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
- - - - -

Nigel Wood- London must improve


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

#281 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,142 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 11:51 AM

3,hull fc
4,hull kr
6,london kiwis
7,london roos

My idea of london kiwis players from GB and NZ plus london roos players from GB and aus. This could create a better more depth Exiles team .


RL is in such a corner that I like your thinking "outside the box".

But any drop of the league to 10 especially can't countenance two clubs in one city and two clubs in another. It's not my opinion, the RFL have always wanted a geographical spread for the game.

Also we need international test rugby league and so your exclusion of France puts to bed the only meaningful northern hemisphere pro RL international match we have a chance of staging.

Canetman seemed to give the definitive list for a radical shake up for me.

#282 deluded pom?

deluded pom?
  • Coach
  • 8,549 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 11:54 AM

But any drop of the league to 10 especially can't countenance two clubs in one city and two clubs in another. It's not my opinion, the RFL have always wanted a geographical spread for the game.


Parky, are you seriously suggesting that if there was the possibility of a second London team to enter SL and both London teams were viable, that the RFL would not entertain the second team because there's already a SL team in London!!!!!

rldfsignature.jpg


#283 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,142 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:02 PM

1. (RL) since going full time pro with a superior product to theirs (RU)

2. All businesses no matter how big and how rich take heed of what their customers want.


1. It's a gross assumption that RL is "superior".

2. The RFL/SLE have taken heed of what their customers want and it's big time professional Rugby League with the likes of leeds, Saints, Wigan, Wire etc battering the heck out of each other.

Look at the attendances since 1996 which show which game most rugby people consider to be superior - Union of course.

Look at the attendances that have flown up for SL and are collapsing in CC to find out what the customers in our niche market want.

You've tried to find another way to push your agenda but it really does take the biscuit, do you expect RL fans across the board to vote in great numbers for the things you want to see???

You yourself said about "voting with their feet" a line that badly failed as RL fans have voted for SL with their feet.

Your flogging your dead one trick pony again.

Edited by The Parksider, 25 March 2013 - 12:03 PM.


#284 foozler

foozler
  • Coach
  • 969 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:15 PM

Not got time, nor inclination to trawl through all the pages.

In all of this, is there any update on the ground situation with the Broncos?

FWIW I read this morning that Wasps are having prelim talks with Brentford re the latters proposed 20k new ground. Seems they are looking to do it on a 50/50 ownership basis and the new guy at Wasps has some serious coin. Only mention it as there has often been talk about Broncos moving to Brentford.

#285 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,155 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:53 PM

If we have the top league of ten we should sit down with our media partners and see what deals are out there.An alternative ten could be
1,bradford
2,huddersfield
3,hull fc
4,hull kr
5,leeds
6,london kiwis
7,london roos
8,st helens
9,warrington
10,wigan
Would be interesting to see what tv deal could be given for that. I bet if sky offer 2m a club this league could happen. My idea of london kiwis players from GB and NZ plus london roos players from GB and aus. This could create a better more depth Exiles team . England to have three match serries against them one game in yorkshire one in lancs and one in london.Two teams in london could give scorp for afew double headers against others. Could possible also build to three magic week ends one in london , one in yorks and one in lancs.


Who is going to support an Australian or Kiwi side based in London?

Edited by Northern Sol, 25 March 2013 - 12:53 PM.


#286 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,155 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:54 PM

Parky, are you seriously suggesting that if there was the possibility of a second London team to enter SL and both London teams were viable, that the RFL would not entertain the second team because there's already a SL team in London!!!!!


At one time he argued that a second London SL team was inevitable, now the wind has changed.

#287 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,706 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 01:00 PM

Put it this way Chris Union, whose club crowds were pathetic up to their going openly pro have expanded enormously - playing in winter. Ours since going full time pro with a superior product to theirs have expanded but nothing like to the same extent.


Once again you are really being selective with your facts.

