Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world 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
- - - - -

London Broncos time to be very afraid


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
180 replies to this topic

#141 getdownmonkeyman

getdownmonkeyman
  • Coach
  • 1,753 posts

Posted 12 June 2013 - 09:31 PM

THE RED ROOSTER; You seem to have a knowledge of the inner workings of London. Do you know whom's counsel David Hughes seeks on coaching appointments, as I would say he has been poorly advised in respect of the last three.

 

I do feel for London, as they are competing in an intensely saturated sporting environment. God knows how many football clubs at various levels, plus half a dozen or so Premier RU clubs is an enviable task in anybody's book.

 

All that said, they really don't help themselves. The Broncos was becoming an established/recognisable name; Why change? This is further compounded by their nomadic existence.

 

They really do need a long term approach to how they are going to go about the running of the club. By that, I don't mean a three/five year plan, I mean at least ten years plus. How you do this with an owner who is willing to sell on, is a whole different proposition entirely.

 

It is my take, that London are a focal point for amateur RL for the whole of Southern England, a clear career path for those juniors wanting to play the game as a fulltime pro. If they are allowed to go, what message does that send to prospective professional players? 

 

Arguably, the biggest point is losing that SL presence on the doorstep of the media. It is hard enough to get column inches as it stands, without giving  them another reason to ignore the game.



#142 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,194 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 10:32 AM

There's a certain irony in you accusing others I'll say it again, I'm not even sure you like rugby league. There's little evidence from your postings on here that you do.

You still don’t get it. Posting provocative stuff at the start and end of your post simply invites me to give it back to you in spades, then we have a childish row then the thread gets locked and we can be warned/banned.

In between thanks for your views on the progress at Coventry. One thing I am pleased about is how since the free gangway and the end to sporting apartheid people have chosen RL over RU and we have obtained a nationwide foothold in nearly every county.

I am however talking about the growth of the professional game and the idea that the future is clubs coming in at the bottom and following the virtual cycle of pay good players, attract more fans. get more money pay better players, get more fans use profits to build the business and so it goes on.

Wether it’s 1945 Workington (feeder club 700 fans) after 70 years, or 2013 Hemel Hempstead (122 fans after 30 plus years) the principle of growing from the bottom into a professional club hasn’t worked for virtually all who have tried it. As for the Championship clubs like Batley, Dewsbury, Leigh, Whitehaven, York Workington, Donny, Hunslet, Keighley, Swinton these all average over 100 years of trying to “grow”. In 1995 their crowds were averaging 1500. Today their crowds are half that. Is that growth? Has the amateur game in all those areas grown? Nope. So these clubs are becoming “A” teams and feeder clubs living hand to mouth.

Top of the CC table and exciting competitive year on year Sheffield may have grown something, but at the turn of 2000 they were on 1,200 crowds, they are now down to 1,000 and only one significant amateur club underpins the game in the city after what 30 years? Finally the Superleagues underfunded clubs, seven of them can’t compete and as Hetherington says “(in these) cases there has been no growth at all and in some cases there has been a decline.

Edit - oh Yes apparently Crusaders are now the beacon for growth. Don't forget Hunslet came from rock bottom to lead CC1 and win in 2010. Was that "growth" given we are an "A" team club on 500 crowds?

Yes it’s not rocket science to work out that the top seven properly funded Superleague clubs grow the game, grow the player base, attract the fans and at least break even doing it. However by some long, elasticated stretch of the imagination (and back on topic) there’s an idea removing London Broncos and leaving the growth in the game to Hemel Hempstead and London Skolars, an “organic and sustainable growth” is a viable alternative. The facts are overwhelmingly against it.

Edited by The Parksider, 13 June 2013 - 10:38 AM.


#143 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,634 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 10:42 AM

Yes it’s not rocket science to work out that the top seven properly funded Superleague clubs grow the game, grow the player base, attract the fans and at least break even doing it. However by some long, elasticated stretch of the imagination (and back on topic) there’s an idea removing London Broncos and leaving the growth in the game to Hemel Hempstead and London Skolars, an “organic and sustainable growth” is a viable alternative. The facts are overwhelmingly against it.

