Jump to content


RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE (ISSUE 397 - MAY 2014): Available to download now. Get the app from Apple Newsstand or GooglePlay, or click here to read it online now at Pocketmags.com - Print edition in shops from Friday, or click here to get it delivered by post in the UK or worldwide.

Rugby League World - April 2014
League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Widnes should be dropped from SL and have failed

using everyones Broncos logic

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

#41 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,569 posts

Posted 04 August 2013 - 09:48 PM

We beat that by more at home in 2011 (82-6), that one didn't lead to as many calls to get rid of Quins (as they then were) as they were second in the league at the time.

http://news.bbc.co.u...gue/9425926.stm

That's it in a nutshell, when Bronquins had a better side and were in better shape off the field, there was less criticism of them following a heavy defeat. A bit like Widnes now.

 

So no real "anti-London" agenda,



#42 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,689 posts

Posted 04 August 2013 - 10:00 PM

Pretty obvious really. They can't support fully professional clubs without artificial financing. They should have merged back in the 1990s before the backwoodsmen got their way.

Don't worry, with the reintroduction promotion and relegation the backswoodmen are being placated again. Regressive and backward.


I note from the cross-code forum that you are a very big RU fan. Are you against premiership RU who have P&R?.

#43 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 39,806 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 11:53 AM

I note from the cross-code forum that you are a very big RU fan. Are you against premiership RU who have P&R?.

 

 

I note from the cross-code forum that you are a very big RU fan. Are you against premiership RU who have P&R?.

they don't have it

hence the lagal case with the immediately relegated London Welsh

 

by the way, and there is a connection how does professional union compare with professional rugby in terms of wealth, geographical spread and demography.

My point is that even though it doesn't have auto p and r it is in a far better position to sustain it than rugby.


WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015

Keeping it local


#44 Duff Duff

Duff Duff
  • Banned
  • 717 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 02:10 PM

I note from the cross-code forum that you are a very big RU fan. Are you against premiership RU who have P&R?.


No I don't agree with promotion and relegation in Rugby Union either.

Rugby Union struggles to support a self sustaining professional competition with the Premiership and suffers from many of the same problems that Super League suffers from. Half the clubs unable to balance their books whilst the lack of security of income leads to a lack of rational commercial investment.

The bottom line is you can't have direct promotion and relegation between a fully professional and a semi professional competition. Without a functioning fully professional pyramid like soccer promotion and relegation gives clubs false incentives, encourages irresponsible behaviour, short term thinking and is destructive.

The best analogy I can think of is County cricket where there is no promotion and relegation between the First Class and Minor Counties. The gap in terms of infrastructure, off field administration, player development structures and everything else than separates a professional club from a semi pro one is just too great. Promotion and relegation is completely unsustainable if relegation means that the playing staff have to be laid off and half the back room staff end up losing their jobs too.

The idiotic London Welsh episode from the last Union season serves an ideal case in point. A shell of a professional club with no ground, no supporters, no player development infrastructure and no prospect of being self sustaining. I would estimate that at least £5 million was wasted by the RFU, Premier Rugby and London Welsh themselves on their bid for glory. Completely irrational and there are very sound reasons why the Union Premiership had established strict minimum entry standards, unfortunately the courts of law had other ideas.
  • l'angelo mysterioso and Manx RL like this

#45 Errol Stock

Errol Stock
  • Coach
  • 454 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 03:35 PM

No I don't agree with promotion and relegation in Rugby Union either.

Rugby Union struggles to support a self sustaining professional competition with the Premiership and suffers from many of the same problems that Super League suffers from. Half the clubs unable to balance their books whilst the lack of security of income leads to a lack of rational commercial investment.

The bottom line is you can't have direct promotion and relegation between a fully professional and a semi professional competition. Without a functioning fully professional pyramid like soccer promotion and relegation gives clubs false incentives, encourages irresponsible behaviour, short term thinking and is destructive.

