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
- - - - -

Toulouse Olympique


  • Please log in to reply
212 replies to this topic

#61 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,718 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:51 PM

Should of put attracted really but it still makes the point the same, there is along way to go to be sustainable in SL.

Not if Mr. Nahaboo delivers the funding.

#62 Dennis Bloodnock

Dennis Bloodnock
  • Coach
  • 488 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 04:39 AM

I am just giving my opinion on the future of the game. I'm not attacking anyone personally, and I don't have any club biases, as I don't support anyone. I just want the game to prosper over here. I can't see it happening with P&R back or Fev in SL. Just my opinion.

So why not let them have their day in the sun?After all how many chances have your Gold Coast had?Well they've had the Giants,Seagulls,Chargers and now the Titans.

They have a new ground with no parking,no leagues club,nowhere outside the ground to get a drink or a bite to eat.Inside the ground there is a total lack of atmosphere,the crowd at a game I saw at Rochdale v Blackpool made more noise.

Shouldn't you be more worried by the Titans,or because you live in the UK for a little while you are now an expert.Just my opinion.


I can speak Esperanto like a native.

#63 Forever Trinity

Forever Trinity
  • Coach
  • 635 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 06:37 AM

Lets put in some controversy then

Why not pack the catalanss off and develop the French league seperately then? If there is such a market devlop it and also the International game would proper. We could look after our own clubs then

I cant be bothered to go to France for the yearly pilgrimage I personaly feel its a waste of money and does nothing for our RL in this country.

Thanks but I am happy watching local teams ansd would be in favour of P&R good governance would control this area of the game, do we have robust goverance now of the salary cap and how clubs are run?

#64 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 10,080 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 07:24 AM

Lets put in some controversy then

Why not pack the catalanss off and develop the French league seperately then? If there is such a market devlop it and also the International game would proper. We could look after our own clubs then

I cant be bothered to go to France for the yearly pilgrimage I personaly feel its a waste of money and does nothing for our RL in this country.

Thanks but I am happy watching local teams ansd would be in favour of P&R good governance would control this area of the game, do we have robust goverance now of the salary cap and how clubs are run?

Hardly controversy. It's just ill-informed illogical nonsense really.

Unless you can tell us where the French Federation will suddenly get tens millions if Euros from to fund a professional French Elite, how will packing the Catalans off improve the French game?

If you want to watch local teams, go watch amateur rugby.
Posted Image

#65 Steve Slater

Steve Slater
  • Coach
  • 1,942 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 09:09 AM

Yet your post shows that you have absolutely no idea what the definition of "sport" is and you have the audacity to call others "idiots"...

By the sport of Rugby League I mean the whole structure from grass roots level to the top of the tree, while the game is what's being played on the field. The game is brilliant while the sport is self-deluded by thinking it's bigger than it is.

Example: Before Super League, Rugby league was the biggest sport in Hull and Wigan!



#66 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,273 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:55 AM

Not if Mr. Nahaboo delivers the funding.


What like Hughes and Hudgell have? Have they both delivered funding? Yes. Are London and KR sustainable SL clubs? No.

Funding doesn't guarantee sustainability although used rightly it can help.

#67 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,991 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 11:25 AM


No they are not.It's one crowd of over 3KLast year they averaged 2,060.......


And so far this year Rovers are averaging well in excess of the required 2500 which is anothe substantial increse on top of a 38% rise last year. You're right Parky, they do deserve their chance. Once the ground is completed the club will tick every box... A fantastic achievement considering it will all have been done through their own resources.

Edited by Terry Mullaney, 04 May 2013 - 11:26 AM.

Wedding Films For The Discerning by Picture House
Free Showreel DVD On Request

http://www.pictureho...ingfilms.co.uk/

#68 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,718 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 11:32 AM

What like Hughes and Hudgell have? Have they both delivered funding? Yes. Are London and KR sustainable SL clubs? No.

Funding doesn't guarantee sustainability although used rightly it can help.

Well exactly BRK.

If second tier sized clubs like London, Salford, Fartown, Widnes, Castleford and HKR can all be allowed to play with the big boys because Hughes, Wilkinson, Davey, O'Connor, Fulton and Hudgell can pay for the empty seats and fill the massive gap in the salary budget.....

Why can't Featherstone Rovers and Mr. Nahaboo?

It's unfair to suggest Featherstone are not sustainable without directors loans/gifts (Griff is very good on pointing how how important the distinction could be in the long run) and therefore should not be allowed in Superleague when half a dozen other clubs are allowed in SL under those exact conditions.

If we want sustainable clubs in SL then we need to invite applications where the realistic forecasted level of income for each club will meet the necessary budget to be a Superleague club.

