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
- - - - -

The SL Licensing v Promotion & Relegation debate thread


  • Please log in to reply
292 replies to this topic

#281 Chronicler of Chiswick

Chronicler of Chiswick
  • Coach
  • 2,476 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 09:55 AM

Good post. After all, without the financial backing of David Hughes and before him Richard Branson, London wouldn't have a SL side - we nearly folded when Branson pulled out and I'm still not sure how we conned SL to let us stay in!

#282 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,771 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 10:03 AM

Indeed but it is so much more difficult to match up to an exisiting SL club via licencing whereas under p and r the promoted club would only have to meet minimum standards to oust the bottom of the table Sl outfit.


Much depends on the height of the bar.

Yet, in practice, there might be little difference.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#283 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,771 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 10:15 AM

Your last paragraph is interesting. It does raise a question over why clubs suddenly went full time in 1995 when the game got the sky money. Would it not have been better to stay part time or mixed full/part time and to have used more money across the clubs to spend on facilities and structures.


My memory fails me a little but, in 1995, I reckon your average player at an average club's winning pay was around £250, losing pay £80 or so. We only paid the 15 players who played. When we went full time, obviously the players needed enough guaranteed money to pay the mortgage, so they all got salaries. Not just 15 - all 25 (or so) of them. And the win bonus went up to around £500 (nothing for losing).

It was a huge increase. I thought we should have either paid them a salary or tripled the win bonus. Not both.

But - hey - clubs seemed awash with money. It wasn't spent wisely.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#284 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,771 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 10:19 AM

Who says a season has to be 9 months long, may be run two 5 month seasons in a year with P & R, this could keep the interest going especially with a yo yo club and if worked correctly would produce more games and open up two transfer windows within a year.


How about it lasts three years ? Gives clubs time to build. ;)
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#285 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,380 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 07:27 PM

Your understandably trying to keep the debate going, but I'd suggest no jury is out based on this "evidence".

It's not 1962. In the Superleague era the formative years did not have a straightforward P & R system you could judge. Big clubs did not make the 1996 cut whilst little clubs did, and in the ensuing years of SL sorting itself out there were anomalies like Hunslet and Dewsbury taking the promotion spots over such as Widnes and HKR and not getting promotion because of a lack of resources to go on to compete in SL. Huddersfield equally showed that we didn't have proper P & R then because four times they came bottom and four times they stayed in Superleague.

It wasn't until 2002 by which time Fartown had gone and Widnes had been promoted AND stayed up in seventh place that some sort of orderly P & R started to emerge. Noticeably Widnes came seventh in their First season of Superleague so promotion worked for them at that time.

Ken Davey came in at Hudderersfield and his millions helped them get promoted back to SL. The Championship that year was a cakewalk as the cash rich professionals of Fartown didn't lose a single game and amassed over 1100 points in doing so. Huddersfield returned to SL via promotion and stayed up. Was this a success of the P & R system?? No it wasn't it was Ken Davey's millions.

Salford's relegation allowed Fartown back and Mr. Wilkinson equally flashed the cash, but only just pipped Leigh to promotion. Mr. Wilkinsons money made promotion possible for Salford, and made it possible for them to "stay up" (twice) before it ran out and the club recently collapsed. Castleford dropped in 2004 to allow Leigh up and a shortage of money led to a disasterous season for Leigh, back down to be replaced by Castleford who managed to find a budget and keep as many of their SL players as they could.

Plucky whitehaven beat them to the top spot but collapsed in the grand final amid a rumour that the part timers didn't want to go up and their chairman didn't have any money to go up with anyway.

Finally came 2006 and up went Hull.K.R. under Neil Hudgells money, they'd been close to Castleford and once Whitehaven had collapsed and leigh came down with not a penny left, the door was open for the Robins and with the clubs strategy of importing quality Australians up they came and stayed up.

I've NO doubt P & R would work if we went back to it as long as there was the finance to make it work, and this simply means that the likes of Sheffield, Leigh, Halifax and Featherstone having the likes of Hudgell, Wilkinson. Davey and Fulton so they can go up and compete to stay up in a series of ups and downs with the likes of Castleford, HKR, Salford & Wakefield.

The only valid evidence from the old P & R days in SL is that if you want P & R to be effective where clubs can stay up, you need the promoted clubs to have the money.

Finally I don't see what you mean by "under licensing Catalans and Widnes came bottom". Catalans came into SL under licensing which was claimed to give a chance for clubs to stay up through a three year period. In coming bottom it more so proved P & R does NOT work as you can't stay up in a year even WITH money. Same with Widnes. They came bottom WITH money - so what is proved is that without money at the CC clubs P & R will not work.

Indeed if Ralph Rimmer were to want a club to prove his case he's pick Catalans. He'd tell you how in protecting them from relegation they were able within six year to "build" to become a top four SL side.


All you have done here is provide an argument in favour of p and r with standards.

