Jump to content

Rugby League World
League Express
Garry Schofield Testimonial Brochure (Signed)

The Parksider

Member Since 06 Oct 2004
Offline Last Active Today, 12:00 PM

#3208651 Tweaking the middle eights

Posted by The Parksider on Yesterday, 05:31 AM

1. I strongly believe that structure is largely irrelevant to the bigger picture.
We need to prioritise above everything else:
- broadening the player pool; and
- strengthening the international game.
Slowly but surely I see the second being done......


2. As regards the clubs, I am happy with p and r for precisely the reason Dave T gives. Where we have perhaps a dozen clubs of equal resource/potential, outside of the big 8, what do you do? Invite them all in (my preferred option), or have the ability for them to rise and fall, sort of what we have now. There is a constant refrain/complaint that too few teams win SL. To my mind, that begs the questions - why do these clubs do well? What can other clubs do to match them?


1. You need to explain to me how the international game is strengthening. There is no professional International game in northern Hempishere RL, particularly since the England-France games were abandoned. Think about that - what a disaster that was - sadly it was also understandable.


2. Leeds, Saints and Wigan do well as constant success breeds interest in these places (ever since I started watching in the 60's these clubs were big) and they develop players and big fan bases off that. In addition they can pick off players from other clubs to strengthen their sides and weaken their opponents below the big three. Warrington are not far off them though.


Big clubs are possible in other places like Humberside, Calder and south Bradford areas but there is no one club to mop up all the resources, instead they fight over the same fan and player base and struggle for both a decent ground and adequate private investment in the Calder area. Both Hull and Bradford have been at the top so they can work.


Along with Catalans these clubs/areas that are strong in RL rescourse actually make up the top eight as it stands now. The RFL have succeeded in getting the biggest clubs into a small Elite league who get all the priveliges.


As Brian Smith says struggling to stay in SL whilst the top eight go off to play each other again will make it hard for the lower SL clubs to compete 


As regards the "dozen clubs" below the top eight both you and Dave T identify as being relatively weak clubs but with "potential" I think your right in the analysis.


But your wrong in terms of potential IMO. Their fan bases are too low and their local players bases are far too weak, it all goes back to resources and there aren't the fans or players for 20 or even 10 competitive clubs - which is the reason licensing won't work, it will trap poor clubs in with the Elite as it did last time.


This is why the RFL have created their elite super 8 and left the rest to happily go play P & R. It's a resounding success.......

#3206610 Tweaking the middle eights

Posted by The Parksider on 03 October 2015 - 06:15 PM

Proper licensing, with an organisation that has the bottle to throw teams out that don't come up to scratch.


Licensing was working, the problem was the RFL didn't have the bottle to throw someone out and replace them. 


If that had happened when it should have a lot of people would have felt a lot better about it.


I'm at a loss here.


I followed licensing avidly for the years it was in place.


If they had thrown out failing clubs not up to scratch they'd have ended up with an eight club league.

  • BBR likes this

#3203255 Leigh to ignore Salary Cap

Posted by The Parksider on 29 September 2015 - 08:51 PM

The blurb coming out of Leigh was.....


Not actually coming out of Leigh.


It was coming out of Craiq......

#3202004 SL Semi Tickets

Posted by The Parksider on 27 September 2015 - 09:48 PM

thanks guys,


No, Thank you......

#3199978 Back Chat Special: Marwan Koukash Interview

Posted by The Parksider on 25 September 2015 - 08:11 AM

In a Back Chat special, Dave Woods interviews controversial Salford Red Devils owner Dr Marwan Koukash. Watch the interview in full here.

View the full article on TotalRL.com


Really enjoyed that, informative and interesting. The bit at the end about what if the fans turned on him seemed really silly though.


Would love to see every SL chairman come out and do the interview.


The Hetherington spat was a big aspect of the interview, but again entertaining stuff.


A desire to capture more fans from around Manchester sounded positive and the on the Manchester Road games innovation was interesting. 