 

The removal of London from Superleague, which is not something that I am advocating, has nothing to do with organic and sustainable growth of the game as from what I can see London contribute little or nothing to the growth of the sport in the capital and surrounding areas.

 

Again you keep citing examples that are so out of date it's embarrassing, ignored the answers given and the points discussed.  I almost feel sorry for you, there has to be fair limit to the number of times you've had your backside handed to you on a plate, and I suspect you're approaching it.


The Unicorn is not a Goose,

#144 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,847 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 10:51 AM

Posting provocative stuff at the start and end of your post simply invites me to give it back to you in spades, then we have a childish row then the thread gets locked and we can be warned/banned.

Quite probably the best sentence you've ever posted.  No excuses now is there?  Especially on a thread where a moderator has been posting and takes a big interest in the subject... :D


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#145 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,194 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 10:58 AM

Quite probably the best sentence you've ever posted.  No excuses now is there?  Especially on a thread where a moderator has been posting and takes a big interest in the subject... :D

I admit to getting drawn into this stuff many times. Guilty M'Lud.

But I have never really thought that badly of anyone based on differences of opinion between two decent people who fundamentally love the game. I remember asking one poster on PM about his friend who was really nasty to everyone on here, but it turned out he was a fine fellow!!

The more you Mod the better it'll get, keep on modding!

#146 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,847 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 11:09 AM

I admit to getting drawn into this stuff many times. Guilty M'Lud.

But I have never really thought that badly of anyone based on differences of opinion between two decent people who fundamentally love the game. I remember asking one poster on PM about his friend who was really nasty to everyone on here, but it turned out he was a fine fellow!!

The more you Mod the better it'll get, keep on modding!

9 years I've been moderating this forum... that's 3 years longer than the longest I've held any paid job.

 

It's a point I never get, two guys who if stood next to each other on a terrace somewhere at a game would get on perfectly fine but on a forum it's a different matter.  Maybe it's the anonymity of the internet that breaks down social behaviour.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#147 The Big Gun

The Big Gun
  • Coach
  • 392 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 11:23 AM

THE RED ROOSTER; You seem to have a knowledge of the inner workings of London. Do you know whom's counsel David Hughes seeks on coaching appointments, as I would say he has been poorly advised in respect of the last three.
 
I do feel for London, as they are competing in an intensely saturated sporting environment. God knows how many football clubs at various levels, plus half a dozen or so Premier RU clubs is an enviable task in anybody's book.
 
All that said, they really don't help themselves. The Broncos was becoming an established/recognisable name; Why change? This is further compounded by their nomadic existence.
 
They really do need a long term approach to how they are going to go about the running of the club. By that, I don't mean a three/five year plan, I mean at least ten years plus. How you do this with an owner who is willing to sell on, is a whole different proposition entirely.
 
It is my take, that London are a focal point for amateur RL for the whole of Southern England, a clear career path for those juniors wanting to play the game as a fulltime pro. If they are allowed to go, what message does that send to prospective professional players? 
 
Arguably, the biggest point is losing that SL presence on the doorstep of the media. It is hard enough to get column inches as it stands, without giving  them another reason to ignore the game.

The thing is, the point you make regarding London's 'competition' doesn't really matter. The Greater London metropolis is enormous (over 8 million people without including the home counties) and the populace is generally far wealthier than anywhere else in the UK. There are easily tens of thousands of people across the capital who would potentially go and watch a successful, well-run RL club (me being one of them).

#148 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,194 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 11:30 AM

1. From what I can see London contribute little or nothing to the growth of the sport in the capital and surrounding areas.
 
2. Again you keep citing examples that are so out of date it's embarrassing

3. I almost feel sorry for you, there has to be fair limit to the number of times you've had your backside handed to you on a plate, and I suspect you're approaching it.

1. Rugby League World had the big article on how London contribute to the expansion of the professional player pool, this has been repeated throughout this thread my good sir. I am merely reflecting many people DO believe they have a contribution that is important to the game.

2. I am afraid Mr. Leit I quoted examples from 1947 to 2013. However I am quite happy to cut that down and show you how from 1996 to date clubs at all levels of the professional game have not grown or gone backwards, except for the very top SL clubs who have grown the game due to adequate investment.

