Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

21/03/14 - Leeds Rhinos v London Broncos KO 8pm (Sky Sports)


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

Poll: Who will win? (17 member(s) have cast votes)

Who will win?

  1. Leeds Rhinos (13 votes [76.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 76.47%

  2. Draw (2 votes [11.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.76%

  3. London Broncos (2 votes [11.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.76%

Vote

#181 nadera78

nadera78
  • Coach
  • 2,864 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 10:07 AM

No you're wrong. I was euphoric when Fulham RL was started. I had high hopes, at last our game was going to expand and be respected for the great product it truly is. I thought when they were promoted they should be excused relegation to enable them to become established.  The same goes to a lesser degree for all the Fulham clones that followed, Cardiff Blue Dragons, Carlisle, Mansfield Marksmen, Kent Invicta, I thought it was great.  All these people needed was to see our game at first hand and they would be sold. I was wrong.  I hate it that London (and the rest for that matter) never took off. But we have to face facts, as you say Rugby League in this country is not a wealthy game.  We can't afford the perpetual running sore that is London in Super League, so let them be relegated.  Let's hope they come back stronger  - that's the advantage of P&R you're not condemned to out darkness for ever.  But please let's stop pretending that the present set up is a going concern producing loads of players because we (like I was 30 years ago) are kidding ourselves. 34 years they've been there that's a quarter of the game's existence. think about it.


I'm still waiting sunshine.
"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

#182 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 14,953 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 10:37 AM

Branson got involved because his son liked the game and, more importantly, the expanded WCC event coincided with the launch of his airline in Australia. Once those things ended he walked away.

And lenagan was forced to give his shares to David Hughes by the RFL when he bought Wigan. They blocked him from handing them to his son though. They didn't seem to have a problem with Koukash owning two northern clubs though.

BTW I'm still waiting for evidence of the preferential treatment you claimed earlier. Let me know when you think of something.

Come on they've been bailed out more than once, they've had the limit on overseas players removed, but more to the point they were put into Super League directly from Div ii without having to play off, qualify or anything. I don't know what you call that but I call it preferential.


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#183 nadera78

nadera78
  • Coach
  • 2,864 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 11:28 AM

Come on they've been bailed out more than once, they've had the limit on overseas players removed, but more to the point they were put into Super League directly from Div ii without having to play off, qualify or anything. I don't know what you call that but I call it preferential.


Bailed out implies they've had money off someone. Broncos were liquidated a decade ago and the only person who lost money was David Hughes. They re-formed and, as per the rules at the time, were voted back into SL by the clubs themselves. Off the top of my head I can think of several northern clubs that have been bailed out, in the true sense, by the RFL, fans and the taxman.

They had a quota exemption for a few years and, as we've seen very clearly ever since, the club damn well needed it. It's almost impossible to get any northerners, never mind the best ones, to leave their mummies to play in London. It really says something when it's easier to get people to relocate halfway around the world than to move a couple of hours south.

Yes, they were put into SL without winning promotion. So we're Catalans, and Huddersfield, and Widnes.

So, really, in 34 years you don't have many examples of them receiving preferential treatment, do you?
"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

#184 The Big Gun

The Big Gun
  • Coach
  • 390 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 11:36 AM

That's because he wouldn't have owned two clubs. His wife - not a blood relative - would have owned one.

The point is moot anyway as it would seem the Administrator or the RFL (no idea where the process is up to) has turned down Mrs K's bid.

I thought he was about to take control of Swinton?

#185 nadera78

nadera78
  • Coach
  • 2,864 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 11:55 AM

.  All these people needed was to see our game at first hand and they would be sold.

But please let's stop pretending that the present set up is a going concern producing loads of players because we (like I was 30 years ago) are kidding ourselves. 34 years they've been there that's a quarter of the game's existence. think about it.


Your first point sums up the attitude of the game as a whole. It takes so much more than simply putting on a game and expecting crowds to come flocking and then fall in love.

Tony Clubb and Dan Sarginson are at the biggest club in the game, LMS is at another massive club, Matt Cook and Darrell Griffin have had good careers, and Mike Channing and Omari Caro were snapped up by your precious heartland clubs. At the Broncos currently Dixon, McMeeken, Bishay, Krasniqi, Dollapi, and George Griffin would all be playing for other clubs in SL. There's a stack more coming through too, if they're given a chance, and lots of players in the Championship too.

