bills etc. I fail to see how you think SL is so great. It may have improved certain areas but many areas are being neglected.

The International scene in the early to mid 90s was probably at its strongest with regular Wembley visits with crowds of over 73,000 in 1992. Another plus 57,000 crowd at Wembley in 1994. Regular tours for PNG etc against GB. Since SL international crowds have struggled. The Kangeroo Tours of 2001 and 2003 didnt even see crowds of 30,000! Even in 2011 when England played Australia and before Wales played NZ at Wembley just 42,000 turned up. How has SL helped the International part of the game? The International Scene right now has sees little benefit from Sky money except for England. And we see SL clubs pulling players out of Internationals. We see SL clubs getting rid of academy teams to save money which in turn means less or no Welsh, Scottish or Irish kids get to be involved at a SL club doing full time training. So the International scene sees Wales amongst others having weaker less experienced part time players. Catalans has not really improved the French team at all as many of the players in key positions are actually overseas players. And the problems with Catalans and the French National team have been well documented on here. So again I dont see how the International game of RUgby League has benefitted. The development of the game in Serbia, Czech Rep, USA, Canada, Norway etc has nothing to do with Sl but is down to exiles or people interested in RL promoting and developing the sport with money coing in from the RLIF and RFEL via WC and EU and other such money not from anything with Sky or SL. So for me the International Scene at the top level has gone backwards since Sl for whatever reason.

The Challenge Cup has also lost its power and Sky have managed to promote the SL Grand Final as THE final at the expense of the Challenge Cup. The RFL and clubs have tried different means to reignite interest in the cup especially in the early rounds but crowds of 2000 or so even between SL teams shows sadly the cup magic has gone. Whether that is because of Sky its hard to say. But the fact remains this area of the game has been weakened during the Sky/Sl years. I dont see how you can say the cup has benefitted from Sky/SL.

#679 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 408 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 11:47 PM

With pleasure my good sir.

There are figures and articles easily available to see if under Superleague more fans watch the game, to see where all the professional players come from, and to see how much Superleague has attracted in revenue from TV and private investors enthused by pro-RL.

I'm quite happy to spend some time and effort putting these together to see if we can agree some facts, I'm quite happy to table them. and people are quite happy to pick them to bits and contrive to tell me they are all wrong.

If they are wrong and it's not a fact that Superleague attracts lots more fans, TV money, Private money and quality players - everything our games needs - then perhaps those who argue with the figures can do their own figures and show me what the real facts are?

When they don't do this I suspect it's because they really know the truth, but just don't like it.

I'm not bothered but Padge makes some very big efforts in this direction and it's quite unfair to call his efforts "dubious"


There's just one small problem with that, I'm not and never have made any of the claims you're railing against.

It's perfectly possible to agree with the general thrust, in this case that more people are passing through the gates now than in '93/'94, whilst pointing out an apparent flaw in the comparison which makes the improvement seem larger than it really is. I thought I had taken the trouble make sure it was clear I wasn't disputing the basic claim, an increase in overall attendance, apparently not. I'm happy to ensure you do not continue labour under such a misapprehension.

If you take issue with 'dubious' I'll certainly take the trouble to clarify. It wasn't my intention to label Padge's efforts as dubious but to suggest the way the figures had been compiled left them open to questioning. Something to the effect of; your point stands regardless of which way you present the figures so why choose the way which leaves them most open to question?

In terms of disputing figures or facts but not providing my own figures, the only claims I'm making re facts and figures are that the constituent parts of the merger that formed UTC in 2000 did exist in '93/'94 and that they were not playing in front of zero crowds. You surely can't be disputing any of that?

#680 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,081 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 11:59 PM

There's just one small problem with that, I'm not and never have made any of the claims you're railing against.

It's perfectly possible to agree with the general thrust, in this case that more people are passing through the gates now than in '93/'94, whilst pointing out an apparent flaw in the comparison which makes the improvement seem larger than it really is. I thought I had taken the trouble make sure it was clear I wasn't disputing the basic claim, an increase in overall attendance, apparently not. I'm happy to ensure you do not continue labour under such a misapprehension.

If you take issue with 'dubious' I'll certainly take the trouble to clarify. It wasn't my intention to label Padge's efforts as dubious but to suggest the way the figures had been compiled left them open to questioning. Something to the effect of; your point stands regardless of which way you present the figures so why choose the way which leaves them most open to question?

In terms of disputing figures or facts but not providing my own figures, the only claims I'm making re facts and figures are that the constituent parts of the merger that formed UTC in 2000 did exist in '93/'94 and that they were not playing in front of zero crowds. You surely can't be disputing any of that?

But the point is UTC had nothing to do with the RFL and didn't contribute money to or where a member club in any shape or form of the RFL, Catalan are, it doesn't matter where they are, as I said people will want Welsh clubs excluding next because they aren't English if it suits their argument. Crusaders were born of a union club, should we take into account the crowds of the union club beforehand. What about Scorpions who born of the old Crusaders, which one do you want to use to cancel the other.

I only use official records not made up numbers, vague guesses or gut feelings.

Edited by Padge, 07 December 2012 - 12:01 AM.


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.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users