I'd even be happy to show you how the bottom half of Superleague/the championship has been declining since 2009, how the championship crowds have been dropping and the clubs turning to being feeder and "A" teams, and I can remind you again of how the new CC1 clubs are not a sign of growth, just an addition to the treadmill Skolars and Gateshead have laboured under for years. I hope this clear things up.

3. Some famous guy once said "Maybe it's the anonymity of the internet that breaks down social behaviour". I would normally report this but as the Moderator is around he can deal with it if he so wishes.

Edited by The Parksider, 13 June 2013 - 11:32 AM.


#149 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,889 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 11:34 AM

The big mistake is assuming the socio economic factors that make an RL club successful is the same dynamic for all clubs. That's why comparisons are pointless. The case for London's lack of success is unrelated to that for any other club.

 

The other mistake is to assume these factors continue indefinitely. Using the past can only tell you where we've been not what's round the corner.


Edited by Ackroman, 13 June 2013 - 11:36 AM.


#150 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,194 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 11:46 AM

The other mistake is to assume these factors continue indefinitely. Using the past can only tell you where we've been not what's round the corner.

Well I disagree good sir. Since 1973 and the change to divisional RL we can see what has been. There is inadequate paying spectator interest in second and third tier RL to grow such businesses sustainably. The change to pro status from amateur debilitates further growth as the limited money from fans all has to go into player pockets not growth.

I cannot tell you 100% that the entry of say Coventry to the pro ranks will not see crowds of four figures turning to five, nor can I tell you that Hunslet 100% will not become attractive to the paying fans in the city of Leeds overnight.

To plan where we are going as a business one certainly does have to make calculated assumptions as one cannot just drift in hope.

#151 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,634 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 11:54 AM

1. Rugby League World had the big article on how London contribute to the expansion of the professional player pool, this has been repeated throughout this thread my good sir. I am merely reflecting many people DO believe they have a contribution that is important to the game.

2. I am afraid Mr. Leit I quoted examples from 1947 to 2013. However I am quite happy to cut that down and show you how from 1996 to date clubs at all levels of the professional game have not grown or gone backwards, except for the very top SL clubs who have grown the game due to adequate investment.

I'd even be happy to show you how the bottom half of Superleague/the championship has been declining since 2009, how the championship crowds have been dropping and the clubs turning to being feeder and "A" teams, and I can remind you again of how the new CC1 clubs are not a sign of growth, just an addition to the treadmill Skolars and Gateshead have laboured under for years. I hope this clear things up.

3. Some famous guy once said "Maybe it's the anonymity of the internet that breaks down social behaviour". I would normally report this but as the Moderator is around he can deal with it if he so wishes.

 

 

1. With all due deference and respect to those that write for the the RL press, their opinions and research is often no better than what can be found on these very forums.  In fact there are plenty of instances of posts/views etc being directly lifted from on here.  So citing them is as silly as citing your beloved Sir G Hetherington, the Leeds employee who is not in any way impartial on any matter regarding the strategic direction or structure of the game.
 
2. All you have done is quote what we all know, the economic climate and leisure industry has changed almost beyond recognition.  You've brought nothing to the debate as normal.  I've outlined why I think Coventry have a better chance than most, and drawn a comparison with young players entering the professional game where the overwhelming majority will fail.  Guess what that's mirrored in life and business too.  How many businesses, let alone RL clubs, make it through their first year? 
 
3. There you go again crying the victim, the ever so polite and reasonable debate enthusiast that has yet again been wronged.  I'll refrain from calling you a troll, but you're certainly a pest. There is little or no evidence that you like the game that you spend so much time “debating”.

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

#152 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,176 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:05 PM

The key mistake that Parky is not to recognise that RU going open in 1995 opened up opportunities that didn't exist between 1895 and 1995. Coventry joining CC1 next year is an example of the kind of bottom-up growth that wasn't possible before 1995 so basing an argument that bottom-up growth can't deliver a SL club is foolish. We've only had 18 years where it was possible to test this theory.



