Archived

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

foozler

Oldham

403 posts in this topic

I know that but why do you need to add unnecessary and untrue facts like "there were no fans"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. They do but

2. They also need to engaged with emerging talent from around the country.

1. They DO????????? Hurrah I win :lol:

2. I never ever said clubs did not have to do that that's not the point in question.

I posted about Wigan and Widnes reaching out to Wales only yesterday. Do your research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I know that

2. but why do you need to add unnecessary and untrue facts like "there were no fans"?

1. Good I've driven the point hone I win :lol:

2. Why do you need to talk rubbish? Bored in Turin.

Try to stop this "You do this" "you do that" rubbish. it makes the debate personal.

Try to stop this now the thread is about Oldham.

Agree to disagree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Good I've driven the point hone I win :lol:

2. Why do you need to talk rubbish? Bored in Turin.

Try to stop this "You do this" "you do that" rubbish. it makes the debate personal.

Try to stop this now the thread is about Oldham.

Agree to disagree

Rubbish is that Keighley had no fans. They most certainly did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They certainly didn't have few fans. The terraces were full.

I was on them. the terraces were only full for the odd game and the terraces were small.

In relation to what you need for Superleague they had too few fans.

Did I say "few" instead of "too few" Of dear me my bad.

Now what is the ppint of this particular exchange other than you waste some time in Turin poking me with a stick??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rubbish is that Keighley had no fans. They most certainly did.

In SL terms "NO FANS to speak of"

I win :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. They DO????????? Hurrah I win :lol:

2. I never ever said clubs did not have to do that that's not the point in question.

I posted about Wigan and Widnes reaching out to Wales only yesterday. Do your research.

Yeah but you also post that the two Hull sides need to merge because there aren't enough youth players in Hull to support two sides. Both Hull sides have signed youth players from Scotland. They don't need to restrict themselves to the Hull area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are the one trying to make it personal.

18 pointless posts were heading for a record and not advancing the debate, which should be about Oldham, one iota.

Agree to disagree Solly, surely you get the point now???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was on them. the terraces were only full for the odd game and the terraces were small.

In relation to what you need for Superleague they had too few fans.

Did I say "few" instead of "too few" Of dear me my bad.

Now what is the ppint of this particular exchange other than you waste some time in Turin poking me with a stick??

The average attendance at Cougar Park was higher than the SL average. That's hardly too few. It was twice what Broncos get now and more than Crusaders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but you also post that the two Hull sides need to merge

Nope wrong.

Your now making it up.

I said two SL clubs in Hull isn't working.

£500K a year loses at HKR losses at Hull.

I do research, you make stuff up and pin it on me.

I win again because I'm concentrating on facts not having a spat :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just copy / paste this for the next Hull thread then. "Parky says that juniors aren't a merger issue in Hull".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The average attendance at Cougar Park was higher than the SL average.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Figures please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just copy / paste this for the next Hull thread then. "Parky says that juniors aren't a merger issue in Hull".

Boy you've twisted that round into a stupid nonsense,

MODS HELP ME - LOCK THIS THREAD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they havent lost their £700k then. Lovely stuff.

(Yet) ;)

If were looking for monetary losses of great magnitude we will find tens of millions completely wasted by M62 clubs who have taken such money from SKY and squandered the lot failing in Superleague. Now that's a scandal.

£700K was small beer compared.

The RFL were right to take Samuels money, Moss and Roberts money and put in themselves to keep Wales going in SL.

It's sad that the game could not find enough money (maybe more should have gone to Wales from the SKY pot) to keep a Welsh SL club going, but there is a legacy.

More kids started playing, some signed on at SL clubs and still will do. two championship clubs have emerged and hopefully their juniors under the guidance of Wigan (and Widnes) will keep the pot boiling.

The idea take in isolation that the RFL just "wasted" £700K is simplistic biased nonsense....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can you 2 swop phone numbers please :lol:

Please don't give him my phone number Dave.........

Unless he's kindly calling to agree to disagree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time of the first SL, Saints were on around 6,000 averages and Wigan around 10,000. The two towns are about 6 miles apart. By your theories this would have produced a merged team with an attendance of 15 to 16,000.

Those are not my theories.

It's a stupid and transparent trick to attribute an argument to me that I do not and never have held then argue against it.

I agree with Lyndsay when he said "there were too many clubs chasing too few resources". Got it now???

Forget "mergers" that was his suggestion as a way round the problem. The clubs said no 17 years ago so again forget mergers and deal with the debate don't twist it.