There is nothing about winter that created or aided the expansion, the expansion came from the fact that they had never taken the club game seriously. They essentially created a proper league system for the first time off the back of huge national support for Rugby Union, with internationals etc. This has been replicated in other parts of the world where Union has treated club rugby seriously for the first time, look at Australia for instance. The NRL has seen growth but nothing compared to the growth of domestic Rugby Union. This is not in any way to downplay the NRL as like us the strength was already in the club game and Union exploited an already large grassroots and international network.

RL in this country couldn't be more different than the RU Premiership, our game had been all about the clubs since 1895. Our biggest successes have always been in the club games. We created growth from an arguably already saturated market and a bigger growth than NRL clubs have managed (staying in their winter) since 1995.

What I find the dishonest about your reasoning is the fact that you treat your own speculation about what might have happened winter as if it is fact. You then oddly use this speculation to try and make out like summer rugby has been unsuccessful in comparison to it. We have no way of knowing what would have happened in winter and it is far from guaranteed that there would have been the same growth.

#288 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,155 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 01:29 PM

Once again you are really being selective with your facts.

There is nothing about winter that created or aided the expansion, the expansion came from the fact that they had never taken the club game seriously. They essentially created a proper league system for the first time off the back of huge national support for Rugby Union, with internationals etc. This has been replicated in other parts of the world where Union has treated club rugby seriously for the first time, look at Australia for instance. The NRL has seen growth but nothing compared to the growth of domestic Rugby Union. This is not in any way to downplay the NRL as like us the strength was already in the club game and Union exploited an already large grassroots and international network.

RL in this country couldn't be more different than the RU Premiership, our game had been all about the clubs since 1895. Our biggest successes have always been in the club games. We created growth from an arguably already saturated market and a bigger growth than NRL clubs have managed (staying in their winter) since 1995.

What I find the dishonest about your reasoning is the fact that you treat your own speculation about what might have happened winter as if it is fact. You then oddly use this speculation to try and make out like summer rugby has been unsuccessful in comparison to it. We have no way of knowing what would have happened in winter and it is far from guaranteed that there would have been the same growth.


Very true, leagues only existed in English RU from 1985 onwards (IIRC). They were only 8 years old when the game went (openly) pro.

I'd be surprised if the game wasn't growing as a spectator sport before the end of shameuterism.

#289 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,142 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 01:32 PM

Parky, are you seriously suggesting that if there was the possibility of a second London team to enter SL and both London teams were viable, that the RFL would not entertain the second team because there's already a SL team in London!!!!!


You make a great point.

I remember Richard Lewis talking about London and really pushing the idea of a second club being something the game really wanted. The same principle applied to France, and I'd guess Wales too!!

Yes this is a good principle in theory, and it would have been great to see but it was never going to happen without rich men coming in to join the party. Sadly one rich man doesn't lead to another probably because rich man 2 sees rich man 1 struggle and get no help from RFL/SLE!!

You got me there!!

#290 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,706 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 03:47 PM

Very true, leagues only existed in English RU from 1985 onwards (IIRC). They were only 8 years old when the game went (openly) pro.

I'd be surprised if the game wasn't growing as a spectator sport before the end of shameuterism.


It was only 1987 when they started the Courage Leagues and even then clubs arranged fixtures amongst themselves!

Just a quick look at the teams that competed in those leagues shows how minor it was. It included Liverpool St Helens, Waterloo, Orrell, Moseley, Rosslyn Park etc. It's really no surprise that once their leagues adjusted to teams that could sustain professional RU that they saw a big increase in their crowds.

There are no parallels with RL, we already had a history of clubs that had drawn 20k+ crowds in their past and crowds had found their natural level, since 1995 we have increased from that base. Professional rugby is still pretty new to most of the towns in the Premiership and to an extent it is still finding its level. There are some clubs that clearly have the potential to get regular huge crowds but they are still held back by some poorer performing clubs (often in the North).

#291 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 501 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 04:03 PM

Who is going to support an Australian or Kiwi side based in London?


