Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

foozler

Oldham

403 posts in this topic

They are the be all and end all in keighley.

But somehow you have allocated barnoldswick to keighley which is as damn stupid as when you decided the midlands would be Sheffield's catchment area.

Your stupidity knows no bounds when you then assume that any decent player anywhere in the midlands would go to Sheffield and any decent barnoldswick player would go to keighley.

And this extends to further stupidity that none of these kids would go to either club if they were any good because neither is a Superleague club.

I may feel embarrassed at getting something wrong, how do you feel getting stuff wrong with such regularity?

they aren't

http://www.barla.org.uk/Clubs/Contacts.asp?id=1184

Pete Fell their sometime chair a good friend and employer of mine will be turning in his grave!

They had a good side in his day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is always interesting to me that a merger which would have made sense, namely St Helens and Wigan....... two small towns

You and your mate need to wake up grasp the economics.

St.Helens is a profitable RL club and attracts support from a wide area not from it's small town base.

Wigan is a profitable RL club and attracts support from a wide area and not from it's small town base.

But you have your facts filter on as always. Anything that proves we have to move forward is filtered out.

We need 12,13,14 profitable clubs in SL and your stupid (no apologies it is stupid) idea is to dump one of the few who are successful.

You say less clubs will "disenfranchise many, many thousands of fans, who will not flock to the remaining SL teams",

That phrase is as always not backed up by any logic whatsoever.

There's effectively two less clubs in Leeds yet more people pay to watch RL and Leeds are profitable like Wigan and Saints.

When HKR were dumped out of SL Hull went on to profitable 14,500 crowds and competed. Now 19,500 fans watch the pro game in hull and guess what.........

Both clubs make losses.

You like to mock the idea of mergers and less clubs but here's a great idea for you.

Bring back Recs, Boro, Huyton, Carlisle, Tyldesly, Belle Vue, Bramley, Scarborough, Highfield, Springfield, Streatham, Carlisle, Mansfield, Crusaders, Cardiff, Nottingham, Pontefract, Liverpool, Newcastle, Acton, Coventry, Brighouse, Ebbw Vale, merthyr, Bradford PA, Manningham etc.

Let's then split the SKY money 60 ways. That's £300K a club each. let's have 5 divisions of 12.

Sorted..........

Now there's a wonderful future for our game. We can have 60 clubs all making losses, all attracting gates in the hundreds, we can enjoy it without TV getting in the way, the evil SKY the awful BBC and their dreadful coverage. We can cheer on the players knowing they like to play for next to nowt because they love the game, those top class players who've gone to RU are mercenaries anyway.

Enjoy the fantasy.

You fail to grasp that when Oldham (back on topic) got 3,600 fans that gave them a big fat monetary loss. It was not enough to fund a competitive pro team or repair the ramsahckle ground. You surely understand this simple economic situation? Or do you??

By creating an Elite league of a smaller number of clubs the number of fans paying to watch game live at the ground had RISEN CONSIDERABLY. Can you not grasp this fact. Water it all down and you have everyone going bust and fans walking away all over.

Try the calder area, there's 16,000 fans there and guess what. Wakefield go bust, Castleford in dire economic problems, featherstone making losses year on year.

How can Rugby league thrive on losses all round.

If Wakefield at Newmarket had a clear run of the area, managed to get crowds to a profitable 10,000 and started to provide some competition for leeds, Wigan and saints how fantastic would that be?

Not in your book though. You'd lament how 9,000 Cas and Fev fans would have been lost to the game, and how these clubs would die and how RL in the area would die and how nobody from Cas or Fev or Ponte would ever watch Wakefield. Yeh nobody from South or west leeds would ever watch Leeds and east Hull would become a soccer stronghold.

You also fail to see the armchair fan. Open your eyes and look at how many people pay how much to sit in their armchair and watch our SL clubs. Every friday and saturday i have two mates who watch Superleague and their subs go on to pay SKY who go on to pay the RFL. They don't go near live SL games.