I think that was met by about four clubs at the last round of licensing and they are marked out by their "A" ratings.

The laugh was Bradford were only allocated a "B" rating but critics somehow contrived to say how could Bradford go under when they had scored a "B". The fact was only the "A"s were trading at a level to guarantee sustainability over the three years.

Featherstone won't get an "A" but nor will most applicants.

This leaves choosing the clubs on self sustainability only possible if you drop the cap down heavily. So what the licensing people do is take into account directors intentions on loaning clubs money.

Featherstone have stated that Chapman, Nahaboo and various other sources will guarantee full cap spend. At this point in time if those guarantees are made to the licensing commitee and they accept them it will put Featherstone in about 10th place.

If such guarantees turn out to not be the case Featherstone would drop to about 14th, place.

All in my humble opinion based on facts, figures and events as best as I can obtain...

#69 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,718 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 11:41 AM

And so far this year Rovers are averaging well in excess of the required 2500 which is anothe substantial increse on top of a 38% rise last year. You're right Parky, they do deserve their chance. Once the ground is completed the club will tick every box... A fantastic achievement considering it will all have been done through their own resources.

Very fair comment as always Terry and IIRC you were pragmatic about the likely crowds Fev would get and you agreed that you'd need Mr. Nahaboo and others investment to keep the momentum growing.

Back on topic, The Toulouse bid was supposedly dependant on a TV deal and so Toulouse and Rovers are to be judged on totally separate criteria for separate reasons. I do not see it's Featherstone.v.Toulouse and if the latter was to be judged by the licensing criteria as it stands then they too would have to guarantee the forecasted investments from the local Maire, and aerospace industries. Do that and they may be way above most SL clubs anyway.

If there is a decision between clubs along the likes of which one out of the last three do we let in, then at this point in time Rovers would be judged moreagainst Cas and HKR.

Finally your comment on Rovers pending solid SL application "A fantastic achievement considering it will all have been done through their own resources", recognises just how few resources championship clubs have and how hard they would have to work and how "fantastic" a result they would have to achieve to meet what are only "minimum standards" after all.

The continuing myth that P & R "with minimum standards" can work is to me IMHO absolutely absurd, because who else in the future can get there?

#70 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,718 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:15 PM

What we need is a balance which DOES NOT stop ambition and denying clubs like Featherstone Rovers a SL place if they can obtain one through winning the championship is wrong,also though SL needs to expand Toulouse is a must as is retaining a franchise in London.

INHO we have at the moment the following scenario for SL

Grade A Clubs (In no particular oder with comments)
BRADFORD BULLS (Early days but need to get the revenue streams back up)
LEEDS RHINOS (Lucky old GH keep the local players coming they will never be able to spend all the income:)
HULL FC (Certain that AP would love to have a merger)
WARRINGTON WOLVES (Doing OK but still the crowds although much improved could be better)
WIGAN WARRIORS (Best run club in the SL along with Leeds Rhinos)
ST HELENS (Watch the gates plummet this season and the finances)
SALFORD CITY REDS ( I include them now due to the recent takeover lets hope the Dr sticks with it one thing i bet NW will regret the day he met him on the plane:))) fun and games to come for sure)
HUDDERSFIELD GIANTS (100% TO C if Ken Davy pulls the plug)

Grade B Clubs
CATALAN DRAGONS (Lets hope France doesnt end up like Greece and Spain)
WAKEFIELD TRINTY WILDCATS (Coming along really well)
HULL KINGSTON ROVERS (No new investment and its merger as the best way forward)
LONDON BRONCOS (If DH pulls the plug it has to be centrally funded or else its goodbye to that massive potential London talent pool)
WIDNES VIKINGS (O Connor obviously has taken a back seat the club badly needs bigger gates and new revenue streams)
FEATHERSTONE ROVERS (Nothing wrong with new money so lets give them a go)

GRADE C CLUBS
CASTLEFORLD TIGERS (Just papering over the cracks they badly need a new stadium investment and revenue streams)

The weakest of all is without doubt sadly the Tigers however if TOULOUSE come in that means two more clubs will have to go to make the magic 12 figure.

My thoughts on who it might be well pick anyone from the following.

HULL KR (Badly need a new investment to take over from NH)
WIDNES VIKINGS (O,Conner has had enough and would prefer to watch football but will retain his shares)
LONDON BRONCOS (if DH pulls the plug can only continue in SL with central funding)

CM

I think that's a tremendous well thought out analysis.

A question...

WIDNES - The press statement said O'Connor would take a back seat. He can sit on the moon as long as he continues to fund the club. It wouldn't matter if he sat in the dug outs as long as he continues to support the club financially.Nothing at all was said about his financial commitment and that;s the point. How do you view the situation there????