Woods kept pushing the idea of hiring Old Trafford for a match which sounded a bit mocking to me, especially as that venue is so close to Salford unless Woods doesn't know his geography! 

#3193635 Structurewatch

Posted by The Parksider on 15 September 2015 - 05:34 AM

People can't pick and choose what the definition of Dead Rubber is. It is a 'thing' it has a definition already.



Indeed it does, and outside leeds and Wigan every other match is by definition a dead rubber 


Dead rubber is a term used in sporting parlance to describe a match in a series where the series result has already been decided by earlier matches. The dead rubber match therefore has no effect on the winner and loser of the series, other than the number of matches won and lost.


So there you have it


If you want to spend months going on about how the structure has "dead rubbers" then it's a fair idea to consider dead rubbers in Licensing.


It's also fair to not dismiss a match as worthless because it's a dead rubber especially where the crowd level decides it's not a dead match. Les Catalans dead rubber against Leeds got a high crowd. Equally in the past play off games under licensing in which in theory the club can win the grand final have got appalling crowds.


Slogans don't prove arguments.

#3193631 13 Sept: Qualifiers - Halifax v Leigh Centurions KO 3pm

Posted by The Parksider on 15 September 2015 - 05:18 AM

One up, one down system just led to a boom and bust situation for clubs, at least this system allows clubs to build for the future with greater structure and purpose


Well you've been reading the RFL press releases again


Hull promoted stayed up

HKR promoted stayed up

Wakey promoted stayed up

Salford promoted stayed up

Cas promoted stayed up

Huddersfield promoted stayed up

Widnes stayed up under their first promotion


London went bust with a license

Salford went bust with a license

Bradford went bust with a license

Wakefield are going bust with a license


But if you want to just repeat RFL press releases then fine, add to that I'm not sure where anyone is building anything (care to suggest what?), spending as much as they can on players yes. 

#3192421 Structurewatch

Posted by The Parksider on 13 September 2015 - 06:25 AM

No - I meant our very own competitive and exciting Super 8s... My joke of course.


Not quite as funny as the bring back licensing with each of ten club's Dual Registering with a championship club who act as their academy and each buying a £half million marquee player.

#3190389 Structurewatch

Posted by The Parksider on 10 September 2015 - 04:20 AM

Your not keen on Fui are you ? Overall he's been a great signing , I really don't see how you can criticise , have you watched him all year ?

Yes we've taken a punt on Gareth and the jury is still out , but he when on his game a SL player , getting him onto his game for long enough is the issue , as it has been for many before him

If we'd had a bigger SC , would we have spent more ? , probably not , if we'd have had more money ( central funding ) and a bigger cap then possibly yes we would

But as an argument , not relevant


I'm very keen on them both, exciting in their disparate ways. arch-villain meets colourful hero.


Two great signings to keep your Championship team strong and attract the fans to watch these characters. Well done Leigh.


But not serious SL team building for me.


Thank you PADGE for confirming the Solly quote, the RFL are already seeing problems in the system that they reckon may need tweaking before we even know the outcome.


I know people are saying the 4.v.5 is fine, excusing a one off "anything can happen" as "what it's all about" but what it really is about is having a relief valve in which failing clubs like Wakefield can step down for growing clubs like Leigh. Licensing trapped failing clubs into a spiral of decline and blocked clubs who wanted to make a go of SL. 


As you say Wakefield get £1,825,000 from SKY/RFL which pays their players wages in full.


Leigh get what? £500K for coming top of CC so if say Wakefield beat Leigh in the £Million game, then the central funding for next year handicaps Leigh against Wakefield to the tune of a whopping....




In effect that will be Solly and his mates bankrolling a busted Wakefield possibly playing out of Dewsbury, with all their eggs in the basket of "put it all into the first team, for the last 8 games"


You yourself admit that those signings are just about all your fine Chairman can afford (or find, or attract to the championship) and that the only way you could compete is if Solly and his mates cut the massive funding gap between the 4.v.5.


