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
- - - - -

Should the plug be pulled on Salford?


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#1 Kenilworth Tiger

Kenilworth Tiger
  • Coach
  • 8,993 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:12 AM

Just to add some balance to the plug being pulled on London thread

DIscuss
Now then, it's a race between Sandie....and Fairburn....and the little man is in........yeees he's in.

I, just like those Castleford supporters felt that the ball should have gone to David Plange but he put the bit betwen his teeth...and it was a try

Kevin Ward - best player I have ever seen

Posted Image

The real Mick Gledhill is what you see on here, a Bradford fan ........, but deep down knows that Bradford are just not good enough to challenge the likes of Leeds & St Helens.


#2 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 517 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:19 AM

Salford are no different to London,if the rich man pulls out then they're finished as a superleague club

#3 Henson Park Old Firm

Henson Park Old Firm
  • Coach
  • 307 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:25 AM

I think its time to pull the plug on these forums. its becoming a joke with these stupid topics



#4 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,326 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:39 AM

I think its time to pull the plug on these forums. its becoming a joke with these stupid topics

I don't. I think it is an effective way to make the point that clubs outside the M62 are not the evil beings that the traditionalists want to make them out to be.

It's an effective way to make the point that when expansion clubs are in trouble M62 clubs have the same troubles but probably less excuse for them.

Besides whose an "expansion club" London formed in 1981? Toulouse formed in 1931?

Well I remember London being berated week on week for sub 3,000 crowds when Salford, Halifax and wakefield were returning the same sort of crowds. Crusaders were murdered on here with people cheering them out of the game, so fair topic and top answer from jpmc.

Edited by The Parksider, 11 June 2013 - 07:40 AM.


#5 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,271 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:58 AM

The usual stuff. Hey if Salford lose a match by 40 points then it's okay that Broncos lose games by 80 points because "it's the same".

 

Salford are in no way comparable to Broncos.

 

Salford have a major investor willing to inject funds, Broncos don't.

Salford have a fixed home. Broncos don't.

Salford's crowds are poor. Broncos are dreadful.

 

But yeah let's have another round of making out that a 3,000 crowd is equivalent to 1,800.



#6 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,462 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:00 AM

I think its time to pull the plug on these forums. its becoming a joke with these stupid topics

start a 'sensible' thread then mastermind


WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#7 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,271 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:01 AM


Well I remember London being berated week on week for sub 3,000 crowds when Salford, Halifax and wakefield were returning the same sort of crowds. Crusaders were murdered on here with people cheering them out of the game, so fair topic and top answer from jpmc.

The usual victimhood claimed.

 

Crusaders broke the salary cap, employed illegal players, didn't pay their players, didn't pay their other bills, moved three hours up the road and failed to bid for a franchise renewall.

 

But no doubt this the same as Salford who:-

didn't break the salary cap, had no trouble with UK border controls, paid their players, paid their bills (eventually), moved to a new stadium in Salford and continued to play in SL.


Edited by Northern Sol, 11 June 2013 - 08:09 AM.


#8 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,244 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:05 AM

Salford are in no way comparable to Broncos.

I agree.

They've been terrible on the field and poor off it for a lot longer.

A better team than Wakefield would have run up a cricket score last night. I found it surprising, and troubling, that a Noble-coached team didn't seem to show any backbone.

The real test for Salford will be next season when the Koukash investment will (and should) deliver an immediate return.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#9 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,271 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:07 AM

I agree.

They've been terrible on the field and poor off it for a lot longer.

A better team than Wakefield would have run up a cricket score last night. I found it surprising, and troubling, that a Noble-coached team didn't seem to show any backbone.

The real test for Salford will be next season when the Koukash investment will (and should) deliver an immediate return.

You can say that but for Broncos to be in Salford's shoes would constitute a massive improvement in fortunes.

 

Do you think many Salford fans would trade places with a Broncos fan?

How about the opposite?



#10 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,972 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:10 AM


Besides whose an "expansion club" London formed in 1981? Toulouse formed in 1931?
 

 

1937, as you were told yesterday.


The Unicorn is not a Goose,

#11 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,244 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:11 AM

You can say that but for Broncos to be in Salford's shoes would constitute a massive improvement in fortunes.
 
