Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

RL Structure


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#21 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,870 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:02 PM

If there's a possibility that the best run club runs the risk of being kicked out of the SL because they have a horror run with injuries then the system is broken.

No if's or but's. P&R or yearly franchising will not strengthen the game in the UK.

They will be in SL 1 at the start of the year. If they are good enough they will be in SL1 at the start of the next year.

 

It's just a bit like saying if a top club has a run of injuries at the moment and doesn't make the playoffs then the system is broken.



#22 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,226 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:07 PM

Let's just keep the licensing system, but make it annual, and make it optional. If teams can afford to come in, then fine, and if teams want to drop out then fine, but don't just chuck out the bottom team automatically. If Salford came bottom this year, it would be idiotic to lose them, and the same should apply to every club.

I know what you are getting at but what it would end up with is "useless salford favoured by RFL and bent system blocks progressive featherstone Rovers" the kid of thing we want to get away from?

#23 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,162 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:22 PM

The system we have isn't perfect but it IS improving both the quality of players coming into the game AND crowd numbers

Investors want stability and predictability - this is what the current system provides

We don't have enough players, clubs, fans or investors for the meat grinder that is P&R

#24 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,858 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:24 PM

They will be in SL 1 at the start of the year. If they are good enough they will be in SL1 at the start of the next year.

It's just a bit like saying if a top club has a run of injuries at the moment and doesn't make the playoffs then the system is broken.

Exactly.
Injuries are a part of sport. If they aren't covered, then that's not exactly a very well run club.

How is any other club meant to become "well run" if they never get the chance? I don't like this monopoly that some people insist should be at the top table because they got in there at the right time to be honest. Licensing has forced standards up, but I think that's more of a catalyst rather than a perfect system as it had also weeded out the poorly run administrators (not poorly run clubs as they've just stayed in there) and not given clubs that are well run in the lower leagues a chance to replace them like I think it should.

I find it boring that it's the same teams over and over again to be honest.
Posted Image

#25 RoytonRoughyed

RoytonRoughyed
  • Players
  • 91 posts

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:27 PM

Have you seen some of the attendances? The licensing has its pros and cons, but I can't think of one reason why Cas deserve a place in the league based on the licensing Criteria

#26 kioli

kioli
  • Coach
  • 336 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 11:04 AM

They will be in SL 1 at the start of the year. If they are good enough they will be in SL1 at the start of the next year.

 

It's just a bit like saying if a top club has a run of injuries at the moment and doesn't make the playoffs then the system is broken.

 

Exactly.
Injuries are a part of sport. If they aren't covered, then that's not exactly a very well run club.

How is any other club meant to become "well run" if they never get the chance? I don't like this monopoly that some people insist should be at the top table because they got in there at the right time to be honest. Licensing has forced standards up, but I think that's more of a catalyst rather than a perfect system as it had also weeded out the poorly run administrators (not poorly run clubs as they've just stayed in there) and not given clubs that are well run in the lower leagues a chance to replace them like I think it should.

I find it boring that it's the same teams over and over again to be honest.

 

The SL is not a closed shop, the 3 year licensing enables clubs like Widnes to join if they deserve it. It's the best way forward for the UK game.

 

The only argument people seem to have for P+R are personal reasons.

 

P+R had decades to grow the game but it didn't and yet people expect things to change if it's brought back...



#27 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 11:18 AM

The SL is not a closed shop, the 3 year licensing enables clubs like Widnes to join if they deserve it. It's the best way forward for the UK game.

The only argument people seem to have for P+R are personal reasons.

P+R had decades to grow the game but it didn't and yet people expect things to change if it's brought back...


Which team do you support?

#28 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,097 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 11:22 AM

Which team do you support?

Unless you had a very narrow self serving view of the sport


Why would that matter?

Edited by l'angelo mysterioso, 15 May 2013 - 11:23 AM.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#29 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 11:26 AM

Unless you had a very narrow self serving view if the sport


Why would that matter?

He is accusing that people who back the proposals as having a personal interest. Which I assume he means it suites their club. I want to know which club he supports as this may not suite his club. And I do have a very self serving view of sport. I want the club I support to be playing and winning any game the play in and win at the highest level they can. I am a supporter of my club first and the game 2nd.

#30 Robin Evans

Robin Evans

    Robin Evans

  • Coach
  • 9,974 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 11:42 AM

He is accusing that people who back the proposals as having a personal interest. Which I assume he means it suites their club. I want to know which club he supports as this may not suite his club. And I do have a very self serving view of sport. I want the club I support to be playing and winning any game the play in and win at the highest level they can. I am a supporter of my club first and the game 2nd.

did your dad have a bike??
Cos we hold some very similar views...
"I love our club, absolutely love it". (Overton, M 2007)

#31 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,786 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 11:46 AM

I am a supporter of my club first and the game 2nd.

