Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Barwick's latest on the Broncos


  • Please log in to reply
93 replies to this topic

#1 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 11:27 AM

Full article here:-

 

http://www.independe...le-8661145.html

 

On the subject of Broncos leaving SL....

 

"I don't think it would be the ultimate withdrawal if it happened," he says. "I'd want to do everything to help it take off. If in five or 10 years it still hasn't taken off, I'd want to take a really adult decision."

 

Interesting on two angles.

 

It's another indication that the mantra that "There is no Sky deal with London" is as much nonsense as I'd always imagine it to be. If you read the full piece, it seems that SL is prepared to live without Broncos.

 

However the "5 or 10 years comment" is just odd. From the looks of things, they are dying on their ###### and won't be around as a SL side in 5 years if nothing changes (and that's optimistic).

 

Does he know something we don't? Or is he just talking ######?



#2 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,422 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 11:43 AM

Full article here:-

 

http://www.independe...le-8661145.html

 

On the subject of Broncos leaving SL....

 

 

Interesting on two angles.

 

It's another indication that the mantra that "There is no Sky deal with London" is as much nonsense as I'd always imagine it to be. If you read the full piece, it seems that SL is prepared to live without Broncos.

 

However the "5 or 10 years comment" is just odd. From the looks of things, they are dying on their ###### and won't be around as a SL side in 5 years if nothing changes (and that's optimistic).

 

Does he know something we don't? Or is he just talking ######?

 I think people go OTT with this point - 'There is no Sky deal without London'.

 

Firstly, I don't think many people actually state that, although there are a couple of people who get hung up on this from the two opposite views and take extreme views.

 

What is clear from previous decisions is that it is desireable for the game to have a London presence. As things stand I don't think Sky care about the London team at all - they don't really televise them, they don't attract crowds and tbh they are an embarassment.

 

When people talk about the value of a London team, they should really be focusing on the presence of a 'successful' London team, not just any old mess of a club like we currently have. I think the RFL and authorities know that if we got a truly thriving club in London then this would be much more valuable from a TV and corporate view than pretty much any club in the game. By thriving I am talking of a club the size of Wigan or Leeds in terms of crowds.

 

Whilst he is rightly saying that we should not keep a London club in at all costs, what he is also saying by the 5-10 year comment is that he does value them (or rather the potential they bring).

 

I'd be very happy if they came up with a proper strategy which involved them getting double funding and centralised support.



#3 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,014 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 12:18 PM

It's an all things to all men comment.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#4 foozler

foozler
  • Coach
  • 958 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:16 PM

In its current guise, the club does more harm than good to the concept and standing of Superleague. It is pretty clear to me that the RFL are comfortable with the concept of Broncos not being in Superleague and regrouping at a level down.



#5 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,275 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:20 PM

It's an all things to all men comment.

 

That's my reading of the situation too.  Man fill empty silence with noise.  Move on, there really is nothing to see here.



#6 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,985 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:50 PM

When people talk about the value of a London team, they should really be focusing on the presence of a 'successful' London team, not just any old mess of a club like we currently have.

Barwick says:-

"It has taken off in certain elements in London. There is fantastic grass-roots and community activity, but there are eight million people in London and we have to find a route to more of those people."

It's a difficult one if the removal of the superleague club "affects the fantastic grass-roots and community activity" which so many commentators reckon it will.

As for finding a route to more spectators as you say the club needs to be competitive on the pitch and like several failing SL clubs needs to get it's turn in the limelight to grow a crowd.

The 8 million comment is debatable, many of our southern friends say London is so big you can't attract casual fans from all over. Barwick would do well to be a bit more understanding in that area.

The bottom line question for me is just how many fans do Broncos have to attract to be considered worthwhile continuing with for the advantages they bring to the player development system. It surely can't be 10,000 otherwise we can say goodbye to half of SL.

If it's 5,000 say then London will still need a large subsidy to continue. At one point Hudgell suggested they could be centrally funded. At another point Wood said no.

If Barwick is speaking in public then his words will be measured. If London go he won't be saying "This is a massive blow to the Superleague concept and an end to the expansion of professional RL outsude the heartlands".

It's a bit like saying after a divorce that the missus wasn't worth it and your not bothered.

Anyway we shall see how it goes and if they do go we shall be drowned in crocodile tears.

#7 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:56 PM

""I'd want to do everything to help it take off."

That bit is interesting, and I look forward to hearing what "everything" entails. Whatever it is needs to be done fairly urgently, though.

