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 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Minimum Standards


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#41 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:50 PM

P and r in the SL era promoted Wakefield, Hull KR, Huddersfield, Castleford and Leigh. Only Leigh are not currently in SL. How do you come uo with this yo yo fantasy?

And Hull.

1996 was a snapshot. there were some small clubs who made SL and some bigger clubs that did not. Rich men had not yet come along and chosen or rejected their clubs

The small clubs got relegated never to return and the big clubs eventually made their way into Superleague and stayed there.

Now it's a more stagnant situation.

I really see what you did there to try to contrive an argument that there'll still be plenty of variety each year in who goes up and down.

Why do you do this? Arguing everything will be OK won't make it OK.

#42 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 09:25 AM


The fact that they did actually finish bottom.


They did. My mistake. Fax won it in 2010 by the way. But doesn't make any difference to the point you were making.

Edited by a.n Other, 20 April 2013 - 09:28 AM.


#43 Mumby Magic

Mumby Magic
  • Coach
  • 3,198 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 09:42 AM

.

Edited by Mumby Magic, 20 April 2013 - 09:42 AM.


#44 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,052 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 12:54 PM

And Hull.

1996 was a snapshot. there were some small clubs who made SL and some bigger clubs that did not. Rich men had not yet come along and chosen or rejected their clubs

The small clubs got relegated never to return and the big clubs eventually made their way into Superleague and stayed there.

Now it's a more stagnant situation.

I really see what you did there to try to contrive an argument that there'll still be plenty of variety each year in who goes up and down.

Why do you do this? Arguing everything will be OK won't make it OK.

 

They never returned because p and r was abolished. Salford and London and Crusaders and Paris and Gateshead were all appointed to SL. How.s that working out.?  If the process is not in place, neither you nor I nor anyone can know if it would continue to work, as it clearly did, or not.



#45 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,829 posts

Posted 20 April 2013 - 02:45 PM

I reckon it'd have gone like this if it had been put in a few years ago......

2009 celtic C. down (and out) Barrow denied
2010 catalans down Fev up
2011 Fev down catalans up
2012 wakefield down and sheffield denied.

Looks like in reality it'd be a pigs ear. Expansion clubs would be hard hit, promoted clubs would not get time to be established and go straight back down (widnes this year), and clubs would be denied on standards so the status quo would remain. Not very exciting...

In practice it doesn't work IMHO.


Les Cats would be exempt. Als, why would Barrow and Sheffied have been denied? They have better grounds than Wakey

#46 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:27 AM

Les Cats would be exempt. Als, why would Barrow and Sheffied have been denied? They have better grounds than Wakey

So if we are to exempt sides in SL and reject sides in CC on standards then how will P & R "work".

If your skint club finds half a million to build a winning team, when they lift the grand final trophy they had better enjoy it because they'll be rejected on the finances standard won't they.

Then whoever's had an awful season in SL will get a reprieve.

You know why Barrow would not have been promoted - remember Mr. Johnston.

What crowd does sheffield have? What money?

It's just a load of rubbish.

P & R with minimum standards is just licensing.

Edited by The Parksider, 21 April 2013 - 08:36 AM.


#47 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:35 AM

1. They never returned because p and r was abolished.

2. If the the process is not in place, neither you nor I nor anyone can know if it would continue to work, as it clearly did, or not.

1. You'd better check the history books again Mr. Wishful thinking. The likes of halifax collapsed in SL, Workington spiralled downwards as did Oldham etc etc. They never returned because trying to be professional clubs destroyed them.

I know Halifax won the 2010 grand final, I also know they had no money for SL as the license commitee had found out. but in the world of wishful thinking maybe they'd have squeezed in at 13th. place on promotion?

"You and I will never know"

2. Which is a truly daft argument because you can see how P & R with minimum standards worked in the years after 1996. Hunslet won promotion and were denied. This killed off the club.

For goodness sake.....

Edited by The Parksider, 21 April 2013 - 08:37 AM.


#48 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,052 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 12:34 PM

So if we are to exempt sides in SL and reject sides in CC on standards then how will P & R "work".

If your skint club finds half a million to build a winning team, when they lift the grand final trophy they had better enjoy it because they'll be rejected on the finances standard won't they.

Then whoever's had an awful season in SL will get a reprieve.

You know why Barrow would not have been promoted - remember Mr. Johnston.

What crowd does sheffield have? What money?

It's just a load of rubbish.

P & R with minimum standards is just licensing.

 

P and r with minimum standards is very definetly NOT just licencing.