Do you think many Salford fans would trade places with a Broncos fan?
How about the opposite?

Right now, Salford are in the better position. That's been the case for a massive six months out of the last twenty years.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#12 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,404 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:14 AM

Quite a few Salford players are presumably marking time till they get to the end of the season,when they'll be released. In the meantime, they aren't good enough to make the 8.

 

I feel really sorry for their fans.


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#13 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,271 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:16 AM

Right now, Salford are in the better position. That's been the case for a massive six months out of the last twenty years.

Not remotely true. How often in that time have London moved and changed name?



#14 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,244 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:24 AM

Not remotely true. How often in that time have London moved and changed name?

How many times have Salford made the play-offs?

Been relegated.

Become the 'Reds'. Added the word 'City' to their name.

I think we can all agree that London's current situation is woeful on every level. The problem for rugby league is that they are just a pretty clear example of failings that have existed (and possibly still exist) at clubs throughout the professional level of the sport.

Salford, until Koukash took over, were at death's door.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#15 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,271 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:35 AM

How many times have Salford made the play-offs?

Been relegated.

Become the 'Reds'. Added the word 'City' to their name.

I think we can all agree that London's current situation is woeful on every level. The problem for rugby league is that they are just a pretty clear example of failings that have existed (and possibly still exist) at clubs throughout the professional level of the sport.

Salford, until Koukash took over, were at death's door.

Salford are a yo-yo side. Too big for the Championship but too small for SL. That's their problem.

London have constantly battling for survival. That's theirs. And they certainly wouldn't be too big for the Championship either.

 

Both sides have problems but to make out that their problems are of the same order is pulling a Parky.

 

Take the issue of name, on the surface, both clubs have had several name changes:-

 

Salford - Salford Reds - Salford City Reds - Salford Red Devils

Fulham - London - London Crusaders - London Broncos - Harlequins RL - London Broncos

 

This for me, is the central point, Salford have struggled for relevance and have made cosmetic name alterations; Bronquins have struggled for survival and have gone through distinct incarnations.



#16 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,180 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:53 AM

it amuses me that the very same threads were initiated last season (mainly by featherstone fans) about widnes...........
"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 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,244 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 09:34 AM

This for me, is the central point, Salford have struggled for relevance and have made cosmetic name alterations; Bronquins have struggled for survival and have gone through distinct incarnations.

Both teams have made ill-thought out changes to their identities. Both teams have failed on an epic scale to engage their core support, find new fans and connect properly with local clubs. Both teams have, to much the same degree, failed to play interesting or exciting rugby for the past few years. Neither has had any success worth mentioning for a while.

Both, without major investment from rich men whose commitment is open to question, would not exist today.

They are as unlike as chalk and some more chalk.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#18 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,271 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 09:49 AM

Both teams have made ill-thought out changes to their identities. Both teams have failed on an epic scale to engage their core support, find new fans and connect properly with local clubs. Both teams have, to much the same degree, failed to play interesting or exciting rugby for the past few years. Neither has had any success worth mentioning for a while.

Both, without major investment from rich men whose commitment is open to question, would not exist today.

They are as unlike as chalk and some more chalk.

And yet one is dramatically on the way up and the other dramatically on the way down but let's treat those two imposters just the same.

 

Salford without their "cashcow" were facing a loss of SL status but would probably be top or near top of the championship with no more question mark over their future than Leigh or Fax or Sheffield.

 

Broncos don't even know where they will be playing their games next year. Their future in the Championships is uncertain. They aren't so big that relegation to Championship 1 wouldn't be a possibility.



#19 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,972 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 09:57 AM

Salford without their "cashcow" were facing a loss of SL status but would probably be top or near top of the championship with no more question mark over their future than Leigh or Fax or Sheffield.

 

Promoted on crowds of 3800 or so, miles more than the darlings at Featherstone are currently managing/claiming.


The Unicorn is not a Goose,

#20 Just to be clear

Just to be clear
  • Coach
  • 330 posts

Posted 11 June 2013 - 10:11 AM

Salford have a fixed home. Broncos don't.

Just to be clear, where did Salford play Wakefield last season?