I'm sorry mate but this idea that creating an elite "disenfranchises" fans to the detriment of the game is correct in that it disenfranchises a good 15,000 fans who would have liked to stick with the old days like you.

But is has franchised many thousands more fans who are attracted to an eleite professional game - probably 40,000 or more, and it has enabled hundreds of thousands of RL fans who cannot get to a ground because they only really play the game in the north and Twickenham.

Open the other eye..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are the be all and end all in keighley.

But somehow you have allocated barnoldswick to keighley which is as damn stupid as when you decided the midlands would be Sheffield's catchment area.

Your stupidity knows no bounds when you then assume that any decent player anywhere in the midlands would go to Sheffield and any decent barnoldswick player would go to keighley.

And this extends to further stupidity that none of these kids would go to either club if they were any good because neither is a Superleague club.

I may feel embarrassed at getting something wrong, how do you feel getting stuff wrong with such regularity?

It's not me that thinks that Sheffield is near Huddersfield but a long way from Derbyshire despite part of Sheffield actually being in Derbyshire. It's not me that argues that Midlands players wouldn't sign up to a Sheffield club despite several of them actually doing so.

As for "getting things wrong", there was the assurance that Crusaders would spend the full salary cap...Or that we would have a second London SL club cos Lewis / Sky wanted it....Or the thread after thread you made saying that flatcappers had their heads in the sands since everybody knew that a Scottish national league side was in the pipeline....

I don't recall ever having made a prediction which has come wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the records sixty points plus.

Do your own research.

Sixty points against Warrington's second team and they were regularly hammered with exactly the same side earlier in the season. They didn't pay the full cap the previous season and they signed nobody significant in the meantime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. It's not me

2. It's not me

3. As for "getting things wrong"................,

3. Don't tell me....I know..... It's me :lol:

I'm always happy to be corrected because we can get to the truth of matters. I'm always happy to thank people for corrections and I like to take a punt on things but if wrong I can learn from them. But your position never ever changes and you accept nothing in our debates.

All we end up with is you hanging on my shoulder trying to prove me wrong about any little thing you can, the site is about debating RL matters. We fundamentally disagree on the idea of "bottom up development" and how in this country clubs can grow from amateurs to SL sides. You say It can happen yet it took me months to get you to set it out. It didn't wash with me so it was time to agree to disagree.

Same with London, I maintain they are important to RL in line with other commentators and events, you argue if they dissapeared tommorrow it would not matter. Let's agree to disagree.

Same with Crusaders, you went mad about that episode and maintained the RFL were mad and wrong. I saw it a different way completely. lets agree to disagree.

You say Sheffield can be an SL club. i say they can't in current circumstances. Let's agree to disagree.

What's happening is we aren't debating anything sensibly (regardless of who is right or wrong) you just hang on my shoulder grasping anything you can to prove me wrong? Most (no ALL) of the time it has nothing really to do with the point of the debate.

I say for instance keighley have too small a junior base to run as an SL club and if they did have any local successes then a big SL club would take that player away. You then try to prove me wrong by saying there's two little kids teams in Barnoldswick and Jack Reed had a game for Silsden. Solly, Jack Reed has never played for keighley mate??

I just do not understand how that proves me wrong? Solly I'm happy to be proved I'm wrong, why would I not want to find out there's a dozen junior clubs in keighley???

Let's just agree to disagree, time may see Sheffield in SL or Barnoldswick being the start of a very successful junior set up in the keighley area or London getting relegated collapsing and London Junior RL still going from strength to strength.

If you want to engage in debate fine, but if you continue to nitpick me from Turin, I will sadly have to put you on ignore because the board isn't for personal spats, it isn't about you or me, it's about debating Rugby League.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they run juniors Ange......

mate I was being flippant.

The idea of Felly jumping up and down because the rangers had been notinally snubbed amused me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mate I was being flippant.

