Jump to content

Rugby League World
League Express

Rugby League Yearbook 2014-15

The Parksider

Member Since 06 Oct 2004
Offline Last Active Today, 03:39 PM

#3096886 Crowdwatch week 7

Posted by The Parksider on Today, 11:26 AM

Over the two years crowds are more or less identical which given the fuss the RFL made is a bit of a head scratcher.


The slogan is "every game counts" and I am not sure if they do to the point where fans will flock in.


a. At the top every game doesn't count as you can win SL from 4th.?


b. The eight counted before these changes so maybe no change there? 


Unless the effect of not getting in it is what counts more, but


c. The bottom four counts because you can be relegated.


But that did not bring the crowds flocking in to bottom four Hull, Wakefield, London and Bradford last year quite the reverse.


d. The middle 8 play off games will count but will the fans respond?


If any games are crucial to who goes up and who goes down then I guess they will..............

#3095496 Are we destroying the Championship?

Posted by The Parksider on 26 March 2015 - 03:23 PM

I don't think parky is saying that kryten.  it would be interesting to know what Mr Davy as thrown at huddersfield to get them where they are today and I bet it hasn't been cheap at all.


What I am saying is at post #426 


The small clubs can't grow because the big clubs hog all the resources and get most of the SKY cash.


Indeed the only way out is a rich man. 

#3093756 Are we destroying the Championship?

Posted by The Parksider on 23 March 2015 - 02:52 PM

No issue , pick your 10 and close the door , fine with me , you'll soon be down to 9 , then 8 , then 7 and so on


Don't be so ridiculous my proposal includes keeping the door open. P & R is clearly in there.


But only for clubs that will enhance the competition.


Nobody can ever get away from the basic truth that we cannot have to businesses chasing the same fans and local players as each other.


As a Leigh fan you can't bring yourself to accept this truth, as a Hunslet fan I have.

#3092466 Are we destroying the Championship?

Posted by The Parksider on 21 March 2015 - 07:31 AM

Theres enough money to give championship clubs.......................................


Where have you been this last nigh on 20 years. SKY/SL don't want to give the Championship a bean. End of.


Look at the Marquee thread, everyone's backing Superleague clubs to have/find more money to keep the SL stars in the game or bring new rugby stars into Superleague.


Your wishful thinking may allocate only £1.8M to SL but they want as much as they can get from the SKY contract and that will never change. I do however think you know this Spuddy

#3091245 Crowdwatch week 5

Posted by The Parksider on 19 March 2015 - 09:35 AM

As much as I agree with everything in your post. What's your thoughts on London then parky? Because they don't fit into any of the above you mentioned.


They do, they may not pull the fans but they have been developing a sizeable playing pool and take no notice of me, but do note that's what all those in the know and at the top of the game have been saying their importance is.


If we were looking at who should be in SL then to pick clubs who do not produce many pro players and may only get 5,000 fans really don't have much claim to be of more value than London.


They of course do OK not just because they have a rich chairman. London have had that, but because they can leach off their bigger neighbours for decent M62 players which is a subsidy London never had the advantage of.


Wakefield are good at taking players Leeds don't want, sadly London can only get players Wakey don't want.  LOL


It's all off topic but the thread runs out today, all I'll say is the game can either subsidise London or forget them. If your a rich game them it's Melbourne Storm time, if your a poor game it's pull the trap door lever.

#3089717 Marquee allowance

Posted by The Parksider on 16 March 2015 - 11:20 AM

yet sponsors do so all the time. Like Gillette did with Paul Sculthorpe.

I have no doubt fulton foods probably won't buy SBW. But then Fulton foods aren't the games only sponsor and Castleford aren't our only side.


Gillette sponsored a model player and a legend once years ago. Can you not use exceptions to the rule to make out that there are clubs and sponsors itching to pay several hundred grand out to 12 top players.


Again it's a glib inaccurate one liner. Doesn't do you justice.