Hunslet and Dewsbury were refused because they didn't meet the standards which resulted in Huddersfield staying up as a result.

All the other clubs, both you and I talk about in being promoted, as you say rightly , stayed up because they had the finances to compete in SL following promotion, again an argument supporting promotion with standards, one of which, as you well know is financial sufficiency to be able to support a SL team.

Catalans were a strange case. They were promised a SL licence three years or so before they were actually playing in SL and still didn't produce a team capable of staying up. Maybe they should have been relegated. The team they produced was not a SL standard team. Another year getting one together and winning promotion might well have resulted in the same level of success as they have subsequently achieved. In hindsight they should not have been granted the licence when they were because they failed the criterium of a good enough on field lineup.

#286 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,173 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 08:11 PM

1. All you have done here is provide an argument in favour of p and r with standards.


2. Catalans were a strange case. They were promised a SL licence three years or so before they were actually playing in SL and still didn't produce a team capable of staying up. Maybe they should have been relegated. The team they produced was not a SL standard team. Another year getting one together and winning promotion might well have resulted in the same level of success as they have subsequently achieved. In hindsight they should not have been granted the licence when they were because they failed the criterium of a good enough on field lineup.


1. I don't favour that cobblers.

2. I don't understand your point.

#287 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,380 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 08:24 PM

1. I don't favour that cobblers.

2. I don't understand your point.


Well, you wouldn'y would you. Bboth cases it go against your argument that p and r is not good for SL teams, even limited in number and standards based and that unqualified failures in SL should be relegated, even Catalans. They didn't produce the goods even with a three year lead in time and neither did Widnes.

#288 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,087 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 09:21 PM

Your last paragraph is interesting. It does raise a question over why clubs suddenly went full time in 1995 when the game got the sky money. Would it not have been better to stay part time or mixed full/part time and to have used more money across the clubs to spend on facilities and structures.

My view is that crowds would be just as good and perhaps higher if clubs were mixed full time and part time, if scores were closer. We would not lose our best players because there would be some money for marquee full timers. I still think the rules with real scrums and a 5m rule also encouraged closer more interesting games


We had to go full time and quick because we were about to have our top players bought up by SL and CH9 in Australia, followed by union panicking and going pro because of what was happening in Oz and would also therefore be out to snap up top rugby players.

Rugby is more than about what goes on in a former pit village in Wigan.

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.


#289 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,173 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 09:29 PM

Well, you wouldn'y would you. Bboth cases it go against your argument that p and r is not good for SL teams, even limited in number and standards based and that unqualified failures in SL should be relegated, even Catalans. They didn't produce the goods even with a three year lead in time and neither did Widnes.


Jeez I do not understand any of that.

Tommorrow have a think and try me with one point at a time.

But above all don't treat me like I'm the devil incarnate.

If you don't like what is happening email/write to/call the RFL, SLE, or individuals concerned.

#290 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,580 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 10:37 PM

We had to go full time and quick because we were about to have our top players bought up by SL and CH9 in Australia, followed by union panicking and going pro because of what was happening in Oz and would also therefore be out to snap up top rugby players.

Rugby is more than about what goes on in a former pit village in Wigan.


Padge my Humble friend, your mixture of sense and booloxen is a consequence of the origins of your scabby breed.

#291 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,628 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 10:34 AM

I'm making a general request here for people to avoid allowing their comments becoming personal on this issue. Just because someone has a different opinion does not make them stupid, and idiot, or warrant any other term of personal abuse. If it continues, warnings and suspensions, even bans will start getting dished out because there is absolutely no need for it.

Thank you.

John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#292 jannerboyuk

jannerboyuk
  • Coach
  • 4,889 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 07:50 PM

Padge my Humble friend, your mixture of sense and booloxen is a consequence of the origins of your scabby breed.

fairplay that's an imaginative insult! Well above the usual standards. Drunk or autocorrect?
PROUD TO BE A MEMBER OF http://www.rugbyleaguecares.org/ and http://www.walesrugb...-wales-for-2013
Predictions for the future -
Crusaders RL to get a franchise for 2012 onwards -WRONG
Widnes Vikings also to get a franchise - RIGHT
Crusaders RL to do the double over Widnes and finish five places ahead of them -WRONG
Widnes Vikings NOT to dominate rugby league in years to come! STILL TO COME

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/cardiffdemonsrlfc/
http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/

I promise to pay �10 to the charity of Bomb Jacks choice if Widnes Millionaires finish above the battling underdogs Crusaders RL. I OWE A TENNER!
http://www.jaxaxe.co...89/Default.aspx

#293 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,087 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 05:16 PM

We did that one in a rather extensive thread.

The proposition for harmony and a return to all clubs being competitive against each other was refuse the SKY contract and sell the game to the BBC.

The bulk of the opinion was BBC would not be greatly intersted and the loss of revenue would see the game either shrink or die.


When was this then?

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