The idea of Felly jumping up and down because the rangers had been notinally snubbed amused me.

I wonder what "Felly" would have made of things if they had run junior sides, and produced Jack Reed only for him to decide to reject the SL academy system and sign for keighley once old enough to play open age!!

I think he'd have been appalled. As it is it must be a proud thing for the Silsden club to be associated with him.

Thanks to Solly for the article, but as I say to him and Keighley you can't run a successful academy to underpin an SL side without numbers of quality kids and the ability to offer them full time employment in competition with other clubs who may covet your best, if they make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what "Felly" would have made of things if they had run junior sides, and produced Jack Reed only for him to decide to reject the SL academy system and sign for keighley once old enough to play open age!!

I think he'd have been appalled. As it is it must be a proud thing for the Silsden club to be associated with him.

Thanks to Solly for the article, but as I say to him and Keighley you can't run a successful academy to underpin an SL side without numbers of quality kids and the ability to offer them full time employment if they make it.

Pete wasn't the kind of guy to go around being appalled. He was too busy enjoying life. He liked beer so he bought a brewery in Bradford. He liked pubs so he bought the cock and bottle also in Bradford. He did a lot of work for the Spanish government's aerospace industry. In gratitude they gave him a Piccasso drawing. He used it to cover a damp patch up in his office. There was a burglary at his gaff once. the burglars nicked all the computers from his office and left the Piccasso.

He was a kind, generous, funny, extremely clever man, who loved Steeton and Silsden, loved Rugby League and loved life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He liked pubs so he bought the cock and bottle also in Bradford.

Was that the one on the right after you cross Leeds Road from coming down Wakefield Road and start going up towards Bolton Road?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was that the one on the right after you cross Leeds Road from coming down Wakefield Road and start going up towards Bolton Road?

sounds like it. It was near the cathedral

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds like it. It was near the cathedral

I once went in when there was a big sign saying "no travellers" which I thought discriminatory, but the guy running it that day whom I asked about it (must be about 1988) explained his view of why they do that, and I took the point...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once went in when there was a big sign saying "no travellers" which I thought discriminatory, but the guy running it that day whom I asked about it (must be about 1988) explained his view of why they do that, and I took the point...

Pete transformed it into a temple of real ale. He even had hand pulled lager.

He lost a packet on the project, but I think he considered it worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what "Felly" would have made of things if they had run junior sides, and produced Jack Reed only for him to decide to reject the SL academy system and sign for keighley once old enough to play open age!!

I think he'd have been appalled. As it is it must be a proud thing for the Silsden club to be associated with him.

Thanks to Solly for the article, but as I say to him and Keighley you can't run a successful academy to underpin an SL side without numbers of quality kids and the ability to offer them full time employment in competition with other clubs who may covet your best, if they make it.

I get that but we were talking about whether Keighley Albion are the sum total of rugby league in the Keighley area, clearly they aren't. There are families in and around the area with a rugby league background. We were also talking about a hypothetical Keighley SL that might have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. Don't tell me....I know..... It's me :lol:

I'm always happy to be corrected because we can get to the truth of matters. I'm always happy to thank people for corrections and I like to take a punt on things but if wrong I can learn from them. But your position never ever changes and you accept nothing in our debates.

All we end up with is you hanging on my shoulder trying to prove me wrong about any little thing you can, the site is about debating RL matters. We fundamentally disagree on the idea of "bottom up development" and how in this country clubs can grow from amateurs to SL sides. You say It can happen yet it took me months to get you to set it out. It didn't wash with me so it was time to agree to disagree.

Same with London, I maintain they are important to RL in line with other commentators and events, you argue if they dissapeared tommorrow it would not matter. Let's agree to disagree.

Same with Crusaders, you went mad about that episode and maintained the RFL were mad and wrong. I saw it a different way completely. lets agree to disagree.

You say Sheffield can be an SL club. i say they can't in current circumstances. Let's agree to disagree.

