Archived

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

The Daddy

Is it against the laws of the game in this country for the RFL to own and operate a Super League team?

40 posts in this topic

When SLE nearly ended up running Bradford, I think the other clubs voted on the situation. i.e the other clubs are in charge of their own destiny as it were, so if it were against their own rules they could just change the rules surely?

If anyone was going to run Salford (presumably who you had in mind) would it not be SLE and not the RFL who would run them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think its against the law of the land or else SLE would not have been able to run Bradford which was once possibility. And its clear that its not against the Constitutions of SLE neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think at the moment anyone with money is acceptable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The owners only have to be approved as fit and proper by the RFL to allow a club membership of the RFL, Who they are is irrelevant. Becoming a member of SL is based on the membership of the RFL for UK clubs, I think there is a clause regarding European clubs in the articles of membership but I can't be arrised looking it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it would be a conflict of interests though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it would be a conflict of interests though?

Why if all the clubs own it?

They would have no interest in it being unsuccessful and losing money any more than they would their own club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it would be a conflict of interests though?

The over riding interest is that the game has a Superleague to sell to SKY.

Forget "fairness" this is "business". As long as the SL clubs are ok anything is possible within the laws of the land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When SLE nearly ended up running Bradford, I think the other clubs voted on the situation. i.e the other clubs are in charge of their own destiny as it were, so if it were against their own rules they could just change the rules surely?

If anyone was going to run Salford (presumably who you had in mind) would it not be SLE and not the RFL who would run them?

I think that's the question (Daddy to confirm??) - SLE running SL clubs in the absence of an owner. Not sure about Salford though I can see the business sense in ensuring Bradford are preserved for SL but not Salford.

I don’t believe the clubs are still agonising about what to do come 2015 and it seems to me Bradford are an integral part of SL’s plans whilst Salford are not. Fairness?? It’s business.

How it would work though is intriguing. Maybe SLE would appoint a willing local business man to run the club on behalf of SLE at no financial risk to himself, but effectively independently of SLE as his club.

Oh hang on??

I welcome any moves for the RFL or SLE to treat Super league as a single business entity, clearly as individuals the clubs are happy to destroy each other, but when it gets a bit close to home like Bradford then there’s a sudden realisation that to be a successful SL club you need someone to beat but you can’t flog whipping boys for too long as they just die on you and everyone get’s bored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why if all the clubs own it?

They would have no interest in it being unsuccessful and losing money any more than they would their own club.

I think that's correct.

Though the clubs are individual businesses they are no more 'viable' as individual members than the league is, as a whole. If the 'also rans' of the league can't provide meaningful oposition for the best clubs within it, we'll all go to the wall. The league is like a chain: it's as strong as its weakest link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NBA recently took over the running of one of their troubled franchises, New orleans, I think. They stabilised it, found an investor, and sold it on to him making a profit in the process. I guess it was done for the greater good of the NBA and not merely to save that particular franchise.

Given the brand new ground and the size of the Manchester/Salford catchment area, I think it would be a good thing for the RFL to do as regards the Salford club. To completely withdraw from that huge meagpolis would seem not to be in the best interests of the game, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NBA recently took over the running of one of their troubled franchises, New orleans, I think. They stabilised it, found an investor, and sold it on to him making a profit in the process. I guess it was done for the greater good of the NBA and not merely to save that particular franchise.

Given the brand new ground and the size of the Manchester/Salford catchment area, I think it would be a good thing for the RFL to do as regards the Salford club. To completely withdraw from that huge meagpolis would seem not to be in the best interests of the game, in my opinion.

I agree but the problem with any RL team in a city/town where there is one successful footy team is going to be hard to compete and get fans through the gates never mind two successful footy teams. I hate to say it but I think rugby for the city of Manchester is on borrowed time which is a crying shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree but the problem with any RL team in a city/town where there is one successful footy team is going to be hard to compete and get fans through the gates never mind two successful footy teams. I hate to say it but I think rugby for the city of Manchester is on borrowed time which is a crying shame.

How come?

City and United have 115k fans out of a metropolis of a million or so.

Salford have 5.5k

The rest is still to go at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come?

City and United have 115k fans out of a metropolis of a million or so.

Salford have 5.5k

The rest is still to go at.

Good point, has been a poorly run club for a long time and I remember Matt Parrish saying that he thought the club was run poorly and it doesn't matter if you move into a new stadium or not if your house isn't in order and it proved to be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come?

City and United have 115k fans out of a metropolis of a million or so.

Salford have 5.5k

The rest is still to go at.