Most clubs are still stretched financially, even the glib "3 clubs made a profit  last year" doesn't outline that that profit was a spare half a £Million each that can be offered to Thurston, Slater and Inglis.

#3089547 Marquee allowance

Posted by The Parksider on 16 March 2015 - 02:34 AM

We have a limited amount of clubs in the top league, its a zero sum game, one coming up means one going down. If clubs are put at this risk they should be a success or failure on their own decisions. If Salford go down then they should do so on their own terms. If Salford have an owner that is willing to spend to achieve success (also known as investment) then they should be able to. 


Salford have an owner who is willing to spend large sums of money, but it's not in the end an "investment" in Rugby League. Marwan Koukash covets the big stars and would happily create wage inflation to shift a few Saints, Wigan and Wire lads to Salford.


Treble a few salaries along the way and deplete the opposition to make way for Salford's rise to the top. What price Ratchford, Burgess, Tomkins, Makinson, Burns, Walsh, Walmesley, Clark, Hill, Westwood, Farrell, Charnley etc. all down at the A.J.Bell.


What is the return on that investment, fans through the gates?? Only 2,712 there today.


What of Yorkshire though? Ken Davey's solid "investment" year on year at Fartown set against the lack of any private investment at all at Bradford. Down that way the return on Ken's investment is crowds well down from their "high" of nearly 8,000 in 2008 (free tickets notwithstanding).


Didn't take long for Marwan to realise he'd picked a scarlet turkey, whereupon he sent the wife out to buy Bradford Bulls. 


These so called investors are not creating wealth and profit for the game. They are failing miserably to fill the empty seats with valuable spectators, people who go on to organise and play the game thus creating playing resources. These so called investors are not swelling the quality of the playing rosters, they are just looking to outbid other chairmen for players from the same playing talent pool.


Their aim is their own self aggrandisment, that is what they are investing in and when you see Bradford Bulls in the CC and Fartown in SL and then Imagine Salford at the top of the league and Wigan in CC, that would be a nightmare for the game.


Every penny of that "Investment" would have gone into the same old players pockets whilst overall crowds would be well down because Salford and Fartown don't have the same pulling power as Bradford and Wigan, not to mention depressing the driving forces behind quality junior development.


Real investment is targeted into the areas where there would be the best returns. 


Real investment means you get your money back and more.


What you propose isn't investment.

#3087915 Crowdwatch week 4

Posted by The Parksider on 13 March 2015 - 07:34 AM

Don't care if anyone disagrees or agrees, couldn't care less, it's great to see the lower championship getting some great crowds that compare to some Super League crowds.


Indeed 6,000 for Featherstone.v.Bradford is "great"


But that's it, a one off, Fev.v.Leigh will be good though.


Bradford used to provide 15,000 crowds every other week to our games, and add a big away following to other SL clubs crowds then they got into problems and were variously punished and penalised well after the perpetrators were long gone, then relegation was brought back for their further demise.


Now they get 5,000.


So lets ignore the 10,000 customers we have lost and herald some "great" crowds.


It's like shutting the supermarket for a corner shop and then thinking it's great that the shop is packed out.

#3086839 Relegation

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

No no Gaz , ' building ' outside SL is impossible , you aren't allowed to put together a squad of players into a team and work with them to improve them individually and as a team , oh no no no


You are allowed to do this


who has done that successfully?


Is it the same amount of clubs who have 'grown organically through the leagues'? The same number who have 'built from the bottom'?


The best recent example I can find is Hull.K.R. 


Messrs. Hudgell and Crossland had the money and took HKR forward with the ambition of Superleague. They assembled the best players they could find outside the Superleague and worked towards Grand Final success.


They made the grand final in 2006 and beat Widnes to get promotion. The team they had built into a successful promotion side was:-


Cockayne, Rivett, Morton, Goddard, Ford, Morrell, Webster, Aizue, Fisher, Tangata Toa, Morrison, Smith, Gallagher.