Wigan and saints were two of the biggest clubs with loads of fans, loads of local juniors, and money men prepared to take them on so these two clubs had the resources to be two of the first picks for Superleague.

It really is very very silly to suggest saints and wigan should have merged in the mid nineties. Good gawd, they were very successful before SL and have been since.

It's very hard to debate with you when you come up with contrived nonsenses like this.

let's try it with you........

You say at the time of superleague big city Bradford could only attract 5,000 fans despite being in the famous old Odsal ground in a city of 400,000 people. Keighley were rapidly growing to the same size and in Division Two at that. they had shown in the cup how they could mix it with the big boys and their marketing was second to none.

By "your theories" which are proven because odsal had to be sold and bradford went bust, the Bulls should have left odsal and merged with keighley. Clearly the keighley marketing dream team would have quadrupled Bradford's 5,000 and continued to grow the "Pennine Cougars" brand. After all the club was planning to move into markets in north yorkshire, north lancashire and they also had the large area of north Bradford to expose to Cougarmania.

Demolish the old condemned stand, turn the pitch around and utilise the cricket field and Bob Sherunkle.

25,000 crowds and success that would still be rolling on today........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are confusing todays Wigan with yesterdays Wigan.

Wigan have been a massive RL club for many many many years and going back before the war.

I first saw them in the cup final 1965

I last saw them in the Superleague semi final.

It's the most illogical, silly and contrived nonsense that Wigan were ever a small club that needed to merge.

For once have the good grace to acccept your wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If were looking for monetary losses of great magnitude we will find tens of millions completely wasted by M62 clubs who have taken such money from SKY and squandered the lot failing in Superleague. Now that's a scandal.

£700K was small beer compared.

The RFL were right to take Samuels money, Moss and Roberts money and put in themselves to keep Wales going in SL.

It's sad that the game could not find enough money (maybe more should have gone to Wales from the SKY pot) to keep a Welsh SL club going, but there is a legacy.

More kids started playing, some signed on at SL clubs and still will do. two championship clubs have emerged and hopefully their juniors under the guidance of Wigan (and Widnes) will keep the pot boiling.

The idea take in isolation that the RFL just "wasted" £700K is simplistic biased nonsense....

M62 clubs may sometimes have squandered Sky TV money but they did, at least, earn it. The RFL sell the TV rights to the club games (which the clubs have agreed to) and then divide the cash up. It is not the RFL's money, they merely safeguard it for the clubs.

The difference is that Crusaders wasted money that they did not earn and had to come from other sources. This tends to mean cutbacks in other areas such as community development officers. In the meantime the open age game in Wales has gone backwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. The only difference between the game of the past and the game of today is the Sky money.

2. All the current success of Leeds is due to the influx of that money and rich entrepreneurs.

3. You think that contraction and the loss of teams is progress. I beg to differ.

4. You think that to lose whole areas from the game of RL due to killing clubs because of greed and exclusion is great so long as the 10 or twelve you want at the trough survive.

5. I think there is another way and that is expansion of SL not contraction. I and others who share this view or who support the admission of some of the CC teams to an expanded top division.

6. Lyndsay is not some messiah

7. Beacuse a team is flying high at some point, that does not mean it will always be that way, ask Bradford or indeed Leeds before Caddick.

1. That's true and SKY money can make big clubs bigger becuase it provides adequate additional investment to do that.

It's a fact proven by events that if you give SKY money to small clubs they fail becuase the SKY money alone won't make them Superleague clubs. Clubs need fans, players and their own money in adequate amounts before the SKY money can be effective investment.

This is why Wigan and saints and Wire can use the SKY money to grow, yet all Oldham (LOOKEY HERE we're back on track) or keighley could do with the SKY money is waste it......

2. TOTALLY WRONG Leeds had five figure crowds depsite not winning anything, their fanbase was the bedrock of their success then hetheringtons junior development took that on. They don't need propping up by Caddick. Your totally wrong and it's hard to debate with you when you pressent no real facts, and create falsehoods.

3. Totally false I don't propose the loss of teams.

I was at the Hunslet meeting when we nearly went, Bramley went this year I was at the last game before York went, Rochdale went etc etc.

What do you propose - give these clubs SKY money REALLY????

Rather than tell you what you thing I am courteous enough to ASK.

4. Again ASK and don't be so rude.

I think the game has to deliver a self sustaining elite league for the following reasons

a. To survive as a professional game

b. To deliver the SKY contract

That may be hard on second tier teams but it has been hard on them since the divisional split in 1973.

