Archived

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

saints10coach

Oldham /Salford

836 posts in this topic

so nothing as changed then?

Well yes - as had been identified, the top level now has much higher. Previously the top 12 or so averaged a hell of a lot lower than now.

The debate seems to be around whether the next 10 clubs have seen big drops, which is what was claimed by one and dismissed by another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a 3 year wait after each unsuccessful attempt.

It still a drawbridge, its still down and all clubs clearly know what they have to do to cross it. Of course, if a club does not get an SL licence, it know what it has to do to get one, and can spend the next three years getting ist act together. Our game has for so long been criticised by the fans for being too short term in outlook. That has now been remedied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes - as had been identified, the top level now has much higher. Previously the top 12 or so averaged a hell of a lot lower than now.

The debate seems to be around whether the next 10 clubs have seen big drops, which is what was claimed by one and dismissed by another.

which is par for the course in every RL deabate.....one says one thing...some one says another...and we all end up talking about GB.......lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes - as had been identified, the top level now has much higher. Previously the top 12 or so averaged a hell of a lot lower than now.

The debate seems to be around whether the next 10 clubs have seen big drops, which is what was claimed by one and dismissed by another.

Just fuels my argument for the greed of SL, not just taking all the sponsorship money, but also stealing the crowds from the ones that can't afford to advertise because they get nowt from the league. And nothing to sell to potential spectators because it will be at least 3 years before we can play against the top clubs and only then if they let us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just fuels my argument for the greed of SL, not just taking all the sponsorship money, but also stealing the crowds from the ones that can't afford to advertise because they get nowt from the league. And nothing to sell to potential spectators because it will be at least 3 years before we can play against the top clubs and only then if they let us.

it doesnt really fuel or even support your argument unless you shoehorn the point in to make it fit your argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it doesnt really fuel or even support your argument unless you shoehorn the point in to make it fit your argument.

Do you mean like the way you did with your argument about the top 12 teams earlier. The point I am most interested in is Oldham's crowds have gone from around 3000 when in the lower divisions to around 500. Not all of the reasons for this can be blamed on the club or the town. If you are looking to see if there is still interest in the sport in this town, take a look at the two hottest thread titles on this forum in the last few weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It still a drawbridge, its still down and all clubs clearly know what they have to do to cross it. Of course, if a club does not get an SL licence, it know what it has to do to get one, and can spend the next three years getting ist act together. Our game has for so long been criticised by the fans for being too short term in outlook. That has now been remedied.

It's only a half opened one way bridge though. They didn't send Bradford back across it when they failed to meet the financial criteria of solvency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean like the way you did with your argument about the top 12 teams earlier. The point I am most interested in is Oldham's crowds have gone from around 3000 when in the lower divisions to around 500. Not all of the reasons for this can be blamed on the club or the town. If you are looking to see if there is still interest in the sport in this town, take a look at the two hottest thread titles on this forum in the last few weeks.

I would argue that unlike you I have no pre-determined opinion on this topic. I genuinely had no idea whether the crowds were as good in the lower divisions as you claimed - the evidence from a source here who is normally reliable suggests your figures were out.

I prefer to base my opinions on actual figures, not what are in my head. Again, I can't make my mind up as the two sources here state conflicting things, and I have no source myself.

If the lower divisions stayed similar, and the higher division doubled, I'm not sure that how is evidence of greed within SL or any crowd stealing. If your numbers were right about crowds halving in lower divisions then this could be a fair assertion.

Oldham's stature in the game is low now, it should be compared to a club who's stature was low at the time, otherwise it's not a like-for-like comparison.

On the thread point, again, that is not really evidence, the vast majority of people are not Oldham fans on the threads, they are arguing about franchising/P&R and so on.

I find this a similar debate to the Cumbria point. If there was enough interest (and this includes from fans, investors, councils, sponsors) then they would be up where they supposedly belong, because let's be honest with the current setup the competition isn;t that high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave T I have no pre-determined opinion. I am posting on this thread headed Oldham/Salford about Oldham. Yes you are quite right Oldham's standing in the game at the moment is low. It has been low in the past, but the level of attendance at the clubs games has never been as low. Whilst not winning a major trophy since I have been supporting the club. Oldham are still the eighth most successful team in Rugby League. Since going bust in 1996 and reforming, we have managed to get to six finals. There is an underlying interest in the sport in the town of Oldham. But it is being suppressed by the none level playing field we have to contend with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's only a half opened one way bridge though. They didn't send Bradford back across it when they failed to meet the financial criteria of solvency.