They came second bottom in Superleague 2007 and finished their season against Fartown. By then the team was:-


Hardman, Lennon, Lovegrove, Dyer, Bower, Cooke, Webster, Vella, Fisher, Tandy,Chester, Netherton, Murell.


They had kept some key players like Scott Murrell, James Webster and Ben Fisher, but beyond that there was wholesale change for better players. Had they not done this they may well have slipped to a bottom finish and relegation even though Salford were particularly useless (again) that year.


Leigh clearly have players like Barlow and Brierley who were fancied by Leeds, and the excellent Ridyard who could also go on to try to keep the ship steady for Leigh in SL. 


However in 2008 HKR kicked on again using Hudgell and Crosslands spending power. They didn't make the eight, but compensation came in the form of a last match derby win over Hull in the heady days when they could sell it out.


Team: Briscoe, Fox, Welham, Jake Webster, Steel, Galea, Dobson, Netherton, Fisher, Mills, Vella, Gene, Cooke.


So the second year it was pretty much all change a second time. 


For me you can't assemble a competitive Superleague side outside Superleague. Superleague's spending power (and only a contractual stand saw Leigh keep Brierley and Barlow) will take all the best players many of whom they will sit on the bench or send out  on DR.


If Leigh have spending power at a lower level then like HKR did they can compete for the best players outside SL with Bradford, and they can pay them to play full time. This can get them through a season possibly unbeaten (HKR lost 2), but can it get them past a Superleague side, and can it then consequently keep them off the bottom of Superleague?


So I really can't buy this build an SL side outside SL. It can certainly be a great slogan to cover up a lack of future investment. I know nothing of the good Mr. Beaumont, he maybe has all his eggs in one basket, and nothing for tomorrow.


Mr. Hudgell had the eggs to change the team twice in two years and still they didn't make the eight. As I understand it despite the accident claims pouring in, today they are a selling club and bottom of Superleague.


Time for the "come down off the fence" challenge.......


£Million match Hull Kingston Rovers.v.Leigh 2015 who will win??


Who on here has the guts to predict it?

#3086528 Crowdwatch week 4

Posted by The Parksider on 10 March 2015 - 04:50 PM

Does Union explain its increases are due to 'events' 


I dunno - go ring them instead of annoying me.

#3086232 Relegation

Posted by The Parksider on 10 March 2015 - 07:34 AM

Clubs go bust, that's what is wrong with it.


To the supporter this may seem irrelevant, to the game as a whole it means a lot of money goes out of the game with no return.


Allowing clubs to have a brief period in the sun may be good for that club's supporters, but it does absolutely nothing for the game as a whole.


Your post indicates that the real reason behind the changes is an attempt to steady the financial ship.


Reduce to 12 SL clubs get more money from SKY divvying it up only 12 ways instead of 14.


That nicely gives the 12 more financial stability, pop a threat only of relegation in to chivvy them up at the bottom.


As for "giving it a chance" giving what a chance? Financial stability?? Superleague has now got it.


Or are we giving relegation a chance to boost crowds "through jeopardy". It had it's chance all last year and crowds bombed. Wakefield are favourites for bottom, and attracted 4,140 for the visit of the champions this weekend.


If we want to give an "It" a chance how about giving Championship clubs aspiring to promotion a level playing field.


Which your post hints at being possibly denied to actually discourage promotion and therefore relegation and the ruination of another club like the suggested Hull?


What's in the minds of the RFL and what comes out of their mouths and their actions and the effect of those actions seem to be two different things and look like giving SL more money and stability whilst "bringing back" P & R in a form that makes it highly unlikely to happen.


That's not a "moan" or a "knock" it's a genuine debate point, for discussion now not after three or four years of sitting back watching nobody get promoted unless they throw a lucky punch.

#3082503 Catalans. Pity.

Posted by The Parksider on 04 March 2015 - 06:28 AM

Seriously, though, I could understand the inclusion of Stacey Jones 10 years ago but thought that by now there would have been far more top class French players emerging.


Your being seriously quite one eyed.