 

Under licencing you could have met minimum standards and still not be given a licence.

 

Under p and r with minimum standards, if you meet them, AND win the league, then promotion will be guaranteed.

 

Under licencing you could meet minimum standards, NOT win the league, and still get a licence. Widnes for example



#49 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 12:43 PM

P and r with minimum standards is very definetly NOT just licencing.
 
Under licencing you could have met minimum standards and still not be given a licence.
 
Under p and r with minimum standards, if you meet them, AND win the league, then promotion will be guaranteed.
 
Under licencing you could meet minimum standards, NOT win the league, and still get a licence. Widnes for example

Nobody met mimimum standards and failed to get a license get real, P & R with min standards gives clubs TWO hurdles to jump to get promoted and as far as 3. is concerned a club could be all geared up to do OK in SL as Widnes were and be denied a place because someone like Sheffield may have snatched the grand final away.

I'm astounded that people want P & R then proceed to put barriers in the way of clubs getting Peed and barriers in the way of them getting arred.

It's a pigs ear it will be as silly as it was when we had the system. Short memories......

#50 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,052 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 12:43 PM

1. You'd better check the history books again Mr. Wishful thinking. The likes of halifax collapsed in SL, Workington spiralled downwards as did Oldham etc etc. They never returned because trying to be professional clubs destroyed them.

I know Halifax won the 2010 grand final, I also know they had no money for SL as the license commitee had found out. but in the world of wishful thinking maybe they'd have squeezed in at 13th. place on promotion?

"You and I will never know"

2. Which is a truly daft argument because you can see how P & R with minimum standards worked in the years after 1996. Hunslet won promotion and were denied. This killed off the club.

For goodness sake.....

 

No, wrong again. They never returned for two reasons. The first is because p and r was abolished and so they could not return. The second is that they never won the league to be in a position to be promoted even if p and r was in place. If  p and r was in place and any of those clubs won their league, then they would have returned to SL ( subject probably to minimum standards criteria)

 

Halifax were not promoted because there was no p and r and even if there was, as you intimate, they may well have failed the minimum standards test which is proposed for both the p and r and the licencing methods of accessing SL.



#51 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,052 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 12:50 PM

Nobody met mimimum standards and failed to get a license get real, P & R with min standards gives clubs TWO hurdles to jump to get promoted and as far as 3. is concerned a club could be all geared up to do OK in SL as Widnes were and be denied a place because someone like Sheffield may have snatched the grand final away.

I'm astounded that people want P & R then proceed to put barriers in the way of clubs getting Peed and barriers in the way of them getting arred.

It's a pigs ear it will be as silly as it was when we had the system. Short memories......

 

But if you tick all boxes, i.e. win the league AND meet minimum standards you will be promoted. Under licencing you may well meet minimum standards but the SL Gods decide that the bottom SL club has a better application for a licence, then that club will get the licence, not the club who qualified for it from the championships.

 

It is indeed a more difficult hoop to jump through than the unqualified guaranteed promotion of yesteryear but is it guaranteed. Licencing a still a ###### shoot.



#52 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 04:10 PM

Is ther a sport in the country, be it franchised,licensed or with P&R that doesn't have some form of minimum standards?

#53 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 05:20 AM

But if you tick all boxes, i.e. win the league AND meet minimum standards you will be promoted. Under licencing you may well meet minimum standards but the SL Gods decide that the bottom SL club has a better application for a licence, then that club will get the licence, not the club who qualified for it from the championships.

Nobody ticks the boxes.

Sheffield don't on 1,000 crowds, Leigh don't because they are skint, Halifax definately did not tick the boxes last time as the licensing committee said, Batley and Dewsbury don't want superleague and below that you have the DR clubs fighting to survive on crowds in the hundreds.

Featherstone may tick the boxes dependent on a rich man guaranteeing cap spend.

Go back to 2010 and Featherstone had won the division by six points clear. They deserved to go up but they had the grand final to come. They lost it by a point.

Had we had your suggested system then Halifax would have got the promotion but had it denied as they were skint, and in addition to that Les Catalans who came bottom would have been "protected" anyway.

The fans would have been going mad because...

1. Featherstone won the league and did not get promoted
2. Halifax won the grand final and did not get promoted
3. Les Catalans deserved to go down but were protected

What if Batley had a great season but refused to go up, and Cas had as awful a season as Halifax had 2003 when they had no money? Do we condemn Cas to be slaughtered for another season in SL. What does the sporting world make of the club who refused promotion?

There's no sense at all to P & R with minimum standards.