I don't think a London club is essential to winning a TV contract for our flagship competition, but if the game retreats back to the heartlands then I think the value of that contract will be affected. Sky certainly seem less enthusiastic about rugby league these days, and the withdrawal of London will signal to the game's partners that a nationwide elite competition is off the agenda for a few generations at least. Despite all the millions of investment over the years, not only has elite rugby league not spread geographically, it hasn't even been able to sustain the one expansion club it started with.

 

Still, let's first see what Mr Barwick can do to help. And if that fails, let's put all the money a London SL club would have received into growing the fledgling community game in the midlands, south and Wales.


"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#8 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,985 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:57 PM

It is pretty clear to me that the RFL are comfortable with the concept of Broncos not being in Superleague.

How so given the RFL fought tooth and nail to rescue the Broncos and install them as Harlequins before turning a blind eye to their struggles through two licensing rounds.

They could not be more uncomfortable with how it's panned out so far and could be even more uncomfortable if the demise of the London SL club affects the "fantastic RL grass roots community"

#9 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,985 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 02:07 PM

"[color=#333333][font=Georgia, "times new roman", serif]"I'd want to do everything to help it take off."

1. I look forward to hearing what "everything" entails.

2. Despite all the millions of investment over the years, not only has elite rugby league not spread geographically, it hasn't even been able to sustain the one expansion club it started with

3. If London fails, let's put all the money a London SL club would have received into growing the fledgling community game in the midlands, south and Wales.

1. Everything but give them any money

2. Despite millions elite rugby league has been unsustainable in Workington, Oldham, Bradford, Wakefield, Sheffield, halifax, salford etc. HKR, cas to follow.

London were a solution to the pro player shortage, their demise may have knock on effects....

3. Which you clearly appreciate. However the SKY money and the Hughes money are both not available for use in RL development. Besides the best return on investment in the game is clearly in traditional areas where there's a strong pro club to be the focus.

London's demise will be IMHO a retreat to the heartlands....

#10 Chronicler of Chiswick

Chronicler of Chiswick
  • Coach
  • 2,426 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 02:10 PM

It can be read as having  London spend 5 - 10 years in the lower divisions to see if they can develop into something that's viable in SL. The fact that this can be read in various ways would indicate a diplomatic non-answer to the question - as Larry the Leit says, move on , there's nothing to see.



#11 Exiled Wiganer

Exiled Wiganer
  • Coach
  • 5,967 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 02:12 PM

Can we have a thread like this every day? It's the most fun you can have...
I like an approach to say that "everyone says that Sky money is dependent on having a London presence..." Only then to use every piece of evidence available, however tangential, to demolish it. It's a superb arguing point. It's a bit like saying "everyone says that the only hope for the game is to consolidate in the heartlands at the expense of elsewhere..." and then using every piece of evidence to the contrary to "strengthen" your case. I think it's called a false supposition.
It's a bit like the numerous atheist/agnostic commentators who will cite the most insane behaviour - "they'd teach that the world is 400 years old and dinosaurs are a trick..." to illustrate their genuinely held and reasonable views that if you can't prove something, don't believe in it.

#12 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 02:46 PM

Can we have a thread like this every day? It's the most fun you can have...
I like an approach to say that "everyone says that Sky money is dependent on having a London presence..." Only then to use every piece of evidence available, however tangential, to demolish it. It's a superb arguing point. It's a bit like saying "everyone says that the only hope for the game is to consolidate in the heartlands at the expense of elsewhere..." and then using every piece of evidence to the contrary to "strengthen" your case. I think it's called a false supposition.
It's a bit like the numerous atheist/agnostic commentators who will cite the most insane behaviour - "they'd teach that the world is 400 years old and dinosaurs are a trick..." to illustrate their genuinely held and reasonable views that if you can't prove something, don't believe in it.

4,000! Why try to make them look stupid?

 

Could you please identify who thinks that "everyone says that Sky money is dependent on having a London presence...."?

 

I know of nobody who said that. You seem guilty of the kind of logically fallacy that you describe above.



#13 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 02:48 PM


Anyway we shall see how it goes and if they do go we shall be drowned in crocodile tears.

I don't recall a lot of sympathy for Celtic Crusaders fans when their club moved 3 hours north coming from your direction. As I recall it was "progress".



#14 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,833 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 03:04 PM

1. Everything but give them any money

2. Despite millions elite rugby league has been unsustainable in Workington, Oldham, Bradford, Wakefield, Sheffield, halifax, salford etc. HKR, cas to follow.

London were a solution to the pro player shortage, their demise may have knock on effects....