Probably not enough fans and business to finance it, but two SH teams stacked with players knocking on the nrl door would lift the quality and intensity of sl no end

#292 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,114 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 05:01 PM

It's a red herring to compare Union and League on this topic.

I remember when I first went down to the Stoop to watch London v Wire - I was shocked that basically it was a couple of crappy stands round a field. Once Union took their club game seriously, it was always going to be pretty easy to make some quite massive improvements. League already had the structures in place, and played in proper grounds (sort of!) - so we didn't have the level of improvements that Union could offer to their fans.

Our sport was already professional, the opportunity for improvement wasn't realistically there on the same scale imho.

But we went full time pro at the same time as they did. The game on the field improved as spectacle - and intitially at least their's didn't - but they got the crowd increase. Playing in winter. We didn't even give playing full time in winter a chance. We just supinely switched to summer. Who knows with the likes of the (then) MCAlpine, KC, (then)JJB coming on stream what would have happened. (plus other stadia at Warrington and Widnes and the improvements at Headingley) We actually play the game in what often (looking out of the window) are the worst months of the winter anyway. We abandoned the early autumn, which even into November can be quite pleasant weather-wise, we abandoned what used to be lucrative Christmas fixtures. Time was when RL was played over all the bank holidays - early season games over the summer one, derby fixtures at Christmas and Easter, May Day was often the CC Final and Spring Bank Holiday for (what would now be) the Grand Final. As I said I'm ambivalent, but it wasn't tried and now it's probably too late. But someone just decided in what seemed a quite arbitrary way to switch fo summer for no better reason than that's what (it's said) Sky wanted. SL crowds are up marginally on pre SL crowds, but as I say we sacrificed some lucrative opportunites plus the Test Tours. The point I was trying to make is that so much of RL is like that - the fans (who let's be honest make some contrbution to the costs of the game) seem to be the last in the queue when it comes to these decisions. Threre was an instance last season when a fixture was moved from Friday to Sunday without any notice at all -fans had booked time off and some had train tickets to travel that would no longer be valid - but no one cared. The 2000 World Cup was another example of the fans taking a back seat. I'm sure had the fans been consulted beforehand a 6-00pm ko at Twickenham could have been avoided for starters. I went - I saw the chaos. IMO RL needs to get its act together in terms of PR and start listening to feedback from fans.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#293 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,706 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 05:35 PM

But we went full time pro at the same time as they did. The game on the field improved as spectacle - and intitially at least their's didn't - but they got the crowd increase. Playing in winter. We didn't even give playing full time in winter a chance. We just supinely switched to summer. Who knows with the likes of the (then) MCAlpine, KC, (then)JJB coming on stream what would have happened. (plus other stadia at Warrington and Widnes and the improvements at Headingley) We actually play the game in what often (looking out of the window) are the worst months of the winter anyway. We abandoned the early autumn, which even into November can be quite pleasant weather-wise, we abandoned what used to be lucrative Christmas fixtures. Time was when RL was played over all the bank holidays - early season games over the summer one, derby fixtures at Christmas and Easter, May Day was often the CC Final and Spring Bank Holiday for (what would now be) the Grand Final. As I said I'm ambivalent, but it wasn't tried and now it's probably too late. But someone just decided in what seemed a quite arbitrary way to switch fo summer for no better reason than that's what (it's said) Sky wanted. SL crowds are up marginally on pre SL crowds, but as I say we sacrificed some lucrative opportunites plus the Test Tours. The point I was trying to make is that so much of RL is like that - the fans (who let's be honest make some contrbution to the costs of the game) seem to be the last in the queue when it comes to these decisions. Threre was an instance last season when a fixture was moved from Friday to Sunday without any notice at all -fans had booked time off and some had train tickets to travel that would no longer be valid - but no one cared. The 2000 World Cup was another example of the fans taking a back seat. I'm sure had the fans been consulted beforehand a 6-00pm ko at Twickenham could have been avoided for starters. I went - I saw the chaos. IMO RL needs to get its act together in terms of PR and start listening to feedback from fans.