#153 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,494 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:19 PM

1. Rugby League World had the big article on how London contribute to the expansion of the professional player pool, this has been repeated throughout this thread my good sir. I am merely reflecting many people DO believe they have a contribution that is important to the game.

.

I am really glad that RLW has introduced a feature on the game darn sarth.  I think that will prove really valuable in keeping London in the loop and may well open the eyes of some readers who perhaps think that nothing much is going on down there because 1500 turn up to Broncos matches. 

 

At the risk of being told off for referring to a competitior, this month's Forty-20 also has a good little piece on the Croydon Hurricanes, highlighting the hours of travel players and coaches have to undertake just to get to and from matches, and how this impacts on attendances at the Broncos as the amateur clubs all play their games on the same day as the Broncos meaning that many interested people cannot physically make it to Broncos' matches.  As an aside, in that piece it was also disappointing to read that the funding provided by the RFL which has helped the Hurricanes to establish themselves at a local school, has been withdrawn and now their future is looking very uncertain.  I sincerely hope that funding hasn't been withdrawn so that, say, development in Leeds or St Helens or Wigan can continue (bearing in mind the somewhat severe cut in Sport England funding) because that would be 'criminal' in my book.

 

I was a little bored earlier today and made a list of the London based amateur and professional clubs that I follow on Twitter.  So far I've got the Brixton Bulls, London Skolars, London Broncos, Hemel Stags, Stains Titans, Enfield Enforcers, West London Sharks, Richmond Warriers, Wandsworth Raiders and Croydon Hurricanes. That's not so bad for a sport that's supposed to be confined to the M62 corridor and the list doesn't include other southern based amateur sides such as the Sussex Merlins, North Herts Crusaders, St Ives Roosters, Medway Dragons, St Albans Centurians, Cornish Rebels, Plymouth Titans, Southend Spartans and Weald Warriors (Tunbridge Wells, that hotbed of rugby league). 


Edited by Saintslass, 13 June 2013 - 01:27 PM.


#154 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,194 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:33 PM

So citing them is as silly as citing your beloved Sir G Hetherington, You've brought nothing to the debate as normal.  I'll refrain from calling you a troll, but you're certainly a pest. There is little or no evidence that you like the game that you spend so much time “debating”.

Nope, you still don't get it.

These things don't advance any debate.

Please deal with the proposal that all the growth we get is at the top clubs where the major investment is. They are the ones who develop professional players in the biggest and ever bigger numbers and attract paying fans in the biggest numbers and are our shop window. Beyond that its decline and struggle.The future is not from the bottom up.

Deal with the debate, don't keep switching it to me, it's a very old trick to discredit the other party.

#155 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,194 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:35 PM

I am really glad that RLW has introduced a feature on the game darn sarth.  I think that will prove really valuable in keeping London in the loop and may well open the eyes of some readers who perhaps think that nothing much is going on down there because 1500 turn up to Broncos matches.

Good thought!

#156 TheBinman

TheBinman
  • Coach
  • 375 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:49 PM

It would be sad if the broncos pull out but for me London need drop down to championship there simply not good enough for our supposed elite super league and regroup as a club. Instead of millions been spent on basically flogging a dead horse London and the rfl need to do there research look at wer the best location is for the club to go forward and start again. It would be much more beneficial for London if the money was spent on the community and junior stuff and look at building new clubs for the championship 1 because London is a massive potential player pool for us just have to hav a look at the recent players to hav come through some of these are internationals in the making. How about having some kind of cap reduction of some kind for players that come through our London or southern based development clubs so the pathway for full time rugby league is still there?

#157 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,889 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:49 PM

Participation has to be the key to future growth and expansion of the sport.



#158 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,634 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:58 PM

Nope, you still don't get it.

These things don't advance any debate.

Please deal with the proposal that all the growth we get is at the top clubs where the major investment is. They are the ones who develop professional players in the biggest and ever bigger numbers and attract paying fans in the biggest numbers and are our shop window. Beyond that its decline and struggle.The future is not from the bottom up.

Deal with the debate, don't keep switching it to me, it's a very old trick to discredit the other party.

 

Big clubs have big bucks and sign, promote and dump more youngsters than other clubs. This isn't news.  They sign players from further and further afield, this isn't news.  They dominate the game, this isn't news to anyone.  

