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
- - - - -

Broncos, Skolars Merger


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#41 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,198 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 04:13 PM

whatever happens we need a super league team in the capitol, broncos must be saved at all costs with probably skolars as the feeder club for up and coming talent..........
"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

#42 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,538 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 04:18 PM

NEW RIVER is NOT the place for RL in London the whole area is a DUMP.

CM


I'm sure the good people of the borough of Haringey will be pleased to hear that. What do you suggest? Napalm?

Funny how the Olympics were used as a catalyst for the regeneration of Stratford but we're too good for Haringey!

#43 deluded pom?

deluded pom?
  • Coach
  • 8,586 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 04:24 PM

whatever happens we need a super league team in the capitol,

The DC Slayers are your best option.


rldfsignature.jpg


#44 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,570 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 04:41 PM

NEW RIVER is NOT the place for RL in London the whole area is a DUMP.

 

If that was a criterion for not having a rugby league club then rugby league would have died long ago!  Most rugby league towns were 'dumps' (in the case of St Helens, they still are!). 


Edited by Saintslass, 15 June 2013 - 04:42 PM.


#45 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,300 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 04:42 PM

NEW RIVER is NOT the place for RL in London the whole area is a DUMP.

CM

Such snobbery is a bit odd in a RL fan. Come on, the game is largely played in towns considered "a bit of a dump" by their neighbours (York excepted). When did we suddenly become so picky?



#46 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,576 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 04:49 PM

they should start a knightsbridge rfc

#47 deluded pom?

deluded pom?
  • Coach
  • 8,586 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 06:18 PM

Such snobbery is a bit odd in a RL fan. Come on, the game is largely played in towns considered "a bit of a dump" by their neighbours (York excepted).

and Hull.

rldfsignature.jpg


#48 Mumby Magic

Mumby Magic
  • Coach
  • 3,168 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 06:45 PM

whatever happens we need a super league team in the capitol, broncos must be saved at all costs with probably skolars as the feeder club for up and coming talent..........

We need teams worthy of playing in the top division. Ideally with a good geographical spread but if a team for what ever reason and whereevr they are from are not good enough they shouldn't be in. If we managed our sport properly and let things grow organically like we may be starting to do. ALL new clubs should start in C1 NO MATTER where they are from. Point being if the Broncos were relegated, there could be an Oxford, Hemel, Dewsbury or Barrow to take their place. That is how it should be.

Lilly, Jacob and Isaac, what my life is about. Although our route through life is not how it should be, I am a blessed man.


#49 THE RED ROOSTER

THE RED ROOSTER
  • Coach
  • 2,272 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 07:03 PM

Better they fold than merge? You're going to have to explain that one!

 

In common with Heartland posters, I would feel no loyalty to any proposed merged club. Those who propose mergers have no understanding of the nature of British sports fans. This is not Australia.


I am an oil trader and successful at that but, but marketing, finance, business management, human resources etc are not my strengths


 

 

David Hughes to Ian Lenagan Page 134 - A Pastel Revolution - Fletcher and Gordas - 2006

 

Being an outsider, it is easiest to see what is wrong with the sport. It's a fantastic sport that has been undersold and under-marketed  because people who run it probably want to keep it the way it is

 

 

Dr Marwan Koukash to Joanthan Lieu. Sunday Telegraph 9th March 2014

 

 


#50 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 3,092 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 07:11 PM

Better they fold than merge? You're going to have to explain that one!


It's essentially the same thing though isn't it? There are two clubs right now, and then there'll be one.
The Unicorn is not a Goose,

#51 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,538 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 07:21 PM

I think people may be jumping the gun here. Even if the two clubs pool resources with the RFL at NRS, what would be to stop them retaining separate identities at their respective levels?

#52 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 10:04 PM

We need teams worthy of playing in the top division. Ideally with a good geographical spread but if a team for what ever reason and whereevr they are from are not good enough they shouldn't be in. If we managed our sport properly and let things grow organically like we may be starting to do. ALL new clubs should start in C1 NO MATTER where they are from. Point being if the Broncos were relegated, there could be an Oxford, Hemel, Dewsbury or Barrow to take their place. That is how it should be.

 

This



#53 gnidir

gnidir
  • Coach
  • 301 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 02:05 AM

Organic growth simply doesn't exist, it's always driven, in the il days it was a rich benefactor starting a team, new teams tend to be started by exiles from the north, I'm talking in the pro ranks anyway.
As dr koukash seems to have quickly noticed, to gain support, you need something to support, without competitive and successful top end teams, the development will struggle.
I have a couple ideas of how I think the game in London should go, either 2, maybe 3 top end teams in an ideal world, geographically spread in London and responsible for developing teams under them.
In the reality we have, I think that the rfl, or London broncos need to become a nz warriors type set up, creating te best paths for local talent to play in superleague. Not just in the London league, but in the south, they need to own this.

#54 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,358 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 07:27 AM

Organic growth simply doesn't exist, it's always driven, in the old days it was a rich benefactor starting a team, new teams tend to be started by exiles from the north, I'm talking in the pro ranks anyway.As dr koukash seems to have quickly noticed, to gain support, you need something to support, without competitive and successful top end teams, the development will struggle.

That's the conclusion I have come to based on the events, facts and figures of the history of the game post war.
There is no organic growth of the professional game because there is very limited numbers of quality players and people who want to pay to watch RL.

Gateshead brought the north east into Superleague with "top down" growth of a sixth place in SL finish and a 4,000 crowd to start with. Top down worked then the money ran out.