But we went full time pro at the same time as they did. The game on the field improved as spectacle - and intitially at least their's didn't - but they got the crowd increase. Playing in winter. We didn't even give playing full time in winter a chance. We just supinely switched to summer. Who knows with the likes of the (then) MCAlpine, KC, (then)JJB coming on stream what would have happened. (plus other stadia at Warrington and Widnes and the improvements at Headingley) We actually play the game in what often (looking out of the window) are the worst months of the winter anyway. We abandoned the early autumn, which even into November can be quite pleasant weather-wise, we abandoned what used to be lucrative Christmas fixtures. Time was when RL was played over all the bank holidays - early season games over the summer one, derby fixtures at Christmas and Easter, May Day was often the CC Final and Spring Bank Holiday for (what would now be) the Grand Final. As I said I'm ambivalent,


I actually just spat my coffee out at this point. There is absolutely no way you are ambivalent, hense your half-truths and speculation just to back up a weak point.

You're arguing a nonsense speculative point yet again. I could just as easily state that crowds would have dropped massively in winter and that we've done a grand job keeping them up. There is no way of proving or even implying either, all we can deal with is facts and the fact is crowds have improved.

You are over playing the effect full-time professionalism has on the spectacle, it's arguably made it worse and certainly made the results more predictable. The difference with RU is that they went from playing friendles in fields with fences around them to going professional on and off the pitch. As I pointed out and was ignored, the same has happened in Australia with RU but the NRL hasn't seen growth in comparison at all. At least we've seen some growth.

Test tours are unrelated to summer rugby, there is no reason why switching to summer necessarily meant the scrapping of tours. If anything, it puts all the nations in line with each other. Football doesn't seem to have problems with internationals when their seasons are all at the same time.

but it wasn't tried and now it's probably too late. But someone just decided in what seemed a quite arbitrary way to switch fo summer for no better reason than that's what (it's said) Sky wanted. SL crowds are up marginally on pre SL crowds, but as I say we sacrificed some lucrative opportunites plus the Test Tours. The point I was trying to make is that so much of RL is like that - the fans (who let's be honest make some contrbution to the costs of the game) seem to be the last in the queue when it comes to these decisions. Threre was an instance last season when a fixture was moved from Friday to Sunday without any notice at all -fans had booked time off and some had train tickets to travel that would no longer be valid - but no one cared. The 2000 World Cup was another example of the fans taking a back seat. I'm sure had the fans been consulted beforehand a 6-00pm ko at Twickenham could have been avoided for starters. I went - I saw the chaos. IMO RL needs to get its act together in terms of PR and start listening to feedback from fans.


Just like which other professional sports....? Are you honestly suggesting that Sky put the 6:00pm Twickenham game on because they thought it would be good for fans? We fit around them or we don't get televised, it's as simple as that.

Like I said earlier, even if there had been a unanimous reaction against it doesn't make it right because we now have a situation where there might be a unanimous number of fans for it. How would you have ever known if you went with what the fans say? That's why you need leadership rather than ruling by the majority.

#294 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,706 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 05:43 PM