The British game is devoid of decent halfbacks, Gary Schofield has just written a piece on it, and over the near 20 years of British SL clubs have chased antipodean half backs.


You seem to want to compare English to French RL as being equal, yes both are regional games and relatively small but France's game is even smaller.


Stacey Jones was a great half back but so has been Thomas Bosc. He's French you know.


Theo Fages is not from Pendlebury.


Having looked at where top players come from over here they come from places where there's a Superleague club mainly, we have had 13 Superleague clubs turning out players from their areas.


Les catalans have one club in Perpignan doing it.


Nobobody can seem to get the point about Oldham. Probably because they don't want to.


Turn it around, say there were 13 SL clubs in France and just Oldham in England, the rest village clubs, if that was the case there's be loads more French players playing pro.


And people in France would be asking why Oldham can't turn out 25 internationals after all they have the "whole of England" to go at.


Kids in Marseille or Paris aren't busting a gut to be RL professionals.


If you really wanna have a go at Catalans they are the only mainland European SL club, you'd think they could find a scrum half from 500,000,000+ people.

#3081510 The latest DR twist

Posted by The Parksider on 02 March 2015 - 11:41 AM

As I have termed DR to be a convalescent or an academy resource for SL clubs, should it not be allowed only between SL and CC1 clubs - if it has to happen at all, as it could be classed as a conflict of interest if clubs from the SL and the Championship come together in the Middle 8 this season.


In your purist world yes.


But CC1 is not a high enough standard for Leeds and Wakey's purposes, and as long as runaway CC leaders Bradford and Leigh don't do it, it is highly unlikely to affect the race for Superleague.


If you believe the RFL actually care about the second tier and the integrity of the competition then fine, but the signs are RFL are interested in London carrying on developing young players (Leigh were apparently refused permission to set up a youth system) and Bradford returning to SL.


Just watch out for Mr. Wood shedding a tear if Bradford lose in the play off.

#3081503 The latest DR twist

Posted by The Parksider on 02 March 2015 - 11:34 AM

Parky, please elaborate


Your coach Rowley is upset London are dual registering with Wakey...


Jarrod Sammut is certainly on no "Elite player development" pathway!!!


Interestingly Wakey's boss Webster says Featherstone will generally be getting the pick of any players surplus to Wakey's requirements during the season.


Fev can have up to four if available. Imagine that? A club apparently seriously going for Superleague making up playing numbers with 8 Leeds and Wakefield lads.


I wonder which way crowds may go there BSJ after the tonking Sunday and the prospect of mid table mediocrity as a Leeds/Wakefield "A" team? 

#3081486 The latest DR twist

Posted by The Parksider on 02 March 2015 - 11:17 AM

Parky, please elaborate on "saves Leeds money" 



It saves Leeds money because they don't have to run an A team/u23s with a full squad of 30ish plus all the coaches phsyio and all the other costs. As for who pays I'm not sure but my guess is Leeds 



The parent club pay the contracts 



There we go Gary, thanks to Bob and Johnny.


In a nutshell it's been a case of Leeds saying lets cut out a whole (Reserve/"A") team and it's support systems and use Hunslet as that team instead.


Leeds get big savings supposedly £100,000 a season and Hunslet are saved from closure and get to play in the Championship to boot, and win matches!!


Next up is supposedly Brett Delaney working back to match practice and fitness with us. That is hardly "Elite player development", he'd be making a come back in the reserves.


Don't forget Leeds have already dumped four lads over age on Featherstone. In that deal Featherstone pay the players contracts for a year. I assume our Mr. Williams cannot afford that. 

But Featherstone who needed players for their SL campaign have gone along with it although the irony is if any of them turn out to be any good, they will revert to Leeds.


Dressed up by fans and coaches in denial as another win-win situation.


So when we watch Featherstone.v.Hunslet just what are we watching? A battle for promotion between two clubs ambitious for Superleague? Is that the "common denominator"??


No, the common denominator is it's a friendly between Leeds "A" teams!!!