What's happening is we aren't debating anything sensibly (regardless of who is right or wrong) you just hang on my shoulder grasping anything you can to prove me wrong? Most (no ALL) of the time it has nothing really to do with the point of the debate.

I say for instance keighley have too small a junior base to run as an SL club and if they did have any local successes then a big SL club would take that player away. You then try to prove me wrong by saying there's two little kids teams in Barnoldswick and Jack Reed had a game for Silsden. Solly, Jack Reed has never played for keighley mate??

I just do not understand how that proves me wrong? Solly I'm happy to be proved I'm wrong, why would I not want to find out there's a dozen junior clubs in keighley???

Let's just agree to disagree, time may see Sheffield in SL or Barnoldswick being the start of a very successful junior set up in the keighley area or London getting relegated collapsing and London Junior RL still going from strength to strength.

If you want to engage in debate fine, but if you continue to nitpick me from Turin, I will sadly have to put you on ignore because the board isn't for personal spats, it isn't about you or me, it's about debating Rugby League.

There is no personal spat, I just don't see why you feel that you can make inaccurate posts without any form of querying or questioning.

I don't see how the 700 thousand pounds lost by the RFL to the Crusaders fiasco can be swept aside as some kind of "difference of opinion" given that you insisted that Crusaders should be given a berth in SL because they were risk free (since Samuel was paying for them). You were clearly wrong.

Nor did I take months to describe what "my plan for expansion" is. You just have a bad memory and don't remember that I have posted said plan multiple times in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no personal spat, I just don't see why you feel that you can make inaccurate posts without any form of querying or questioning.

I don't see how the 700 thousand pounds lost by the RFL to the Crusaders fiasco can be swept aside as some kind of "difference of opinion" given that you insisted that Crusaders should be given a berth in SL because they were risk free (since Samuel was paying for them). You were clearly wrong.

Nor did I take months to describe what "my plan for expansion" is. You just have a bad memory and don't remember that I have posted said plan multiple times in the past.

Has that 700 grand been lost? I thought it was tied up in the Racecourse Ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has that 700 grand been lost? I thought it was tied up in the Racecourse Ground.

If it isn't lost where is it?

Under the seats?

The RFL paid out that cash and now doesn't have it and has no prospect of getting it back. That's lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it isn't lost where is it?

Under the seats?

The RFL paid out that cash and now doesn't have it and has no prospect of getting it back. That's lost.

Do the RFL not own a £700k chunk of the Racecourse Ground then?

(Genuine question, I really don't know.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no personal spat, I just don't see why you feel that you can make inaccurate posts without any form of querying or questioning.

I don't see how the 700 thousand pounds lost by the RFL to the Crusaders fiasco can be swept aside as some kind of "difference of opinion" given that you insisted that Crusaders should be given a berth in SL because they were risk free (since Samuel was paying for them). You were clearly wrong.

Nor did I take months to describe what "my plan for expansion" is. You just have a bad memory and don't remember that I have posted said plan multiple times in the past.

You just cannot grasp it can you.

You really can't.

What am I supposed to do now?

Re-list all the wishful thinking rubbish you have come out with???

Then you have a go back

and then I have a go back.

FFS :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the RFL not own a £700k chunk of the Racecourse Ground then?

(Genuine question, I really don't know.)

No, they have debts secured against the ground, unfortunately so do many other organisations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just cannot grasp it can you.

You really can't.

What am I supposed to do now?

Re-list all the wishful thinking rubbish you have come out with???

Then you have a go back

and then I have a go back.

FFS :rolleyes:

I don't recall making any predictions that have been proven wrong. You brought up the idea that I regularly get things wrong (unspecified things at that). Mostly on the basis that you sometimes misunderstand what I say e.g. I didn't claim that there was a dozen junior clubs in Keighley just that you were understating how much RL exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they have debts secured against the ground, unfortunately so do many other organisations.

So yes then... If its secured against the ground it isn't really lost is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017