We have so many on here rightly predicting all season and now, that the qualifiers will end with the 4 SL clubs top and the 4 CC clubs bottom. The excuse is now down to "well at least we have the £Million pound game" but as we can see above and as you have kindly explained such games in this system are based on the RFL/SKY backing the SL club with £1,325,000 more than the top CC club.


Giant killing is hard enough (what am I saying?, as they stand Wakey aren't Giants) in our game without the match being massively rigged in favour of the SL club.


The solution is clear, the £1.825M x 12 and the £500K x 2 should be distributed evenly between the 12 SL clubs and top two championship clubs. i.e £1,635M each. But the RFL won't get that through......


The system is fine in theory but in practice rigged money wise.

#3179921 888 Crowdwatch: Not P&R v licencing!

Posted by The Parksider on 20 August 2015 - 10:14 PM

One , or two big attendances per year does not constitute a ' big ' sport......


Ha!! you got drawn into being teased.


In 1985 Wigan.v.Hull pulled 98,000


But the average top division crowd was 4,748 and the second division got 953......


I think Wembley was 78,000 this year and the average attendance in SL 9,000.


Why not go back to him and ask how he intends to get the 60,000 floaters going to all the SL matches?


Ah! I have the answer, make every game a Wembley cup final......

#3179918 Crowdwatch - (Merged threads)

Posted by The Parksider on 20 August 2015 - 10:05 PM

Good for you.........


Not sure what "excites you" but watching teams try to avoid a trip to Sheffield and instead get to go to Catalans but other than that have no chance of winning/being relegated is not exciting to me.


The ups and downs of the game excite me, and no matter what system you have there will be ups and downs...


Currently there's action fighting for top four, there's action fighting for SL places, every win is an up, every loss is a down.....


Dead rubber men walking Hull excited me winning at Saints as well.......


Had we had licensing then there'd have been less excitement.


Let me know where you are coming from here, whilst Hull scraping into the eight meant to most agenda driven people, that was their season over they now have a big chance to add Leeds scalp, to that of Saints and the pressure is on a makeshift Leeds.


My problem is probably that I like competitive Rugby League.


Don't you??

#3179416 888 Crowdwatch: Not P&R v licencing!

Posted by The Parksider on 20 August 2015 - 09:35 AM

Everyone has negative comments to make but has anyone got some good ideas as to how an unfashionable sport with limited money can improve crowds.


1. Do you really think 888 is the reason for decline? Something else is to blame.


2. I still maintain that the clubs (maybe due to lack of money) do nowhere near enough. Sticking the odd billboard up on a local junction or roundabout does not scream 'must see'. 


3. To significantly improve crowds, you need to convert non RL fans. A big barrier to that is predictability. 


1. I'd look at the massive growth from 1996 to 2012 as well as the much smaller decline this last couple of years to get it in context.


Then I would suggest we look at just how much RL we can get to fulfil our needs off the TV nowadays. I didn't go to Wakey/Bradford as enticing as it was because the full thing was on TV.


I would suggest we look at the list of stars we don't have in the game because of the lure of NRL & RU. I think this also has an effect.


I'd also cite the financial problems at clubs that have driven fans away from that negativity which people paying for entertainment don't want.


I'd look at competitiveness ad how many clubs are challenging the top four monopoly now as against a few years ago, you'd be surprised at how some current strugglers have made top four finishes 


"something else" is not to blame, it's a cheap idea that there is just one problem, solve that and we'll be flying......


2. This idea of "Market and they will come" was subject to a very long debate in which the "negative comments" were scornfully poured onto the marketing departments of clubs.


To market something it has to be a good product in the first place. Struggling cash strapped clubs losing star players and failing to compete with the same old winners every time.........


3.......And as you say that predictability barrier won't bring the fans in...