They could have done, though, however daft that would have been,. Anyway, I thought you were talking about barriers to entry not barriers to exit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is being suppressed by the none level playing field we have to contend with.

Do you ever get that feeling of deja vu? :) What is suppressing the club?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It still a drawbridge, its still down and all clubs clearly know what they have to do to cross it. Of course, if a club does not get an SL licence, it know what it has to do to get one, and can spend the next three years getting ist act together. Our game has for so long been criticised by the fans for being too short term in outlook. That has now been remedied.

The drawbridge could be up or down and we could have half a dozen clubs that fulfilled all the criteria for entry but it still would come down to would they be allowed in and a current SL club relegated. If your club was fifth or sixth best of those clubs that's at least 15 to 18 years wait providing SLE allowed anyone in!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave T I have no pre-determined opinion. I am posting on this thread headed Oldham/Salford about Oldham. Yes you are quite right Oldham's standing in the game at the moment is low. It has been low in the past, but the level of attendance at the clubs games has never been as low. Whilst not winning a major trophy since I have been supporting the club. Oldham are still the eighth most successful team in Rugby League. Since going bust in 1996 and reforming, we have managed to get to six finals. There is an underlying interest in the sport in the town of Oldham. But it is being suppressed by the none level playing field we have to contend with.

Fair enough mate, let's see what happens this coming season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compare your researched facts with today. Not one team in the Championship is getting 2,800. Any of the third tier clubs would be proud of getting 788. I also notice Oldham being mentioned twice with averages of 3,149. Today's average for the same club is around the 500 mark. What a success the advent of SL has made for our sport.

No, lets compare the actual figures compared to the figures you claimed, you were way off beam, did you just make the figure up?

You completely wrongly claimed that MANY clubs got between 3k - 4k pre SL, unless your definition of many is 0, 1 or 2, which is it? You perhaps should have said, "in the period mentioned occasionally the odd team would get just over 3k if we were lucky"

Now here are the crucial figures:

How many people attended professional RL games in 2011, 1,884,398 how many attended in 93/94 (2 division), 1,679,897.

Since 1994 up to 2011 overall attendances at pro RL games have INCREASED by 164,501

In the season previous in the 90s that I used for comparison earlier (because they had 3 divisions) 92/93, the aggregate attendances were 1,451,372. Now that means comparing 2011 with the last pre SL 3 division competition there is now a massive INCREASE OF 393,026

So all this failure has increased the number of people attending RL games massively

I'll leave you to put 2 + 2 together and work out which change had the biggest effect of decreasing gates. The clues are there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It still a drawbridge, its still down and all clubs clearly know what they have to do to cross it. Of course, if a club does not get an SL licence, it know what it has to do to get one, and can spend the next three years getting ist act together. Our game has for so long been criticised by the fans for being too short term in outlook. That has now been remedied.

Thats a lie as the rules change as they go along. For instance Crusaders were never anywhere near the minimum standards required and the RFL did everything including helping them with dodgy visas. Also the RFL announced in March 31 2011 that Halifax met the minimum standards required for entry in to SL. Yet a couple of months later they were not. And there is noway on earth that Bradford Bulls met the minimum requirements and its unlikely Cas, Salford or London did at that time. Which team has ever been kicked out of SL during the licence phrase? And yet how many clubs have gone into administration? So your comment about clubs knowing what they have to do to get in to SL is wrong. The RFL dont have the balls to kick a poor standard team(s) out. On the other side of the coin under the current structure no championship team is ready for SL as most of the SL clubs are not or else they wouldnt be so many in trouble and looking to save money even though it damages the game in other areas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this failure has increased the number of people attending RL games massively

:lol: nice one.

But they'll still repeat the same myths tomorrow and next week and next year.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a lie.......

Steady boy....

Thank you for the last post you sent to me. Did you reply to mine - I said......

Your opening to the post was disappointing, average attendances in the top division were 5500 in 1995 they are approaching 10,000 now.

SL has in it's areas attracted a lot more kids to play in the first place there are far more junior clubs in Leeds now.

The number and scale of money men and the money they put in is far in excess of pre-1996 Hughes, O'Connor, Fulton, Davey, Hudgell - the latter even spoke about how much he puts in. Those sums never went in in the semi pro day.

If you believe that Superleague has not made these achievements then what's the point of us going any further with a discussion.