The best analogy I can think of is County cricket where there is no promotion and relegation between the First Class and Minor Counties. The gap in terms of infrastructure, off field administration, player development structures and everything else than separates a professional club from a semi pro one is just too great. Promotion and relegation is completely unsustainable if relegation means that the playing staff have to be laid off and half the back room staff end up losing their jobs too.

The idiotic London Welsh episode from the last Union season serves an ideal case in point. A shell of a professional club with no ground, no supporters, no player development infrastructure and no prospect of being self sustaining. I would estimate that at least £5 million was wasted by the RFU, Premier Rugby and London Welsh themselves on their bid for glory. Completely irrational and there are very sound reasons why the Union Premiership had established strict minimum entry standards, unfortunately the courts of law had other ideas.

 

Perfect summary and in a nutshell of where the RFL are about to take us back to - a refreshing post Mr Duff Duff and thanks for it. Its a shame your points will not be seen or listened too where it counts.



#46 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 39,806 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 04:28 PM

Perfect summary and in a nutshell of where the RFL are about to take us back to - a refreshing post Mr Duff Duff and thanks for it. Its a shame your points will not be seen or listened too where it counts.

Seconded

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015

Keeping it local


#47 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,569 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 05:43 PM

No I don't agree with promotion and relegation in Rugby Union either.

Rugby Union struggles to support a self sustaining professional competition with the Premiership and suffers from many of the same problems that Super League suffers from. Half the clubs unable to balance their books whilst the lack of security of income leads to a lack of rational commercial investment.

The bottom line is you can't have direct promotion and relegation between a fully professional and a semi professional competition. Without a functioning fully professional pyramid like soccer promotion and relegation gives clubs false incentives, encourages irresponsible behaviour, short term thinking and is destructive.

The best analogy I can think of is County cricket where there is no promotion and relegation between the First Class and Minor Counties. The gap in terms of infrastructure, off field administration, player development structures and everything else than separates a professional club from a semi pro one is just too great. Promotion and relegation is completely unsustainable if relegation means that the playing staff have to be laid off and half the back room staff end up losing their jobs too.

The idiotic London Welsh episode from the last Union season serves an ideal case in point. A shell of a professional club with no ground, no supporters, no player development infrastructure and no prospect of being self sustaining. I would estimate that at least £5 million was wasted by the RFU, Premier Rugby and London Welsh themselves on their bid for glory. Completely irrational and there are very sound reasons why the Union Premiership had established strict minimum entry standards, unfortunately the courts of law had other ideas.

County cricket might not have P & R but it does have promotion from Minor Counties to first class cricket. Just not every often and on a franchise basis. 

 

I can remember Durham being "elevated" in modern times.



#48 Duff Duff

Duff Duff
  • Banned
  • 717 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 06:12 PM

County cricket might not have P & R but it does have promotion from Minor Counties to first class cricket. Just not every often and on a franchise basis. 

 

I can remember Durham being "elevated" in modern times.

 

Yes. I might not agree with annual promotion and relegation but I don't believe in professional sport being a closed shop either. In cricket Glamorgan and Durham were admitted to the County Championship for sound strategic reasons and both at various stages have thrived. 

 

Durham are now a powerhouse of English cricket, which reflects the strength of the amateur game in the North East, but would they have developed into one of the strongest clubs in the country if they had been threatened with promotion and relegation? 

 

The same applies to North Queensland, Canberra,Newcastle and Auckland in the NRL or Catalans in the Super League. Rational investors and commercial interests are deterred if the money they put in can go up in smoke just because of the bounce of a ball or a dodgy referring decision. 

 

Because of the lack of sponsors and money these issues are particularly acute in Rugby League. Promotion and relegation is a backwards step. There are other credible ways of making Super League more competitive and attractive sponsors which have are much less destructive and wasteful. Regional conferencing, placing an emphasis on the representative and international game, using the 9s format, salary exemptions for expansion teams. The options are legion.  