I don't think the club chairmen are as in the dark as we are as to the likely make up of SL 2015 despite all the press release guff i think they know what is likely to happen. Are club chairmen bailing out, and inviting others to replace them now, in anticipation they won't be in 2015? Is that the best signal to predict the likely make up of SL 2015?

Also how does the game centrally fund London?

#71 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,238 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:24 PM

featherstone will not get a grade b license they have no super league history of development and playing strength, they will get a grade c.....
"Why is Napoleon crying ?" said one sailor to the other, "poor ###### thinks he's being exiled to st helens" came the reply.



https://scontent-a-l...276002364_n.jpg

#72 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,053 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:40 PM

Hardly controversy. It's just ill-informed illogical nonsense really.

Unless you can tell us where the French Federation will suddenly get tens millions if Euros from to fund a professional French Elite, how will packing the Catalans off improve the French game?

If you want to watch local teams, go watch amateur rugby.

 

Ultimately, if Toulouse become a SL club and maybe one other and if French TV become players to assist with the funding, then three French teams, London, and maybe a new Welsh club or Sheffield could become a southern division conference of a conferenced SL.

 

As always though, money is the key, hence the French TV aspect.



#73 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,053 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:43 PM

What like Hughes and Hudgell have? Have they both delivered funding? Yes. Are London and KR sustainable SL clubs? No.

Funding doesn't guarantee sustainability although used rightly it can help.

 

Don't forget Koukash, Davy, Glover, Lenigan, Caddick , Pearson and the Widnes guy.  Rich investors, ideal or not, seem to be the way for RL clubs in this era so why not Nahaboo at Featherstone.



#74 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,053 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 01:58 PM

Very fair comment as always Terry and IIRC you were pragmatic about the likely crowds Fev would get and you agreed that you'd need Mr. Nahaboo and others investment to keep the momentum growing.

Back on topic, The Toulouse bid was supposedly dependant on a TV deal and so Toulouse and Rovers are to be judged on totally separate criteria for separate reasons. I do not see it's Featherstone.v.Toulouse and if the latter was to be judged by the licensing criteria as it stands then they too would have to guarantee the forecasted investments from the local Maire, and aerospace industries. Do that and they may be way above most SL clubs anyway.

If there is a decision between clubs along the likes of which one out of the last three do we let in, then at this point in time Rovers would be judged moreagainst Cas and HKR.

Finally your comment on Rovers pending solid SL application "A fantastic achievement considering it will all have been done through their own resources", recognises just how few resources championship clubs have and how hard they would have to work and how "fantastic" a result they would have to achieve to meet what are only "minimum standards" after all.

The continuing myth that P & R "with minimum standards" can work is to me IMHO absolutely absurd, because who else in the future can get there?

 

Let Toulouse in SL dependent on them securing the said TV contract. Then the Sky money does not need to be split up more ways to accommodate them. There are precedents in Gateshead and Wakefield on their promotion to SL not being given Sky money. These examples did not work out well but there was no separate TV deal to prop them up as there could be for Toulouse. Also, if a French TV deal was big enough the Catalans could also be included freeing up even more Sky money for British teams.



#75 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,718 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:56 PM

As regards to Widnes i am only taking a punt on my thinking from what i am told by those that know O,Connor pretty well he may throw a few bob in however i would guess that like anyone he is looking for the club to generate more income streams.

He's always talked about doing this and not sugar daddying the club.

So in the absence of any up front honesty on the subject it may be safe to assume he isn't going to guaranteed full cap spend?

#76 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,651 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 03:20 PM

So if toulouse aren't bringing money, what are they bringing? And I love this authoritative comments followed by 'don't ask me who said it' stuff. I heard from an ex-president of the USA who I know that the States wants a SL franchise, and That they'll bring big Bucks in sponsorship and tv deals. Just don't ask me who...

#77 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,651 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 03:33 PM

So how much will they definitely get from City Hall, and how does that benefit any one else in SL? And is all this 'hopefully' stuff really a worthwhile reason to bring them in? Why would another French team bring these sponsors any more than the cats?

#78 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,651 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 04:11 PM

I still don't know why toulouse would bring these big sponsors of cats haven't. Why would that be?

#79 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 10,080 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 04:23 PM


I still don't know why toulouse would bring these big sponsors of cats haven't. Why would that be?


Didn't he just tell you? Perpignan to Toulouse is probably like comparing Widnes to Leeds.
Posted Image

#80 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,651 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 04:32 PM

I thought that the sponsorship thing was based on being a pan-european sport, not being in the nicest towns... in any case, London hasn't brought the big sponsors in, has it? Did paris? But toulouse will because it's nicer than perpignan? Why didn't we go to toulouse in the first place?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users