BTW that list includes 2 England internationals, 1 Welsh, several Knights and age group players.
"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

#186 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 14,953 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 12:09 PM

Bailed out implies they've had money off someone. Broncos were liquidated a decade ago and the only person who lost money was David Hughes. They re-formed and, as per the rules at the time, were voted back into SL by the clubs themselves. Off the top of my head I can think of several northern clubs that have been bailed out, in the true sense, by the RFL, fans and the taxman.

They had a quota exemption for a few years and, as we've seen very clearly ever since, the club damn well needed it. It's almost impossible to get any northerners, never mind the best ones, to leave their mummies to play in London. It really says something when it's easier to get people to relocate halfway around the world than to move a couple of hours south.

Yes, they were put into SL without winning promotion. So we're Catalans, and Huddersfield, and Widnes.

So, really, in 34 years you don't have many examples of them receiving preferential treatment, do you?

Come on the league has bent over backwards to keep London in.  Their crowds are pathetic,presumably unlike other clubs they haven't suffered a point reduction.  Their current ground is not up to the SL standard, they've had the rules bent for them time and time again.  As for Widnes, let's not forget that they were denied promotion on the spurious grounds that they'd been in liquidation.  I could happily live with all of this if they showed some sign of being a success on the field, but since the days of Offiah and Edwards there haven't been any.  Even in those heady days the London public were not exactly falling over themselves to see two of RL's biggest names.  I went to a fixture at the Stoop in those days, London fans were pretty thin on the ground, TBH given the number of Hull fans it was more like the Boulevard than West London.


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#187 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 14,953 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 12:15 PM

Your first point sums up the attitude of the game as a whole. It takes so much more than simply putting on a game and expecting crowds to come flocking and then fall in love.

Tony Clubb and Dan Sarginson are at the biggest club in the game, LMS is at another massive club, Matt Cook and Darrell Griffin have had good careers, and Mike Channing and Omari Caro were snapped up by your precious heartland clubs. At the Broncos currently Dixon, McMeeken, Bishay, Krasniqi, Dollapi, and George Griffin would all be playing for other clubs in SL. There's a stack more coming through too, if they're given a chance, and lots of players in the Championship too.

BTW that list includes 2 England internationals, 1 Welsh, several Knights and age group players.

Two players playing Super League after 30 years.  Out of a population of 8 million! You call that an achievement, well I (and thousands of other not so lucky fans of other clubs) don't.  But anyway, if there's such a wealth of talent coming through at the Broncos, then a brief sojourn in the Championship can only do them good.  Like I keep saying, with P&R, the "R" part isn't the end of the world. It enables clubs to regroup and hopefully come back stronger.


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#188 nadera78

nadera78
  • Coach
  • 2,864 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 12:17 PM

Come on the league has bent over backwards to keep London in.  Their crowds are pathetic,presumably unlike other clubs they haven't suffered a point reduction.  Their current ground is not up to the SL standard, they've had the rules bent for them time and time again.  As for Widnes, let's not forget that they were denied promotion on the spurious grounds that they'd been in liquidation.  I could happily live with all of this if they showed some sign of being a success on the field, but since the days of Offiah and Edwards there haven't been any.  Even in those heady days the London public were not exactly falling over themselves to see two of RL's biggest names.  I went to a fixture at the Stoop in those days, London fans were pretty thin on the ground, TBH given the number of Hull fans it was more like the Boulevard than West London.


Blah, blah, blah.

Give me some evidence to show the RFL have bent over backwards. Show me The Hive is the only ground not to meet standards. The rest of it is merely your opinion, no evidence for any of it.
"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

#189 nadera78

nadera78
  • Coach
  • 2,864 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 12:18 PM

Two players playing Super League after 30 years.  Out of a population of 8 million! You call that an achievement, well I (and thousands of other not so lucky fans of other clubs) don't.  But anyway, if there's such a wealth of talent coming through at the Broncos, then a brief sojourn in the Championship can only do them good.  Like I keep saying, with P&R, the "R" part isn't the end of the world. It enables clubs to regroup and hopefully come back stronger.


You clearly can't count. Or you're a troll.

Goodbye.
"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

#190 londonrlfan

londonrlfan
  • Coach
  • 807 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 12:44 PM

Come on the league has bent over backwards to keep London in.  