In 2001 Gateshead tried the organic route 700 fans watched them come 29th.

Last year they came 34th. on 300 crowds.

The only time they ever grew in this period was when money again was thrown at them, again when that ran out they again collapsed.

There is no "organic growth" of the professional game (forget the amateur game) because the professional game needs money to grow as you say. More money than the small clubs can generate, and when I say small clubs that list is very very long and includes some clubs in Superleague, hence you see them going backwards.

If anyone can actually explain how organic growth of professional RL you keep talking about will work, with examples, start a thread on it?

Edited by The Parksider, 16 June 2013 - 07:29 AM.


#55 deluded pom?

deluded pom?
  • Coach
  • 8,586 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 07:39 AM

If the game is to grow organically then it will come from the amateurs. Once clubs are established as Hemel are then that's when we might be able to look at some of them moving into the semi pro ranks.

Edited by deluded pom?, 16 June 2013 - 08:42 AM.

rldfsignature.jpg


#56 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 08:29 AM

In common with Heartland posters, I would feel no loyalty to any proposed merged club. Those who propose mergers have no understanding of the nature of British sports fans. This is not Australia.

 

Well said



#57 gnidir

gnidir
  • Coach
  • 301 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 09:05 AM

Well said


So you would be lost to the game rather than follow a merged team? That kind if thinking is why we are perceived in such a negative light by neutrals to our sport, a bunch of northern villages.
What are you afraid of? That your new team may actually win something?
A team represents your area, so what you are saying is that you won't support a team name or team colours with which you are unfamiliar, a team which still represents the area you support. I struggle with the logic to be honest.
I'm not having a dig, I just really don't get it, I understand loyalty to your team, but if your team becomes part of a bigger, more competitive outfit, why turn your back on them?

#58 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 10:13 AM

So you would be lost to the game rather than follow a merged team? That kind if thinking is why we are perceived in such a negative light by neutrals to our sport, a bunch of northern villages.
What are you afraid of? That your new team may actually win something?
A team represents your area, so what you are saying is that you won't support a team name or team colours with which you are unfamiliar, a team which still represents the area you support. I struggle with the logic to be honest.
I'm not having a dig, I just really don't get it, I understand loyalty to your team, but if your team becomes part of a bigger, more competitive outfit, why turn your back on them?

 

There's nothing logical about it, it's entirely emotional and therefore irrational.

 

My team is my team and if they cease to exist, or are consumed by a larger entity, then they're not longer my team.



#59 THE RED ROOSTER

THE RED ROOSTER
  • Coach
  • 2,272 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 10:51 AM

There's nothing logical about it, it's entirely emotional and therefore irrational.

 

My team is my team and if they cease to exist, or are consumed by a larger entity, then they're not longer my team.

 

Spot on. There are a host of complex, historical, social and geographical reasons why people support the clubs they do.

 

Although may people may have another team whose results they follow as Parksider has said with regards to Hunslet and his other team, it is not the same as your club. It's also true that within the British sporting public in print, and on messageboards, most venom is reserved for those "fans" who abandon their club to follow more successful clubs.

 

Logically we should all follow successful clubs at the top end of the table but logic never determines the sporting preferences of the majority of us, or for that matter why we are on this message board debating what is a minority sport in the Northern Hemisphere. We do it because we like this game and not other sports with a bigger media profile. The same principle applies.

 

Back on topic, this thread is still running I see by way of a thread-killer, I give you this quote from Gus Mackay CEO of the club which in fact does represent the official position http://www.bbc.co.uk...league/22600442

 

Mackay is keen to stress that London should retain a representative in the top division.

"That's fundamentally a big part of Super League and it has to be," Mackay said.

"We have to do whatever we can, working with the governing body and other parties, to make sure that there is a Super League club in London.

"Otherwise it just drifts and becomes a sport that is only played in the heartlands, which is wrong."

 

The real problem faced by the Broncos - in which they are not alone at the bottom end of Super League - is that the uncertainty over the League Structure. It is preventing any new investor / consortium putting money into the club and replacing David Hughes, as before you put money in you want to have an idea how much and what problems you would face with your Business Plan. This is also affecting the choice of new venue for next year and whether there is an next year which is a distinct possibility should the unworkable option 3 be chosen.

 

The 8/8/8 option favoured by the West Yorkshire clubs for the local derbies it would produce would be a club-killer for London, The club could live with the same structure as at present with 1 up 1 down P&R. The minimum disruption method but not the one favoured apparently...


Edited by THE RED ROOSTER, 16 June 2013 - 10:53 AM.

I am an oil trader and successful at that but, but marketing, finance, business management, human resources etc are not my strengths


 

 

David Hughes to Ian Lenagan Page 134 - A Pastel Revolution - Fletcher and Gordas - 2006

 

Being an outsider, it is easiest to see what is wrong with the sport. It's a fantastic sport that has been undersold and under-marketed  because people who run it probably want to keep it the way it is

 

 

Dr Marwan Koukash to Joanthan Lieu. Sunday Telegraph 9th March 2014

 

 


#60 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,358 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 12:50 PM

So you would be lost to the game rather than follow a merged team? I struggle with the logic to be honest.

Older fans are lost to the game every year and new younger fans come in every year.

Out of 17-20,000 people who follow Cas, Fev, Wakey who knows how many would follow a merged team now, who knows how many would walk away, who knows how many of the thousands of new fans coming in would follow that merged club in another 17 years.

The easier option is give them only one SL club to watch. May or may not work who knows. Other option is to stick with what we have which isn't working but fingers crossed.....