I enjoyed the rest of your post, and will have another read, but why the denials???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree their is a big trap door for financial failure. But shouldn't P and R come back if they find a way to make it financially safe?

Sorry it's taken a while to answer, but I've been a bit busy today.

That's a big "if", but if it can be made financially safe, then yes, I'd love to see P&R return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry it's taken a while to answer, but I've been a bit busy today.

That's a big "if", but if it can be made financially safe, then yes, I'd love to see P&R return.

I don't think many are against it, I think a lot are against the consequences of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your opening to the post was disappointing, average attendances in the top division were 5500 in 1995 they are approaching 10,000 now.

First of all many clubs dont put out accurate crowd attendances- remember Halifax v Batley for example? And I would hope crowds have improved for various reasons like better stadiums for the family, Clubs have been full time both on and off the field and should have been marketing themselves way better than in the old part time days of 1995. It wasnt until 1996 that SL clubs switched to being full time. But crowds only tell half the story anyway. You can have crowds of 10,000 but if only 7000 paid for example then the money coming in is way less. But a club like Sheffield who have low crowds can maybe match bigger clubs due to the sponsors they have. Having a bigger crowd does not actually mean you have more money than a club who has lower average gate.

SL has in it's areas attracted a lot more kids to play in the first place there are far more junior clubs in Leeds now.

How do you know? From my experience with the people I played with at school and later at amateur level etc the vast majority started playing because of family, friends or a development officer who went in to schools and got them wanting to play. I honestly dont know one person that started playing because of watching SL. Thats not saying there is not anybody but I feel your comment that loads of kids started playing because of SL is way off line.

The number and scale of money men and the money they put in is far in excess of pre-1996 Hughes, O'Connor, Fulton, Davey, Hudgell - the latter even spoke about how much he puts in. Those sums never went in in the semi pro day.

There were a number of money men who put a lot of money in back then. People like David Brook and Tony Gartland at Halifax, Maurice Lindsay at Wigan, John Wilkinson put loads of cash in at Salford well before SL. There was others back then as well. And you also need to remember that back in the 80s and 90s the value of things was way less than today. Inflation has seen a big increase in the cost and investment of things. You look at how much the top Soccer or RUgby player earnt back in 1995 compared to know. You look at the investment in any sport now compared to 1995 its massive. You cant really compare what people invested in pre 1995 to now really. You also have to remember that many investors back in 1995 didnt need to invest a lot in a part time league to get success or even compete. Nowadays its way different with a fulltime League the cost of having not just players but backrrom staff etc is way more than back then.

If you believe that Superleague has not made these achievements then what's the point of us going any further with a discussion.

I enjoyed the rest of your post, and will have another read, but why the denials???

Denials? SL is a good comp but it and its members as well as the RFL have some major flaws and most of the problems have been self inflicted which in turn has hurt other parts of the game with some very poor decisions. You think SL is the best thing. I dont because to me its a competition that has no solid foundation with clubs often running up debts they cant cope with. The decisions made are ones that are for the benefit of the clubs but not the game as a whole. The money wasted at Bradford, Crusaders, London, Paris etc by the RFL should in my opinion been spent on developing the Grassroots of the sport not trying to prop up badly run clubs or trying to expand the game on silly dreams with no substance. Professional RL is not the most important part of the game and should not get so much money from the governing body. The amount of TV money, sponsors, investors as well as other monies should be what the clubs use and abuse. The money the RFL have should be used on developing the Grassroots should be way more than what it has and still is using. Invest in the grassroots would see more young players playing the game, thus more chance of better and deeper quality of players at the Pro game in time. Developing the grassroots and getting young people involved would often see them making the effort to watch games live. Investing in the Grassroots ad getting more young people involved would also open up more money coming in to the game via grants, funding and sponsorship etc. Whilst SL has made some big strides forwards and the standards obviously have risen since 1995 or pre SL days, there are other areas of the game where SL has damaged them and I feel in the last couple of years the overall standard of Sl is not so good as previously in an effort to even out a comp. A number of SL teams are worse than Championship ran clubs both on and off the field and yet nothing really has been done to address that.

Championship clubs can't afford to run academies in the hope they pick up a Zac Hardaker once a flood.

Halifax make a small profit and still run academy teams. Sheffield also made a small profit and achieve to run academy teams. In Halifax case its true the Supporters trust put in around 30-40,000 to cover it with the rest sponsors and directors but they can still achieve this and for Halifax they have a very good and strong local scene with Siddal, Elland, Ovenden, Greetland, King Cross Park etc churning out many youngsters playing at academy level for both Halifax and a host of SL teams.