 

If London avoiding relegation, by not finishing in a relegation place, is 'bent over backwards', then Leeds, Saints, Warrington etc. have all been bent over backwards too. 

 

Their crowds are pathetic,presumably unlike other clubs they haven't suffered a point reduction.

 

Point reductions for poor crowds? Ok lets hope Wakefield, Hudds, Widnes do too then. None of these clubs can get over 5k at the moment, so called 'heartlands' clubs were RL is the number one sport. 

 

Their current ground is not up to the SL standard

 

Castleford, Wakefield, Bradford etc.

 

 

 they've had the rules bent for them time and time again. 

 

Name one example?

 

Your beloved heartlands clubs have had plenty of chances to be promoted, with or without London being in SL, and they have failed. Sheffield deserve to be in SL far more than 'Fev', Fax or Leigh (I presume you support one of them), given they are the twice championship winners. And guess what? With promotion and relegation, they'd had replaced Widnes and Salford respectively in the SL, not London. 

 

Bye troll. 



#191 londonrlfan

londonrlfan
  • Coach
  • 807 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 12:54 PM

You clearly can't count. Or you're a troll.

Goodbye.

 

I'd go with the former. 



#192 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 14,953 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 02:42 PM

If London avoiding relegation, by not finishing in a relegation place, is 'bent over backwards', then Leeds, Saints, Warrington etc. have all been bent over backwards too. 

 

 

Point reductions for poor crowds? Ok lets hope Wakefield, Hudds, Widnes do too then. None of these clubs can get over 5k at the moment, so called 'heartlands' clubs were RL is the number one sport. 

 

 

Castleford, Wakefield, Bradford etc.

 

 

 

Name one example?

 

Your beloved heartlands clubs have had plenty of chances to be promoted, with or without London being in SL, and they have failed. Sheffield deserve to be in SL far more than 'Fev', Fax or Leigh (I presume you support one of them), given they are the twice championship winners. And guess what? With promotion and relegation, they'd had replaced Widnes and Salford respectively in the SL, not London. 

 

Bye troll. 

I don't agree with him, I can't argue with him so I call him a name. You cannot say seriously that London have justified a SL place.  BTW I am a supporter of Fev, a team who in 1995 were not in a relegation place but were replaced anyway by London.  If only London could produce the same per capta attendance as Fev (of Fax, or Leigh) they'd need Wembley stadium to accommodate the crowd.


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#193 londonrlfan

londonrlfan
  • Coach
  • 807 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 03:14 PM

I don't agree with him, I can't argue with him so I call him a name. You cannot say seriously that London have justified a SL place.  BTW I am a supporter of Fev, a team who in 1995 were not in a relegation place but were replaced anyway by London.  If only London could produce the same per capta attendance as Fev (of Fax, or Leigh) they'd need Wembley stadium to accommodate the crowd.

 

I called you a troll, because you're a troll with an agenda, who overlooks Northern clubs getting advantages from the RFL, because it doesn't suit your anti-London bias. Remind me how many pro sports clubs are in Featherstone/Pontefract again?

 

How many chances have you had to get into SL since 1995 and you're still crying about London over that? In fact you had a chance to beat us last year in the cup and weren't even close. 


Edited by londonrlfan, 23 March 2014 - 03:16 PM.


#194 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,096 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 03:42 PM

yes I have, any of the other fixtures would have been more appealing to the neutral viewer IMO

 

I enjoy watching good teams like Leeds but the one-sideness was confirmed when the Leeds teamsheet was produced - I enjoy watching teams like the Broncos too but last didn't do too much for the image our great game due to the mismatch

I asked which London games should be shown?


Once you have tasted excellence,you cannot go back to mediocrity.

#195 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 14,953 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 04:21 PM

I called you a troll, because you're a troll with an agenda, who overlooks Northern clubs getting advantages from the RFL, because it doesn't suit your anti-London bias. Remind me how many pro sports clubs are in Featherstone/Pontefract again?

 

How many chances have you had to get into SL since 1995 and you're still crying about London over that? In fact you had a chance to beat us last year in the cup and weren't even close. 

