Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres 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
- - - - -

Bringing back promotion and relegation will set the sport back in this country several years

The return of boom and bust

  • Please log in to reply
143 replies to this topic

#1 The Daddy_merged

The Daddy_merged
  • Coach
  • 1,023 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:10 PM

I've been watching, listening and reading with both interest and shock at proposals and calls for the return of promotion/relegation. 

 

Bringing back p&r would be totally the wrong decision for Super League and a return to boom and bust where clubs move between the championship and SL without stability, at the time licensing was introduced there were tangible reasons why it was felt it had to be implemented, those being allowing clubs to develop and put the right structures in place without fear of relegation as time in the top flight would bring about a continued development of professionalism both on and off the field strengthening the competitiveness of the sport. 

Also we wanted clubs to have the time to develop young players without looking at the quick fixes of importing aussies and kiwis and the threat of relegation hanging over everyone's heads. 

 

In short I actually think the suggested proposals are a cop out and don't challenge head on the underlying and real issues of the sport, which is lack of sponsorship, adding value to the SL product, players moving to NRL/Union, media presence and the geographical spread of the sport at the top level so in my books the sport will continue to be underlings to the NRL and Union. 

 

We are pandering to the lowest common denominator and trying to cut a slice of the SL TV money pie to everyone who wants a piece of the action when the initial purpose of SL was elite competition with elite players and clubs.....this will not address the problems and predict that should these proposals go through we will be back discussing the same problems within the game in a few years time.



#2 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,184 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:11 PM

bloody hell i agree with him................
"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

#3 The Daddy_merged

The Daddy_merged
  • Coach
  • 1,023 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:14 PM

We should still allow clubs from the Championship through and there should always be an opportunity for such clubs to better themselves, but not through boom and bust.



#4 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:17 PM


We should still allow clubs from the Championship through and there should always be an opportunity for such clubs to better themselves, but not through boom and bust.


There has be clubs in SL going bust with no threat of relegation. Regardless of P & R clubs will spend to try and compete. Removing P & R won't change that.

#5 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,175 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:26 PM

But it has been doing - the clubs going bust are ones that have been poorly run, not just the ones chasing promotion

Bit like Cas and Widnes when they both chased promotion, one club came up, one club went bust - they were interchangeable depending on the result of one promotion match

Moreover there IS a route into super league, and one that is sustainable - again as Widnes have admirably proved. They earned their elevation and then could take a longer term, stable plan to secure their presence in SL

IF they had been in peril of relegation they would have spent a packet to fight it off, and may not have succeeded

Why am I saying this? It's been said a million times and borne out in history.

This game is determined to destroy itself on the altar of P&R that has never worked

#6 Cumbrian Fanatic

Cumbrian Fanatic
  • Coach
  • 608 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:27 PM

 

bloody hell i agree with him................

 So do I...Except the bit about it taking a few years, think it will be a lot quicker.

I think in an ideal world everyone would like P & R, unfortunately in RL world this means a huge leap from semi pro to a full time operation in just a few weeks when pre-season is taken into account.
100% League 0% Union

Just because I don't know doesn't mean I don't understand

#7 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:27 PM

I've been watching, listening and reading with both interest and shock at proposals and calls for the return of promotion/relegation. 
 
Bringing back p&r would be totally the wrong decision for Super League and a return to boom and bust where clubs move between the championship and SL without stability, at the time licensing was introduced there were tangible reasons why it was felt it had to be implemented, those being allowing clubs to develop and put the right structures in place without fear of relegation as time in the top flight would bring about a continued development of professionalism both on and off the field strengthening the competitiveness of the sport. 
Also we wanted clubs to have the time to develop young players without looking at the quick fixes of importing aussies and kiwis and the threat of relegation hanging over everyone's heads. 
 
In short I actually think the suggested proposals are a cop out and don't challenge head on the underlying and real issues of the sport, which is lack of sponsorship, adding value to the SL product, players moving to NRL/Union, media presence and the geographical spread of the sport at the top level so in my books the sport will continue to be underlings to the NRL and Union. 
 
We are pandering to the lowest common denominator and trying to cut a slice of the SL TV money pie to everyone who wants a piece of the action when the initial purpose of SL was elite competition with elite players and clubs.....this will not address the problems and predict that should these proposals go through we will be back discussing the same problems within the game in a few years time.

That just doesn't sit with reality though does it?

Licensing has not prevented Wakey, Bulls and Salford going belly up, nor has it saved Leigh and Barrow from themselves.