We are the only team in the championship this season to use all the salary cap up

Think you will find Halifax spend up to the Cap as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. First of all many clubs dont put out accurate crowd attendances. Having a bigger crowd does not actually mean you have more money than a club who has lower average gate.

2. I honestly dont know one person that started playing because of watching SL.

3. There were a number of money men who put a lot of money in back then. you also need to remember that back in the 80s and 90s the value of things was way less than today. Inflation has seen a big increase in the cost and investment of things.

1. Do you really want me to believe the massive upturn in gates is all lies and free tickets??

2. Yorkshire amateurs juniors were decimated by half their kids going off to play for Harehills Pigeons on the back of Leeds Rhinos success. However it's not hard to work out why so many kids play in SL areas and so few in CC areas is it. After all SL remains the part of the game that attracts kids. Exactly how the process comes about is complicated and easy to parody and sneer at (not by you) but SL areas have the biggest number of kids playing, and kids are not blind to who the top teams are.

3. No, inflation is another weak excuse. You need to remember todays money men are underpinning £4-5M turnovers. Again todays money men in SL put far far more in than their equivalents in the old days.

My position is SL attracts more kids to play, more fans to watch and more people to invest. It's a success

If your position is kids are blind to Superleague, all the new fans are on freebies or are invented, and no more private money goes to SL today because I have not taken into account inflation then your post really does you no favours, and it starts to be a post that looks like it comes from someone who resents Superleague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just fuels my argument for the greed of SL, not just taking all the sponsorship money, but also stealing the crowds from the ones that can't afford to advertise because they get nowt from the league. And nothing to sell to potential spectators because it will be at least 3 years before we can play against the top clubs and only then if they let us.

I've every sympathy with you.

I've also every sympathy with your argument that you are being tied up by Superleague.

Leeds nicked every fan in Leeds they could, every decent player, and every sponsor/advertisor.

They killed rather than loved their neighbours.

But that process started in 1973 when they split to two divisions, continued when the split to three in the eighties and continued to when they formed superleague, now it's being finished off by merger in the form of tying CC clubs to act as "A" teams.

I do not in any way subscribe to the idea that Superleague is open to all and that all clubs simply "know what they have to do" to get in. I think that's an unfair thing to say to championship fans with respect to all.

I do subscribe to your idea it's not a level playing field, and it's not when all the SKY contract goes to less than half the clubs.

But you can't get away with the "greed" argument unless you believe that on being offered £90,000,000 to stage an elite professional league of a limited amount of clubs who would share all that money with none left over for others, the RFL should have said...

NO - "we will only take you money if we can share it amongst all our member clubs evenly".

Which would have meant no SKY money, stay as semi pro and face the consequences. Is that what you would have wanted for the game??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Do you really want me to believe the massive upturn in gates is all lies and free tickets??

2. Yorkshire amateurs juniors were decimated by half their kids going off to play for Harehills Pigeons on the back of Leeds Rhinos success. However it's not hard to work out why so many kids play in SL areas and so few in CC areas is it. After all SL remains the part of the game that attracts kids. Exactly how the process comes about is complicated and easy to parody and sneer at (not by you) but SL areas have the biggest number of kids playing, and kids are not blind to who the top teams are.

3. No, inflation is another weak excuse. You need to remember todays money men are underpinning £4-5M turnovers. Again todays money men in SL put far far more in than their equivalents in the old days.

My position is SL attracts more kids to play, more fans to watch and more people to invest. It's a success

If your position is kids are blind to Superleague, all the new fans are on freebies or are invented, and no more private money goes to SL today because I have not taken into account inflation then your post really does you no favours, and it starts to be a post that looks like it comes from someone who resents Superleague.

You are very selective and pick on points and then go and make up claims about what somebody has said. I have never said the upturn in gates is based solely on lies and free tickets. I said you cant base an argument on that as its not very accurate. Crowds have increased but by how much is questionable.

SL is attractive but Halifax for example doesnt have a SL club and many of the lads dont watch SL and many dont even watch Halifax as often they have a game on Sunday anyway. And Halifax has always had a strong amateur base which was developed by people like Dilwyn Lewis who was going into schools many many years ago. And dont try and say that I said no kids are ever attracted to playing because of SL. I have never said that.

You dont think the money men of yesterday didnt put millions in? Tony Gartland did at Halifax as did David Brook. Maurice Lindsay pumped over a million as well. But back then the amount these people invested didnt need to be so much as it was still a part time comp and the need to improve stadiums wasnt there.