Castleford's ground is within 3 miles of ours, and with them at home, we still attracted a larger crowd than London did. As for chances to get into SL, by the time we were good enough, that had been closed off to us by the iniquitous franchising.  I sincerely hope that if London are relegated the RFL don't take it upon themselves to change the rules for promotion to the top flight and leave London stranded there. Perhaps if they do you'll really have something to complain about. As it is all that may happen is that you'll be relegated and get another chance at SL the following season. What's wrong with that?  After all it's what we were happy to accept until the rules were changed yet again.


Edited by Trojan, 23 March 2014 - 04:28 PM.

"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#196 oiseau

oiseau
  • Coach
  • 1,324 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 05:04 PM

I asked which London games should be shown?

London v Catalans is usually a good contest and it involves the two 'expansionist' clubs. I would also show v Bulls, Vikings, Salford & HKR for starters.i feel these games would provide more entertainment for the neutrals.

Look at this afternoons results - some good contests there any of which would have provided more interest than fridays' fiasco.



#197 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,096 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 05:19 PM

London v Catalans is usually a good contest and it involves the two 'expansionist' clubs. I would also show v Bulls, Vikings, Salford & HKR for starters.i feel these games would provide more entertainment for the neutrals.

Look at this afternoons results - some good contests there any of which would have provided more interest than fridays' fiasco.

Yet two of today's games have been commented as "possibly the worst game I have ever seen",weren't they supposed to be competitive?Would they have been "good adverts" for the game.As I said earlier,London have a very good recent history at Headingley,just not this season.

Would London v Catalan show the game in a good light when the attendance will no doubt be poor and given Catalans have superior players to London,would again in all probability be a blow out.


Once you have tasted excellence,you cannot go back to mediocrity.

#198 londonrlfan

londonrlfan
  • Coach
  • 807 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 05:25 PM

Castleford's ground is within 3 miles of ours, and with them at home, we still attracted a larger crowd than London did. As for chances to get into SL, by the time we were good enough, that had been closed off to us by the iniquitous franchising.  I sincerely hope that if London are relegated the RFL don't take it upon themselves to change the rules for promotion to the top flight and leave London stranded there. Perhaps if they do you'll really have something to complain about. As it is all that may happen is that you'll be relegated and get another chance at SL the following season. What's wrong with that?  After all it's what we were happy to accept until the rules were changed yet again.

 

Well if you go into SL, you're going to be competing with both Castleford and Wakefield, and to an extent Leeds, which will affect your crowds, signing of potential players and local sponsorship. If we're relegated, then we'll never go back up, certainly in the current climate with Hughes running things. Then we'll probably just gradually die off with 300 or so fans left. I disagree that there is promotion and relegation anyway. Yeah, there's relegation this year, but I'd be surprised if any teams go down in this 8x8 rubbish. I give it three years before the RFL change their minds again and come out with a new 'exciting, revolutionary' relegation system. 



#199 oiseau

oiseau
  • Coach
  • 1,324 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 05:32 PM

Yet two of today's games have been commented as "possibly the worst game I have ever seen",weren't they supposed to be competitive?Would they have been "good adverts" for the game.As I said earlier,London have a very good recent history at Headingley,just not this season.

Would London v Catalan show the game in a good light when the attendance will no doubt be poor and given Catalans have superior players to London,would again in all probability be a blow out.

I can't see how any fan can get excited about any team winning by a cricket score but i'm obviously wrong, if that's what turns you on then good for you pal.

The attendance is certainly not a problem, for me the game is what counts. I get excited watching the kids playing in the junior leagues with one man and his dog in attendance.It's all about the competitive element. Just about the most explosive action I witnessed ona rl pitch in the past few years  was from a  16 year old Morgan EscarĂ© playing for UTC juniors v Villeneuve juniors - a great team performance and a cameo from the Catalans FB in a game they ended up winning by 10 points or so. No,the attendance doesn't bother me.



#200 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,096 posts

Posted 23 March 2014 - 05:44 PM

Cricket scores don't bother me either,I was impressed by the attacking flair that London showed,the obvious talent of the fullback and the pace and the power with which some of the forwards had.Yet again,you've dodged one of my points about two of today's games.Surely to get more people hooked on the greatest game is to show it as a vibrant,fast paced game,with great fan interaction,to highlight the great skill levels and commitment from the players.For all that this game was a cricket score,London didn't give up and maybe the commentary team should have made more of that fact.


Once you have tasted excellence,you cannot go back to mediocrity.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users