Licensing has made the sport a procession of stale friendlies.

Licensing does not generate column inches in the press, P&R does.

Nobody sponsors us, because we have a low profile, see above.

#8 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,089 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:30 PM

In short I actually think the suggested proposals are a cop out and don't challenge head on the underlying and real issues of the sport, which is lack of sponsorship, adding value to the SL product, players moving to NRL/Union, media presence and the geographical spread of the sport at the top level so in my books the sport will continue to be underlings to the NRL and Union. 

I'm not sure what you mean by the proposals being a cop out.

 

1 - Lack of sponsorship - this can be worked on irrespective of the structure. If there is genuine belief within the game that this is the best way to go, then this will surely naturally lead to an improvement in this situation.

 

2 - Players moving to NRL/Union - there is little that can be done here, we are trying to bring as much money as we can, and surely a 2nd SL with more investment and increased salary caps would mean more wages at the higher levels for players - again, I'd argue this is directly addressing the point. Also, there are apparently tweaks to the cap as mentioned on another thread, so this is being addressed where possible.

 

3 - Media Presence - we have IMHO improved a lot during the last 12 months, the World Cup stuff has been excellent, we are seeing more Tests on BBC and so on. There appears to be more marketing than ever from the central marketing team.

 

4 - Geographical spread at top level - what do you want here? Crusaders putting back in? Toulouse adding? Who knows which teams will be added?

We also shouldn;t ignore the geographical growth in the Championships and at amateur level.

 

TBH, it looks to me like the 'big issues' that you describe absolutely are being worked on.



#9 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,559 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:36 PM



Licensing has not prevented Wakey, Bulls and Salford going belly up, nor has it saved Leigh and Barrow from themselves.

.

No, but it has allowed Bulls, Wakey and Salford to find new owners, two of whom we know already are doing a much, much better job than their predecessors, and they have been allowed time to re-form and re-generate the club and game in their towns.  None of that would have been possible with P&R in place. 

 

As for Barrow and Leigh ... Barrow actually reported a profit but they are hampered by the debts left by their previous owner, yet another bad example (and in fact now banned from owning a rugby league club).  Leigh have experienced an unfortunate set of circumstances but they have been going bust for years now.  Maybe Leigh is just not a big enough town to sustain a rugby league team in the present day?  That their reason(s) for being in trouble having nothing to do with licensing but other factors instead is a real possibility; more like a probability.



#10 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,184 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:47 PM

That just doesn't sit with reality though does it?

Licensing has not prevented Wakey, Bulls and Salford going belly up, nor has it saved Leigh and Barrow from themselves.

Licensing has made the sport a procession of stale friendlies.

Licensing does not generate column inches in the press, P&R does.

Nobody sponsors us, because we have a low profile, see above.

licensing has allowed teams like widnes to be promoted and develop whilst in super league, we are gradually building a squad that will be competetive in super league as opposed to ###### or bust. can you imagine last seasons championship grand final winners (4th place sheffield) in super league this season regularly getting 50 or 60 points put past them every week with perhaps 800 home fans, what good would that be to the development of the game?
"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

#11 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:47 PM

No, but it has allowed Bulls, Wakey and Salford to find new owners, two of whom we know already are doing a much, much better job than their predecessors, and they have been allowed time to re-form and re-generate the club and game in their towns.  None of that would have been possible with P&R in place. 
 
As for Barrow and Leigh ... Barrow actually reported a profit but they are hampered by the debts left by their previous owner, yet another bad example (and in fact now banned from owning a rugby league club).  Leigh have experienced an unfortunate set of circumstances but they have been going bust for years now.  Maybe Leigh is just not a big enough town to sustain a rugby league team in the present day?  That their reason(s) for being in trouble having nothing to do with licensing but other factors instead is a real possibility; more like a probability.

I agree that they've been able to reform in Super League as a result of licensing, but I can't agree that they wouldn't have been able to do it from the proposed new second tier (assuming that full time or near full time is allowed).

The point with Barrow and Leigh is that they got into bother and weren't even chasing a dream.

Badly run clubs will go bust regardless of the on field structure, I don't accept and the evidence doesn't support the notion that licensing prevents it, nor that P&R will result in more failures.

I also believe that licensing is anti expansion, every club that has tried has failed (or in the case of London, is on life support). These clubs need a place to build towards the top tier, history shows us that you cannot parachute a team in and expect it to survive.