In the first 10 years Workington, Oldham, Halifax and leigh collapsed financially out of SL, Huddersfield came bottom four times but stayed up three, London would not have been allowed to go down as weren't catalans, and Hunslet and dewsbury were refused promotion - an absolute pigs ear it was.

I'm not against P & R but either do it or don't do it because the evidence is all there to show it was a mess 1996-2006 when standards were applied to it, and would have been an equal mess in recent years under "standards".

Edited by The Parksider, 22 April 2013 - 05:26 AM.


#54 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,052 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 03:02 PM

Quite. Do it right. get the rules sorted and do it. If those teams you mentioned didn't meet the standards then so be it.

There is precedent for teams to request re assigment to another division. Gateshead did just that. They requested demotion. The same think would happen if a team refused promotion. There would be a reprieve for a team set to be relegated.

The point is that, more difficult with standards than heretofore or not, if all the boxes are ticked then, under p and r, promotion would be guaranteed.

That's all I want. No random elevation depending on licencinf committees whereby even if a team meets the necessary criteria for promotion they can be passwed over by some commitee in favour of a losing bottom placed team from SL.

#55 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 09:08 PM

Nobody ticks the boxes.

Sheffield don't on 1,000 crowds, Leigh don't because they are skint, Halifax definately did not tick the boxes last time as the licensing committee said, Batley and Dewsbury don't want superleague and below that you have the DR clubs fighting to survive on crowds in the hundreds.

Featherstone may tick the boxes dependent on a rich man guaranteeing cap spend.

Go back to 2010 and Featherstone had won the division by six points clear. They deserved to go up but they had the grand final to come. They lost it by a point.

Had we had your suggested system then Halifax would have got the promotion but had it denied as they were skint, and in addition to that Les Catalans who came bottom would have been "protected" anyway.

The fans would have been going mad because...

1. Featherstone won the league and did not get promoted
2. Halifax won the grand final and did not get promoted
3. Les Catalans deserved to go down but were protected

What if Batley had a great season but refused to go up, and Cas had as awful a season as Halifax had 2003 when they had no money? Do we condemn Cas to be slaughtered for another season in SL. What does the sporting world make of the club who refused promotion?

There's no sense at all to P & R with minimum standards.

In the first 10 years Workington, Oldham, Halifax and leigh collapsed financially out of SL, Huddersfield came bottom four times but stayed up three, London would not have been allowed to go down as weren't catalans, and Hunslet and dewsbury were refused promotion - an absolute pigs ear it was.

I'm not against P & R but either do it or don't do it because the evidence is all there to show it was a mess 1996-2006 when standards were applied to it, and would have been an equal mess in recent years under "standards".

Im not sure leigh did collapse financially out of sl

Edited by jpmc, 22 April 2013 - 09:10 PM.


#56 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 09:34 PM

Im not sure leigh did collapse financially out of sl

crowds were poor right from the start, affecting the budget badly, they lost £30,000 on an imported player who had a hernia, two directors resigned mid season, and another director had to deny rumours liquidation would follow relegation.......

Edited by The Parksider, 22 April 2013 - 09:34 PM.


#57 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 22 April 2013 - 09:39 PM

crowds were poor right from the start, affecting the budget badly, they lost £30,000 on an imported player who had a hernia, two directors resigned mid season, and another director had to deny rumours liquidation would follow relegation.......

I'm told they made a profit.

#58 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 05:38 AM

I'm told they made a profit.

So given they could not hack SL, were short of money to make it in SL and are skint today what do you want me to say to that??

#59 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 06:12 AM

The point is that, if all the boxes are ticked then, under p and r, promotion would be guaranteed.

That's all I want. No random elevation depending on licencing committees whereby even if a team meets the necessary criteria for promotion they can be passwed over by some commitee in favour of a losing bottom placed team from SL.

The licensing committee judges on the standards now.

"All you want" is the club who qualifies for promotion being judged on standards.

Rather than on the field of play.

Lock the thread, Leigh were a profitable SL club and promotion should not be decided on standards, but on erm standards.

#60 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,052 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 02:08 PM

 

The licensing committee judges on the standards now.

"All you want" is the club who qualifies for promotion being judged on standards.

Rather than on the field of play.

Lock the thread, Leigh were a profitable SL club and promotion should not be decided on standards, but on erm standards.

 

What the heck are you talking about ? Winning the league, i.e. winning on the field and job one and then meeting the stadards is job two. Job two does not even cause a blip on the radar until job is achieved on the field.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users