#49 IM2

IM2
  • Coach
  • 829 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 07:58 PM

I'd say that the "London argument" is based on a number of things such as them not having a regular home, their backer looking to pull out, them not signing players for next year, dramatically falling attendances etc - none of which apply to Widnes.

but the fact is that this has happened to many clubs in many sports. my view is the game needs to take more responsibility for the game at the top level in London. if you think about it the Broncos and the other Champ sides in London get very little help from HQ. NO marketing, limited PR, no recognition of the fact no northern based player of any note will move to london for a fair cost, people dont even know the CC or the WC is happening. if my company was to set up a new business in New York we wouldnt give it the same resources as our established business it would get 'investment' disproportionate to ensure it grows and succeeds. london's success and failure is down to all of us rather than some poor bloke who is losing loads of money and getting it in the neck by everyone.




Season Tickets 2014
- �85 - season ticket
- �125 - family ticket
- �30 - 4 game pack

skolars shop here:
http://www.skolarsrl.../match-tickets/
 

Haringey Team of the Year 2014 Skolars U19s

Haringey Club of the year 2011
London RL Club of the year 2011

Skolars if Carlsberg made rugby clubs! Perhaps Leagues most progressive club!


#50 Steve Slater

Steve Slater
  • Coach
  • 1,647 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 08:28 PM

but the fact is that this has happened to many clubs in many sports. my view is the game needs to take more responsibility for the game at the top level in London. if you think about it the Broncos and the other Champ sides in London get very little help from HQ. NO marketing, limited PR, no recognition of the fact no northern based player of any note will move to london for a fair cost, people dont even know the CC or the WC is happening. if my company was to set up a new business in New York we wouldnt give it the same resources as our established business it would get 'investment' disproportionate to ensure it grows and succeeds. london's success and failure is down to all of us rather than some poor bloke who is losing loads of money and getting it in the neck by everyone.

Good post!If the other SL clubs want a presence in London they should be prepared to sacrifice something for it! How about each of them taking £100K less from Sky, so that the London club gets £1.3M more? £1M could go towards an increased salary cap for them, so that they can attract the best players, and £300K to subsidise admission prices so that locals can be virtually dragged in for free. Gradually reduce this funding over 5 years, and if they cannot maintain success thenpull the plug and forget about London forever.
It might seem an odd suggestion from a Fev fan, but my club had to forego a Super League place for them in '95, yet no-one else is prepared to sacrifice anything to make them a success!

#51 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,569 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 10:19 PM

but the fact is that this has happened to many clubs in many sports. my view is the game needs to take more responsibility for the game at the top level in London. if you think about it the Broncos and the other Champ sides in London get very little help from HQ. NO marketing, limited PR, no recognition of the fact no northern based player of any note will move to london for a fair cost, people dont even know the CC or the WC is happening. if my company was to set up a new business in New York we wouldnt give it the same resources as our established business it would get 'investment' disproportionate to ensure it grows and succeeds. london's success and failure is down to all of us rather than some poor bloke who is losing loads of money and getting it in the neck by everyone.

London Broncos are not a branch office belonging to the RFL with Wigan and Leeds as regional offices.

 

London Broncos are one business and Leeds is another.

 

Each club is responsible for marketing itself.

 

The WC and CC is, however, the RFL's job. As is the grassroots of the game (both heartlands and elsewhere).


Edited by Northern Sol, 05 August 2013 - 10:22 PM.


#52 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,569 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 10:21 PM

Good post!If the other SL clubs want a presence in London they should be prepared to sacrifice something for it! How about each of them taking £100K less from Sky, so that the London club gets £1.3M more? £1M could go towards an increased salary cap for them, so that they can attract the best players, and £300K to subsidise admission prices so that locals can be virtually dragged in for free. Gradually reduce this funding over 5 years, and if they cannot maintain success thenpull the plug and forget about London forever.
It might seem an odd suggestion from a Fev fan, but my club had to forego a Super League place for them in '95, yet no-one else is prepared to sacrifice anything to make them a success!

The cold hard fact is that sides like Bradford, Wakefield, Castleford, Widnes, Hull KR etc can't afford to take 100k less. I doubt that Leeds, Wigan, Hull or Wire wish to do so either.