If you are going to keep making up things and make claims that I have said my position is kids are blind to Superleague, all the new fans are on freebies or are invented, and no more private money goes to SL today because I have not taken into account inflation then I wont bother posting with you. You have your agenda and twist peoples words.You seem to feel SL is the best thing and is responsible for everything good in the game. Its not good at all and my resentment at SL is nothing actually to do with SL v CHampionship. My resentment is that a hell of alot of RFL money has been wasted on SL clubs and pushing expansion clubs in when no need. The systems in place to develop youngsters to be better and also to grow the game at grassroots is not good enough. That time, effort and money should be going in to grassroots level rugby and developing youngsters. Grassroots and youth rugby is the key for our game to progress and is the foundation the Pro game and Internationals is based on. Instead the RFL wastes money on the Pro game on short term thinking and fixes. The Pro game after so many years even before being fulltime should be in a position where it supports itself and not keep looking to the RFL for more and more handouts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are very selective and pick on points and then go and make up claims about what somebody has said. I have never said the upturn in gates is based solely on lies and free tickets. I said you cant base an argument on that as its not very accurate. Crowds have increased but by how much is questionable.

SL is attractive but Halifax for example doesnt have a SL club and many of the lads dont watch SL and many dont even watch Halifax as often they have a game on Sunday anyway. And Halifax has always had a strong amateur base which was developed by people like Dilwyn Lewis who was going into schools many many years ago. And dont try and say that I said no kids are ever attracted to playing because of SL. I have never said that.

You dont think the money men of yesterday didnt put millions in? Tony Gartland did at Halifax as did David Brook. Maurice Lindsay pumped over a million as well. But back then the amount these people invested didnt need to be so much as it was still a part time comp and the need to improve stadiums wasnt there.

If you are going to keep making up things and make claims that I have said my position is kids are blind to Superleague, all the new fans are on freebies or are invented, and no more private money goes to SL today because I have not taken into account inflation then I wont bother posting with you. You have your agenda and twist peoples words.You seem to feel SL is the best thing and is responsible for everything good in the game. Its not good at all and my resentment at SL is nothing actually to do with SL v CHampionship. My resentment is that a hell of alot of RFL money has been wasted on SL clubs and pushing expansion clubs in when no need. The systems in place to develop youngsters to be better and also to grow the game at grassroots is not good enough. That time, effort and money should be going in to grassroots level rugby and developing youngsters. Grassroots and youth rugby is the key for our game to progress and is the foundation the Pro game and Internationals is based on. Instead the RFL wastes money on the Pro game on short term thinking and fixes. The Pro game after so many years even before being fulltime should be in a position where it supports itself and not keep looking to the RFL for more and more handouts.

On the subject of crowds would you care to tell us which clubs are lying about attendances, then explain how they are massaging the figures, are they just adding 10%, 15% 20% to the real figures, do they have turnstiles set to double count, explain how this works. You seem very confident in your claim so you must know what is really going on. I think we should all be told.

Lindsay pumped over a million into Wigan, did he really? Can you show me where and when and how?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of crowds would you care to tell us which clubs are lying about attendances, then explain how they are massaging the figures, are they just adding 10%, 15% 20% to the real figures, do they have turnstiles set to double count, explain how this works. You seem very confident in your claim so you must know what is really going on. I think we should all be told.

Lindsay pumped over a million into Wigan, did he really? Can you show me where and when and how?

I gave you an example with Halifax and Batley regarding crowd figures. Does it matter what percentage? Crowd figures are something that are not 100% as clubs have various means of counting people. Are ALL Season ticket holders counted and if so do All attend every game? Halifax gave away a thousand or more free tickets for the Batley game at the Halifax Show and included them in the crowd figure. You dont think clubs that have done something similar like Bradford have done the same? Its why I dont believe you can base too much of an argument on crowd figures as they are not 100% accurate.

I can only go off memory but Lindsay was with Wigan in the old second division going to Halifax on an old bus and he decided things needed to change at Wigan and so over the years he alongside others like Jack Robinson invested large amounts of Cash to turn things around. You cant tell me Lindsay didnt invest over a million in Wigan over the years that saw them go from Division two to a full time club signing the best players in the world.

I have stated my case and you and your twin Parky can keep going and living in your world that SL is so great and good for the whole game. I cant be bothered responding to people who twist peoples words anymore. Enjoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017