Trouble is - if there's no game, there's no-one for your club to play.

So you wouldn't have a club.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#32 Baaarrow

Baaarrow
  • Coach
  • 1,075 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 11:47 AM

im pretty sure it was mentioned that staying as is is an option. I think people are naturally focusing on the one radical option.

The option to stay with the current structure has already been rejected (thank god).


Posted Image


#33 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 11:58 AM

Trouble is - if there's no game, there's no-one for your club to play.

So you wouldn't have a club.


Oh i agree. But I want what is best for my club first, and proposed plans imo will give my club a better chance of playing in the SL. Obviously I may change my views after my club had won the SL grabs final 10 years in a row. But until then, that's how I see things. I can quite understand why fans of Widnes, Wakefield, London and Salford to name but a few are against it. But to say that they are against it for the good of the game doesn't wash with me. The majority want what is best for their club.

#34 Robin Evans

Robin Evans

    Robin Evans

  • Coach
  • 9,974 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:01 PM

Oh i agree. But I want what is best for my club first, and proposed plans imo will give my club a better chance of playing in the SL. Obviously I may change my views after my club had won the SL grabs final 10 years in a row. But until then, that's how I see things. I can quite understand why fans of Widnes, Wakefield, London and Salford to name but a few are against it. But to say that they are against it for the good of the game doesn't wash with me. The majority want what is best for their club.

Again +1.
I think I'll butt out of this now. You appear to be beating me to the post..... almost verbatim!
"I love our club, absolutely love it". (Overton, M 2007)

#35 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,786 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:02 PM

Oh i agree. But I want what is best for my club first, and proposed plans imo will give my club a better chance of playing in the SL. Obviously I may change my views after my club had won the SL grabs final 10 years in a row. But until then, that's how I see things. I can quite understand why fans of Widnes, Wakefield, London and Salford to name but a few are against it. But to say that they are against it for the good of the game doesn't wash with me. The majority want what is best for their club.

Including the folk making the decisions at Red Hall.

That's what's wrong with the game.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#36 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,097 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:08 PM

He is accusing that people who back the proposals as having a personal interest. Which I assume he means it suites their club. I want to know which club he supports as this may not suite his club. And I do have a very self serving view of sport. I want the club I support to be playing and winning any game the play in and win at the highest level they can. I am a supporter of my club first and the game 2nd.

That's exactly what I'm getting at sod the game as long as things suit your own narrow demands. Sadly you aren't alone

Still I can respect the fact that you aren't hypocritical enough to invoke some disingenuous and selective construct of fairness and justice.

Edited by l'angelo mysterioso, 15 May 2013 - 12:13 PM.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#37 RLRatings

RLRatings
  • Players
  • 74 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 12:26 PM

I know what you are getting at but what it would end up with is "useless salford favoured by RFL and bent system blocks progressive featherstone Rovers" the kid of thing we want to get away from?

I never said don't have promotion, I'm all for more teams to come in, especially if they're cashed up!
www.rugbyleagueratings.com - proving that Featherstone were bound to beat Cas, since 2011.

#38 RoytonRoughyed

RoytonRoughyed
  • Players
  • 91 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 03:47 PM

I want P&R but the only way it will do is if the 2nd tier is Full. Like I said in the origional post. There are pros and cons to both. Even the option 3 the RFL have mentioned has its plus points. Whatever the outcome its time fans stopped moaning and got on with watching this great game

#39 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,097 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 04:18 PM

I want P&R but the only way it will do is if the 2nd tier is Full. Like I said in the origional post. There are pros and cons to both. Even the option 3 the RFL have mentioned has its plus points. Whatever the outcome its time fans stopped moaning and got on with watching this great game


I want I want I want

I want a 1957 stratocaster but it would bankrupt me and be the end of my marriage if I went out and bought one: well maybe not that, but it would cause a serious rift in our otherwise blissful relationship

Mate you can always have what you want
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#40 RoytonRoughyed

RoytonRoughyed
  • Players
  • 91 posts

Posted 15 May 2013 - 05:02 PM

I want I want I want

I want a 1957 stratocaster but it would bankrupt me and be the end of my marriage if I went out and bought one: well maybe not that, but it would cause a serious rift in our otherwise blissful relationship

Mate you can always have what you want

. Think you totally mis read my post. By i want i meant id prefer, if you read the rest of it youll see whatever they choose ill get on with supporting Rugby League




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users