#53 IM2

IM2
  • Coach
  • 829 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 10:36 PM

London Broncos are not a branch office belonging to the RFL with Wigan and Leeds as regional offices.

 

London Broncos are one business and Leeds is another.

 

Each club is responsible for marketing itself.

 

The WC and CC is, however, the RFL's job. As is the grassroots of the game (both heartlands and elsewhere).

 

problem with this logic is that each of those clubs benefit from all the HQ activities such marketing, sales, development, player development is all Northern centric so i totally disagree its up to the clubs alone. the competitions and the RL brand is the HQs not broncos, but no one does that job here. not only are the broncos, skolars, hemel etc marketing themselves but they also are marketing the game as well. the rfl dont do anything in london mktg wise.

 

for point of reference Melbourne receive a massive deal compared to sydney clubs. this includes money, promotion, origin games, internationals and is a 3 or 5 year deal. i cant remember exactly. interestingly it was up for renogatiaton last year and i think it was increased. it certainly isnt the same. dont forget all RLs activity and awareness is northern. no one has a clue in london and its not the clubs job to promote the game alone.




Season Tickets 2014
- �85 - season ticket
- �125 - family ticket
- �30 - 4 game pack

skolars shop here:
http://www.skolarsrl.../match-tickets/
 

Haringey Team of the Year 2014 Skolars U19s

Haringey Club of the year 2011
London RL Club of the year 2011

Skolars if Carlsberg made rugby clubs! Perhaps Leagues most progressive club!


#54 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,569 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 11:22 PM

problem with this logic is that each of those clubs benefit from all the HQ activities such marketing, sales, development, player development is all Northern centric so i totally disagree its up to the clubs alone. the competitions and the RL brand is the HQs not broncos, but no one does that job here. not only are the broncos, skolars, hemel etc marketing themselves but they also are marketing the game as well. the rfl dont do anything in london mktg wise.

 

for point of reference Melbourne receive a massive deal compared to sydney clubs. this includes money, promotion, origin games, internationals and is a 3 or 5 year deal. i cant remember exactly. interestingly it was up for renogatiaton last year and i think it was increased. it certainly isnt the same. dont forget all RLs activity and awareness is northern. no one has a clue in london and its not the clubs job to promote the game alone.

Tbh if the RFL does any marketing of the SL brand in the north then I've never noticed it. What do you think they do?

 

The expansion of the game at grassroots outside the heartlands is a separate issue from Broncos. The RFL should fund it as much as possible (I know that there have been cutbacks) whether or not Broncos exist as a SL side. I have no knowledge of a breakdown of their spending per region so can't comment on whether the current set-up is "fair" or not.

 

I know Melbourne get more money than Sydney clubs but the NRL is a different beast from SL. Clubs don't compete in quite the same way because there is no relegation. I also don't hear much about this-or-that club nearly going to the wall, whereas recently very many SL clubs have been in trouble. The NRL can afford to pay Queensland and NSW sides less and Melbourne more but the SL simply can't afford to do the same. This is why we're moving from 14 clubs to 12; it's a case of rationing.



#55 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,275 posts

Posted 06 August 2013 - 05:23 AM

Can you name a single stat that has London ahead of Widnes?


Most Tommy Lees in the squad?

#56 Steve Slater

Steve Slater
  • Coach
  • 1,647 posts

Posted 06 August 2013 - 08:17 AM

The cold hard fact is that sides like Bradford, Wakefield, Castleford, Widnes, Hull KR etc can't afford to take 100k less. I doubt that Leeds, Wigan, Hull or Wire wish to do so either.

Yes they can, because they will have one less top quality player to pay..... London will have them! It's ok to keep them in Super League at the expense of the plebs, but if you want them there you have to sacrifice something yourselves.If you're not prepared to do that you shouldn't give them preferential treatment over other clubs

#57 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 15,954 posts

Posted 06 August 2013 - 09:29 AM

Time to let it rest now.


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





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users