3. Which you clearly appreciate. However the SKY money and the Hughes money are both not available for use in RL development. Besides the best return on investment in the game is clearly in traditional areas where there's a strong pro club to be the focus.

London's demise will be IMHO a retreat to the heartlands....

 

The word you need is inconsistent in this context. if something is unsustainable it ends. In a number of  cases elite RL is still a reality for most of your "examples".



#15 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,923 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 03:13 PM

Brian Barwick is the part-time non-exec chairman of the RFL: see http://www.therfl.co...ctors/the_board

 

A non executive chairman is a part time office holder who sits on and chairs the main board of a company, and also usually provides support and advice to a chief executive officer. This position usually entails fulfilling a similar function on a number of ancillary board committee, as well as being a political figurehead of the company.



#16 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,221 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 03:17 PM


I think that Parksider has said many times that Sky demand a London team when they enter into contracts with the game. In any event, it would appear that this is not the case.

A good strong SL club in London or Wales for that matter would do the game a world of good but the Broncos/Harlequins of the last few years are a negative for the public face of the game and it is that level of team that the game could live with dropping from the top tier.

#17 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,148 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 03:36 PM

I think that Parksider has said many times that Sky demand a London team when they enter into contracts with the game. In any event, it would appear that this is not the case.
 

At one time, he was claiming that a second SL club in London was inevitable because Lewis / Sky wanted it.



#18 foozler

foozler
  • Coach
  • 958 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 03:46 PM

How so given the RFL fought tooth and nail to rescue the Broncos and install them as Harlequins before turning a blind eye to their struggles through two licensing rounds.

They could not be more uncomfortable with how it's panned out so far and could be even more uncomfortable if the demise of the London SL club affects the "fantastic RL grass roots community"

 

Times are different, people in charge are different.

 

I just get the impression that the RFL currently see the Broncos in its current guise as being on a road to nowhere, but that they (the RFL) have neither the desire or the financial clout to take a greater stake in the club. Basically Broncos need to sort themselves out, and if it requires a drop to the Championship and the move to a more suitable (ie smaller) stadium then so be it. 

 

I would have thought Leeds Carnegie RU side are a good case study. Trying to push pro RU in an RL/ AFC city, they spent big time when they were last in the Premiership and basically got relegated and ran up some important debts. Granted their crowds were a bit higher than Broncos have been getting of late, and there are no doubt favorable terms for their use of Headingley.

 

Since relegation from the Premiership, Hetherington and Caddick have taken the opportunity to rework Carnegie top to bottom, they have binned the expensive contracts and are assembling a squad made up from the academy and the wider Yorkshire region. It has been painful, but they have a squad mainly of local players who are slowly gelling as a squad, and who were in the play offs for promotion this season just gone. Give it another season or two, and Leeds Carnegie could well be back in the Premiership with a majority home grown squad.

 

I am yet to hear anyone suggest that there is not a pathway to the RU top table (so Leicester, Saracens, Bath, Gloucester) for talented Yorkshire RU players just because there is not a Yorkshire club in the Premiership. There are stacks of northern born and bred RU players who have had to move to the South East/ West or East Midlands to play top flight RU, why should it be the case that no-one from the South East would want to move to Leeds or Wigan to play the sport they love? Where RU has it right and RL has it less so, is that top RU clubs are more active in scouting talent from the lower leagues than their SL counterparts, particularly when it comes to forwards: the RU Championship is seen as an excellent breeding ground for tough gnarly forwards.

 

As for the grass roots development in London, I am really not sure how much of that can be directly attributed to the London Broncos certainly in north/ east/ south east Greater London. Granted they might have some impact in the triangle between the M3/ A3 but am not aware that they do a massive amount there (I stand to be corrected on this).



#19 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,334 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 04:04 PM

As for the grass roots development in London, I am really not sure how much of that can be directly attributed to the London Broncos certainly in north/ east/ south east Greater London. Granted they might have some impact in the triangle between the M3/ A3 but am not aware that they do a massive amount there (I stand to be corrected on this).

Here's a link to the Broncos' site pages:

http://www.londonbro...hools/index.php

 

And another specifically about the schools' comp:

http://www.londonbro...hool_league.php

 

I think it is likely that the Broncos have had a lot of involvement with grassroots rugby league around London (and possibly beyond, taking games on the road for example, although that recently probably had a negative effect but never mind. But anyway nobody else takes games on the road these days, bar the Dragons). 



#20 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,923 posts

Posted 17 June 2013 - 04:05 PM

Barwick is not in charge of anything.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users