Since 1973 exclusion has not led to "losing whole areas of the game".

Since 1996 it hasn't either. You seem to confuse "the game" with semi pro clubs.

the only club to be lost apart from expansion clubs is Bramley, well they play RL in the schools, Stanningley are a mega club that produces players and the good people of West leeds get themselves off to headingley.

Bramleys dissapearance hasn't lost the area to the game. How can you expect me to debate with you with cointrived nonsenses like this???

5. Greed?? Trough??? What are yo on about? the game has to deliver an Elite league to get £90M - live with it for without is there is disaster. You and your mates think that we can return to the past, we can't if we waste the SKY money on all inclusiveness the game will be at it's lowest ebb ever.

6. Messiah??? Don't be stupid, just accept he said too many clubs were chasing too few resources. He was right, since that has been partly addressed the game has more fans, has expanded around the country and is played professionally, and attracts a big fat SKY contract.

I'm loving it......

7. I asked Bradford and they say they are a massive club traceable back to the 1860's. They've had some downs but have always been big enough to pick themselves up and rise again. last time they did this they ended up being the most successful club in Superleagues first decade.

I then asked leeds and again traceable right back to victorian days, always been heavily supported, never been out of the top league and the most successful club by far of Superleague second decade.

BUT (just watch what i do here) OLDHAM are not as big as these clubs and they consequently cannot survive setbacks the same way Leeds and bradford can. They cannot and di not make use of the SKY money because it wasn't enough to make a small club big.

It's not enough to make cas a big club or Salford a big club or HKR a big club yet they are IN superleague.

Any idea to increase the size of superleague and stretch the SKY money further would be an economic catastrophe.

Don't you get this??

Come on lets deal with one point at a time.

Divvying up SKY money 14 ways has led to several SL clubs being unable to compete on the field, a couple of clubs have to rely on private money to survive, and about £8,000,000 in losses have occured.

So you think that SL should fly in the face of this and expand.

Do me the favour of explaining exactly how this will work.

1. Which clubs? (let's go for 16)

2. How will the money divvy up??

3. How will the 16 club competition reduce losses

4. How will it be more competetive.

Explain to me your alternative plan and how it will work in detail please...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

M62 clubs may sometimes have squandered Sky TV money but they did, at least, earn it.

M62 clubs "earnt" the money did they?

Certainly the Leeds, Bradford, Saints, Warringtons, Wigans Hulls, Catalans etc, help the RFL earn the money by providing quality teams and quality action.

The bottom clubs over the years who failed to entertain, failed to compate, went bust and did nothing with the SKY investment to improve the product did not in any way "earn" their money.

I completely disagree with you.

A string of clubs wasted a million a year for seventeen years and counting............

Including OLDHAM ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was only around 800k when Oldham were in SL. The club was under constant pressure to upgrade their facilities, eventually forcing them to sell cheap on a promise from the council and move to the unaffordable Boundary Park. It was the demise of the club. After relegation to the bottom division we were then only allowed back into the fold if we played without any money from the governing body whatsoever. I get the feeling that if Sky pulled out of RL there would only be about three or four SL clubs which would survive and the strongest teams would emerge from the deprived Championship divisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was only around 800k when Oldham were in SL. The club was under constant pressure to upgrade their facilities, eventually forcing them to sell cheap on a promise from the council and move to the unaffordable Boundary Park. It was the demise of the club. After relegation to the bottom division we were then only allowed back into the fold if we played without any money from the governing body whatsoever. I get the feeling that if Sky pulled out of RL there would only be about three or four SL clubs which would survive and the strongest teams would emerge from the deprived Championship divisions.

the club had been going down the nick for decades: what you are decribing is the last chapter in its demise. Surely the fact thsat the club was in thre position you describe is evidence of that, rather thsna it being the cause itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

M62 clubs may sometimes have squandered Sky TV money but they did, at least, earn it.

Do your research.

Several years ago Stevo who works for SKY and knows more than you do said it's a crime that some clubs don't spend up to the cap and don't compete. So they hardly "earn" the SKY money they pinch it.

After 17 years clubs are still coming into SL and not paying their way and fulfilling their part of the contract.

This is why I supported Bradford who spent full cap as long as they could.

As for Crusaders your la la fingers in the ears not listening.

The RFL were right to put as much money into wales as they could, the game desperately needs new areas and new countries at international level. they were desperate BUT understandable actions and all you do is put the boot in.

Oh and has the "open age game gone backwards" in Wales????

Best not boot out London then eh? Don't want things going backwards there do we.

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