There's no magic bullet, but we do need to see a Calder club do well so Cas getting that ground, we do need a Hull club competing so Hull getting that recruitment and academy  right and becoming the force they once were, We desperately need the Bulls back because Fartown ain't working......


These are the achievable things that could see us get some fans back, but remember it's a limited market, it's about maximising that not setting ill thought out pie in the SKY ideas that are costly and impractical. 

#3178874 15 Aug: Middle 8 - Wakefield Trinity Wildcats v Bradford Bulls KO 3pm (TV)

Posted by The Parksider on 19 August 2015 - 06:53 AM

The deck is rigged in favour of the SL clubs for sure.  The middle 8 system has its merits, but it’s not there to facilitate P/R, it’s there in an attempt to generate interest and income.  In this environment Lowes is expected to beat the system.  God help us next year 


Last thing I wanted and argued hard against (OK only on a throw away fans forum) was the relegation of the Bulls assisted by the other SL clubs. Had there been auto P & R then introduced fine, and even if Leigh had deservedly got it this year, I'd guess Bulls would have been favourites for next year.


But the favourite will always be the SL clubs now to remain the same. Even the lame ducks as we saw at Wakey can have a mid season clear out, and new signings, and a short term lucrative contract to a Tim Sheens or a Brian Smith.


So for me the reversion to Lowes and Harrison being the "problem" is just what we fans do. When the team isn't good enough blame the coach. OK coaches do make a great difference but those that DO are those who want to do it in Superleague not in the Championship whether it be Smith, Sheens or Darryl Powell.....


Would the latter have knocked the Bulls into shape enough to have beaten Wakefield?? 


I doubt Powell's Featherstone Rovers would be winning any games had they been in this play off system, so for me it's not the coach but the players. No offence to them, anyone who steps on a Rugby League pitch has to be greatly admired but Bulls recruitment will always be the "Pick of what's left over" after the Superleague clubs have taken their 25 each.


Money talks and of course Bulls can spend a £Million, but SL clubs can spend £1.8M. Even if Bulls could spend that the professional RL player always comes with the Tattoo "I want to play at the highest level" emblazoned across his forehead.


As for "building for the future" The championship isn't a place this has ever really happened, and that myth was blown apart by featherstones collapse. It's a place where if you hang around long enough your crowds will shrink, and your best academy players will be off. Just going down will knock a club back a long way even if they return immediately.


But as has been said again and again (and no doubt will be countered by the "doom and gloom" taunts) you have to get back on the SL horse ASAP or those crowds will take another knock. This is the one massive downside to the new system, that arguably the one club that really flew on the back of Superleague isn't there any more. Massive blow to the game. 

#3178034 Crowdwatch - (Merged threads)

Posted by The Parksider on 17 August 2015 - 01:08 PM

I'm saying that they don't want those things in the first place because they would be detrimental to keeping the sport a minority M62 interest. 


The RFL don't want to be able to sell franchises to rich men?? Really????


Why did Nigel Wood Stalk Koukash?


The RFL want rugby league to be just an M62 thing??  Really????


They have variously pushed hard to include Paris, Gateshead, Wales, London, Catalans, Oxford, Toulose, Coventry, Hemel, Gloucester, Newcastle?


The RFL don't want mergers?? Really???


They suggested Calder, Cheshire, Humberside, Cumbria and Manchester? 

#3177642 Super 8s - a joke

Posted by The Parksider on 16 August 2015 - 09:00 PM

Why not ? , it's sport , it isn't fair , sometimes the better team loses , any team that makes it to SL under this system WILL deserve to be there , of that there can be no argument



It shouldn't be easy to gain entry to SL


Then why not play the play offs at Mount Pleasant and make the CC team play uphill both halves?


Why not play 13.v.12 with the CC team playing a man short?


Why not give the Superleague club 12 points start




Why not allow the Superleague clubs £800,000 extra salary cap?


In fact


Why not all of these then anyone who gets promoted really has climbed the mountain and will deserve it? 

  • BBR likes this