But we went full time pro at the same time as they did. The game on the field improved as spectacle - and intitially at least their's didn't - but they got the crowd increase. Playing in winter. We didn't even give playing full time in winter a chance. We just supinely switched to summer. Who knows with the likes of the (then) MCAlpine, KC, (then)JJB coming on stream what would have happened. (plus other stadia at Warrington and Widnes and the improvements at Headingley) We actually play the game in what often (looking out of the window) are the worst months of the winter anyway. We abandoned the early autumn, which even into November can be quite pleasant weather-wise, we abandoned what used to be lucrative Christmas fixtures. Time was when RL was played over all the bank holidays - early season games over the summer one, derby fixtures at Christmas and Easter, May Day was often the CC Final and Spring Bank Holiday for (what would now be) the Grand Final. As I said I'm ambivalent, but it wasn't tried and now it's probably too late. But someone just decided in what seemed a quite arbitrary way to switch fo summer for no better reason than that's what (it's said) Sky wanted. SL crowds are up marginally on pre SL crowds, but as I say we sacrificed some lucrative opportunites plus the Test Tours. The point I was trying to make is that so much of RL is like that - the fans (who let's be honest make some contrbution to the costs of the game) seem to be the last in the queue when it comes to these decisions. Threre was an instance last season when a fixture was moved from Friday to Sunday without any notice at all -fans had booked time off and some had train tickets to travel that would no longer be valid - but no one cared. The 2000 World Cup was another example of the fans taking a back seat. I'm sure had the fans been consulted beforehand a 6-00pm ko at Twickenham could have been avoided for starters. I went - I saw the chaos. IMO RL needs to get its act together in terms of PR and start listening to feedback from fans.


Oh and as for the 'small improvement in crowds,' the last proper season in winter (94-95) had an average crowd of 5,624. Last season had an average of 10,124, an increase of 80% albeit with 2 fewer clubs. This is likely to go down this year after the worst recession for a long long time.

In the same years, the top Australian division has increased its crowds by 18% staying in the same season and with numerous better facilities.

#295 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,155 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 06:06 PM

Probably not enough fans and business to finance it, but two SH teams stacked with players knocking on the nrl door would lift the quality and intensity of sl no end


Would it?

Do we get high quality Aussie / Kiwi players at the moment?

#296 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 501 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 06:34 PM

Would it?

Do we get high quality Aussie / Kiwi players at the moment?


I think it would,The strength in depth of SH RL must be massive compared to here.If each nrl club was to provide five or so of the most experienced and best up and coming players to play in these teams,i think they could very easily compete with the bottom 10 clubs.It could also make it a bit more interesting with the different styles of play.As i say though its all about finance.

Not anymore it seems, but is that down to finance?.

#297 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,155 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 07:18 PM

I think it would,The strength in depth of SH RL must be massive compared to here.If each nrl club was to provide five or so of the most experienced and best up and coming players to play in these teams,i think they could very easily compete with the bottom 10 clubs.It could also make it a bit more interesting with the different styles of play.As i say though its all about finance.

Not anymore it seems, but is that down to finance?.


Wouldn't it be rather more likely that we get sent some hasbeens looking for a pension?

#298 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,114 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 08:11 PM

Oh and as for the 'small improvement in crowds,' the last proper season in winter (94-95) had an average crowd of 5,624. Last season had an average of 10,124, an increase of 80% albeit with 2 fewer clubs. This is likely to go down this year after the worst recession for a long long time.

In the same years, the top Australian division has increased its crowds by 18% staying in the same season and with numerous better facilities.

But you can't say what would have happened had we stuck with winter. That is the point. Not that winter is best - that it was never tried and no one was consulted. You just don't get it do you? I'm not saying go back to winter I'm using the example of the switch to summer - could there have been a bigger swtich? - of the way Rugby League treats its fans.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#299 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 501 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 08:37 PM

Wouldn't it be rather more likely that we get sent some hasbeens looking for a pension?


That being the case there would be little point in doing it. :lol:

#300 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,114 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:28 AM

I have presented a long, but even then incomplete list that addresses your's and lobbygobbler's self serving ideas about running the game by plebiscite, perhaps yu might like to answer the questions it poses.

I have never advocated that the game should be run by plebiscite. But for such a major change in the game such as from winter to summer surely justifies asking someone what they think of the idea. AFAIK no such questions were asked. For me it was symptomatic of the way those who run the game treat the fans. I don't advocate a return to winter although I believe there were many advantages that we sacrificed in the move to summer that weren't taken into account. All I say is that the next time such a major change is contemplated, perhaps someone somewhere should take some thought for the fans' views.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users