The licensing brigade will no doubt cite Catalan as an example of successful expansion as a result of licensing. Even someone with only a basic grasp of the geography and demographics of our game knows that Catalan are very much a heartland team.

#12 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:49 PM

licensing has allowed teams like widnes to be promoted and develop whilst in super league, we are gradually building a squad that will be competetive in super league as opposed to ###### or bust. can you imagine last seasons championship grand final winners (4th place sheffield) in super league this season regularly getting 50 or 60 points put past them every week with perhaps 800 home fans, what good would that be to the development of the game?

You're not comparing like with like.

I agree that your scenario wouldn't work.

A team with the right investment can build in the proposed second tier, unless the RFL are determined that the middle eight will compete with different salary caps.

#13 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,103 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:53 PM

This, is typical of the problem with RL.

 

You cannot just have various situations; they are all either going to kill the game or make it bigger than gasoline.

 

Having licensing won't kill the game - if the attitude is right and the game is behind it.

Having P&R won't kill the game either.

 

All that will happen is the game will continue as it has done since 1895, ie stumbling along with a firefighting mentality.

 

Fact is, if it was so good under P&R, RL would have been much bigger before 1995 and wouldn't have needed a SL revolution. Licensing is contentious but some issues are not easy to resolve and will cause aggro however they are raised. 

 

IMO, most of this current malaise is self inflicted and brought on by endless doom mongering about how bad RL is at the moment -when that isn't actually the case at all. t's like some people have been repeating it long enough hoping everyone joins in -which it looks like they are doing. I can't be really bothered on here anymore as it is a case of having to argue just to justify the fact that you enjoy the sport, like you should feel down about the game all the bloody time and it is boring and wears you down.



#14 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:55 PM

Fact is, if it was so good under P&R, RL would have been much bigger before 1995 and wouldn't have needed a SL revolution. Licensing is contentious but some issues are not easy to resolve and will cause aggro however they are raised.

How many household names (nationwide) were there before 1995?

How many are there now?

#15 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,184 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:56 PM

a team with the right investment and criteria could also flourish in super league with a license. i am sure that featherstone will meet the set criteria for a license next time around but if they came up with p&r then they would find it a hard slog and probably finish bottom and go back down, but with a license they would be able to build a team whilst playing on the same playing field as the rest of super league instead of trying to build within 3 months.
"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

#16 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,184 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:57 PM

How many household names (nationwide) were there before 1995?

How many are there now?

wigan......................
"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

#17 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,607 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:57 PM

No, but it has allowed Bulls, Wakey and Salford to find new owners, two of whom we know already are doing a much, much better job than their predecessors, and they have been allowed time to re-form and re-generate the club and game in their towns.  None of that would have been possible with P&R in place. 

 

As for Barrow and Leigh ... Barrow actually reported a profit but they are hampered by the debts left by their previous owner, yet another bad example (and in fact now banned from owning a rugby league club).  Leigh have experienced an unfortunate set of circumstances but they have been going bust for years now.  Maybe Leigh is just not a big enough town to sustain a rugby league team in the present day?  That their reason(s) for being in trouble having nothing to do with licensing but other factors instead is a real possibility; more like a probability.

 

You can add Crusaders and Paris to the list of SL failures as well.

 

Since neither the Bulls, Salford or Wakefield have been in what would have been a relegation spot, I fail to see the relevance of their finding new owners to the problem of p and r.

 

Halifax and Featherstone have both found new investors whilst in the championship. If p and r was on offer they may have found even more suppprt as may have leigh, barrow and others.



#18 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:59 PM

a team with the right investment and criteria could also flourish in super league with a license. i am sure that featherstone will meet the set criteria for a license next time around but if they came up with p&r then they would find it a hard slog and probably finish bottom and go back down, but with a license they would be able to build a team whilst playing on the same playing field as the rest of super league instead of trying to build within 3 months.

The point is that with the proposed arrangements, the second tier will have a lot more than 3 months to build and there'll be an exciting on field fight to witness.

#19 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 12:59 PM

wigan......................

I mean players

#20 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,103 posts

Posted 08 May 2013 - 01:00 PM

How many household names (nationwide) were there before 1995?

How many are there now?

Only because they were on the BBC with a captive audience, not because of huge interest in RL. 

 

 

And that actually makes it worse. Not only was there P&R but famous players and lots of coverage (allegedly) So why weren't RL club crowds as big as they are now? (When RL is apparently at deaths door -again)


Edited by Johnoco, 08 May 2013 - 01:01 PM.