City and United have 115k fans who go to games, I'd say the proportion of avid followers of the two teams in Salford/Manchester is quite high, presuming that Salford have 900,000 people to go at is stretching it, however it is a valid point that they probably have a lot of untapped potential. To get to 10k you generally need a local population of around 100,000, 10% of the population. That doesn't mean though that if an area has a population 500,000 the support will easily reach 50,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come?

City and United have 115k fans out of a metropolis of a million or so.

Salford have 5.5k

The rest is still to go at.

Those stats can't be taken as they are though. How many of Uniteds 75k are actually from manchester? But then again how many more could united get in if theh had a bigger stadium. The fans won't be the same every game also so that's a factor.

Basically the amount of people within salfords potential fan radius who have paid too watch the two soccer clubs could vary between 50,000 - 300,000. Even if one fan only watches one game at United, that could be an equivalent cost of 3 salford city games which he has chosen not too go to. It would take extensive research to get an accurate amount of what Salford can aim for if they are looking to attract non soccer fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the RFL should own Salford, buy all the best kids over 20 and then put mcbanana in charge of them

It'll save the championship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come?

City and United have 115k fans out of a metropolis of a million or so.

Salford have 5.5k

The rest is still to go at.

City and United attract fans from all over not just Manchester but the north west as well and beyond.

Wigan attract fans not just from Wigan but the north west including Manchester as well.

Of course Salford would aim to pull in local fans first, and of course limited marketing budgets can only go so far.

But the sporting world knows what's going on and who plays what where and they take their pick.

Says here in my Gillette yearbook 10,146 people went to see Salford.v.Catalans at the end of the 2011 season

The return game the following year at Barton attracted 4,220.

It's not Mrs. Williams in Pendlebury and another million like her Salford need in their stadium, she doesn't even know what Rugby League is and likes Tennis anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

City and United attract fans from all over not just Manchester but the north west as well and beyond.

Wigan attract fans not just from Wigan but the north west including Manchester as well.

Of course Salford would aim to pull in local fans first, and of course limited marketing budgets can only go so far.

But the sporting world knows what's going on and who plays what where and they take their pick.

Says here in my Gillette yearbook 10,146 people went to see Salford.v.Catalans at the end of the 2011 season

The return game the following year at Barton attracted 4,220.

It's not Mrs. Williams in Pendlebury and another million like her Salford need in their stadium, she doesn't even know what Rugby League is and likes Tennis anyway.

So, if they need 8,000 to survive and already get 5,500, they only need to attract 2,500 more spectators from the whole of Manchester. Surely that can be done ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if they need 8,000 to survive and already get 5,500, they only need to attract 2,500 more spectators from the whole of Manchester. Surely that can be done ?

HKR only need 2200

Cas only need 3300

Wakefield only need 1800

Fartown only need 3300

Widnes only need 2000

The clubs have all the SKY money and all the best players and are well presented by SKY and the BBC and all have marketing departments.

perhaps they are all badly mismanaged.

perhaps the vast majority of people in this country don't give a flying fig for Rugby League

And we have done brilliantly to get this far

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HKR only need 2200

Cas only need 3300

Wakefield only need 1800

Fartown only need 3300

Widnes only need 2000

The clubs have all the SKY money and all the best players and are well presented by SKY and the BBC and all have marketing departments.

perhaps they are all badly mismanaged.

perhaps the vast majority of people in this country don't give a flying fig for Rugby League

And we have done brilliantly to get this far

What did you get for Christmas, a box full of white flags perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did you get for Christmas, a box full of white flags perhaps.

A half empty glass maybe?

B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did you get for Christmas, a box full of white flags perhaps.

I'm happy Superleague at 14 clubs averages 9431 attendance per club. It's great and puts the game in it's best position since the early sixties.

I'm happy to trumpet the games achievements against the odds, well done RFL well done SL.

The white flags crack is just silly, if you think RL is missing a trick somewhere, then why don't you do something about it? Why don't you campaign for a revival at Oldham, or at Salford.... Why don't you go to Manchester and lead a campaign for the city to embrace RL again like it used to, why don't you go the Red Hall and show them how they have it all wrong?

Tap at your computer telling everyone else what everyone else ought to do because it's simple and easy, and do naff all yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if it wasn't legal, they'd no doubt change the rules to suit anyway.

From a business point of view I get the wisdom of saving Bradford in the way they did in order to tease out a buyer but in my opinion that was a step over the line and in doing so they created a precedent.

If a club's management isn't good enough and clubs spend more than they can afford, that club should be demoted (if it survives that is). I've heard people say that such an act would be unfair on the supporters of the failing club and why should they be penalised? Well! They were happy to go along with the good times; with the good often comes the not so good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017