 

I must have dreamt the growth at Featherstone, Wakefield, Coventry, Hemel, Oxford, Bristol, Leicester etc then.  Of course the big clubs have more players graduating through their academies, they have the most money, sign the greatest number and have the best paid and resourced coaches.  Guess what, they also discard the greatest number of failures too, this has been going on for decades.  How does this advance anything in relation to this debate?  It's as obvious as day following night for all but the terminally stupid.

 

The logical conclusion to your constant rattling, is that you want a smaller number of clubs.  Well I don't.  Reduce the league to eight, and guess what you'd still end up with winners (well just one) and losers (seven), and probably two perennial strugglers.  You appear to be arguing, that if a club isn't big now then it never can be and that it should give up.

 

You appear to be arguing that new clubs are wasting their time.

 

As others have said participation is key, and that's at grass routes and junior level.  You seem to think we should all just give up.

 

I don't think you like rugby league, there little evidence of it from your postings.


Edited by Larry the Leit, 13 June 2013 - 01:25 PM.

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

#159 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,402 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 01:29 PM

You still don’t get it. Posting provocative stuff at the start and end of your post simply invites me to give it back to you in spades, then we have a childish row then the thread gets locked and we can be warned/banned.

In between thanks for your views on the progress at Coventry. One thing I am pleased about is how since the free gangway and the end to sporting apartheid people have chosen RL over RU and we have obtained a nationwide foothold in nearly every county.

I am however talking about the growth of the professional game and the idea that the future is clubs coming in at the bottom and following the virtual cycle of pay good players, attract more fans. get more money pay better players, get more fans use profits to build the business and so it goes on.

Wether it’s 1945 Workington (feeder club 700 fans) after 70 years, or 2013 Hemel Hempstead (122 fans after 30 plus years) the principle of growing from the bottom into a professional club hasn’t worked for virtually all who have tried it. As for the Championship clubs like Batley, Dewsbury, Leigh, Whitehaven, York Workington, Donny, Hunslet, Keighley, Swinton these all average over 100 years of trying to “grow”. In 1995 their crowds were averaging 1500. Today their crowds are half that. Is that growth? Has the amateur game in all those areas grown? Nope. So these clubs are becoming “A” teams and feeder clubs living hand to mouth.

Top of the CC table and exciting competitive year on year Sheffield may have grown something, but at the turn of 2000 they were on 1,200 crowds, they are now down to 1,000 and only one significant amateur club underpins the game in the city after what 30 years? Finally the Superleagues underfunded clubs, seven of them can’t compete and as Hetherington says “(in these) cases there has been no growth at all and in some cases there has been a decline.

Edit - oh Yes apparently Crusaders are now the beacon for growth. Don't forget Hunslet came from rock bottom to lead CC1 and win in 2010. Was that "growth" given we are an "A" team club on 500 crowds?

Yes it’s not rocket science to work out that the top seven properly funded Superleague clubs grow the game, grow the player base, attract the fans and at least break even doing it. However by some long, elasticated stretch of the imagination (and back on topic) there’s an idea removing London Broncos and leaving the growth in the game to Hemel Hempstead and London Skolars, an “organic and sustainable growth” is a viable alternative. The facts are overwhelmingly against it.

 

Looking at the Broncos they are on course for a very sutainable organic decline. The facts are overwhelmingly supportive of that.



#160 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,494 posts

Posted 13 June 2013 - 01:35 PM

Participation has to be the key to future growth and expansion of the sport.

I think the context of that participation is important too.  It would appear to me that rugby league does best when it engages with and is a part of the local community.  North Wales Crusaders in their present incarnation are doing tremendously well in this regard and another club, again featured in Forty-20 this month, is Medway Dragons where the local council sports rep wasn't convinced that RL would do anything in the area when starting up a club was first mooted and yet now they have 'hundreds of members' and have become 'a huge part of the community' (quoted from the Medway Council Olympics legacy manager).  Rugby league clubs need roots and need to grow into their community because community is what the sport thrives on.  Participation is obviously key to that but of course there are other elements also.  Poor old London Broncos are suffering from that lack of connection to a local community.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users