Archived

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

The Parksider

News on Salford

478 posts in this topic

If the RFL really want a 'Manchester' team in SL then that's absolutely fine. What I don't undertsand is why everybody seems to think a club with over a 100 years of history should give up it's identity and become the Manchester club they want.

Leave us to be Salford in whatever guise. If a Manchester club is a necessity for the RFL then by all means go ahead and create one, just leave us be in the process.

Anyhow, the whole Salford/Manchester debate has been done to death and is slightly off topic. In terms of the potential new investor, it's not just the investing side of things that we will benefit from here. Unfortunately, we've been mismanaged for years. Lots of credit has to go to Wilkinson for keeping us afloat for this long but the eye had been well and truely taken off the ball a good while ago. Our marketing is terrible (lack of funds often cited as the reason for this) communication shoddy at best and overall profile in Rugby League circles not where it should be. The club on the whole seems to be seen as a bit of a joke. Hopefully if Dr Koukash does come in along with Peel and a new CEO then the club can be put back on the right track and our overall profile will be increased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is this based on?

Nothing more scientific than the fans who post on here and elsewhere to be fair, I mean I've not done a postal vote or anything. Certainly, the impression I get (rightly or wrongly) is that many are going to have their noses put out of joint with a change and it hardly seems a good idea to alienate the current support for the 'bird in the bush', which may well turn out to be illusory. Maybe, since it may be an important point, the club should hold some kind of vote and find out once and for all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but the club have 5,000 fans, not enough to survive without free subsidies from the rich.

Out of the 5,000 4,950 may vote to stay as Salford

But how many would walk away if the name changed??

And if the name changed to Manchester how many more fans could be attracted??

However what's in a name??

And how many Salford fans don't live in Salford?? Could be a lot.

This club primarily needs one thing - to be competetive on the pitch and make a salford game an event, last time it was an event they got 10,000.

Eventually, I knew you'd manage to get something right, Parky ;)

I travel 50-odd miles every other week to support the club representing the city of my birth. If they ceased to do that, I probably wouldn't bother. I suspect many others feel the same.

If the game can afford to wave bye bye to a core support of 5,500 (and a latent support of similar size) then good luck to them.

But do you really think there are a similar number of supporters in Manchester ready and waiting to fill the void?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One huge irony being that the Reds no longer even play in true Salford anyway - if the name were to correctly reflect the location of their current match day venue they would become Eccles!

Sorry to be picky, but Eccles has been in Salford since before I was born. Moreover, the ground is actually in Barton (which is also in Salford).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be picky, but Eccles has been in Salford since before I was born. Moreover, the ground is actually in Barton (which is also in Salford).

but sadly, not before I was born. :(

Eccles was fully "acquired" by Salford in 1974 though a bit was lopped off in 1961. My mother used to take me kicking and screaming on the bus to Eccles to go shopping at the Maypole in Eccles back in..er...er.....1955!! :O

Regarding rugby in Salford and particularly is schools, it was always border country. I went to secondary school in Salford between 1957 and 1962 and the code played at school was union, and the decent players played for local union teams. AS I came from Swinton, just three miles away I had never heard of union so it all came as a bit of a shock. As for Manchester itself, that really was a that time union territory.

At that time Salford did nor own places such as Swinton, Little Hulton etc and I guess league was the code at schools. However, the major game by far was always soccer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Leeds and wigan develop players by having the money to pay full salary cap, by having the money to staff junior development, by having the facilities, by promoting the game in their areas, by winning loads of cups, by being famous as the games two greatest ever clubs of all time, and through this by stimulating many junior RL clubs in their areas.

Maybe the new owner has earmarked investment of large proportions for a couple of generations to achieve this?

2. Nine players from overseas make Les Catalans a top six club. How would a French born X111 go in Superleague?

You are just negative to be negative, the word curmudgeon comes to mind.

1. On the one hand , you state all this as a necessity before any success can be achieved in developing players but, when it suits you, you champion London as the beacon from which all junior development shines but which said club have had no success, no cups, no trophies, are not at all famous and whose owner has stated he dosn't know how long he can keep up his investment in the club. I would think Salford fall somewhere in the middle between those opposite and conflicting positions that you have previously espoused. With a new owner on board, let's see what tney can achieve before you write them off. You are just too keen to slam dunk all promising outlooks for the game.

2. Nobody is denying the influence of a foreign born players at Catalans. If they were all French, they would end up mid table probably. I am sure they could beat anything in the bottom hald of SL. But that's just a speculative assumption that you have interjected into the thread so as to send it off on a tangent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the case of Salford I think the location is far more important than the name.

The Salford club has a tremendous opportunity, if well managed and marketed, to build a large audience to follow it in Barton.

And it strikes me that it has the opportunity to be the biggest sporting club in Salford or, at best, the third biggest in Manchester. At one time I was in the vanguard of those calling for a name change to Manchester, but Salford is now coming up in the world, with the BBC locating its sports department there, and I don't think there is anything negative any more (if there ever was!) about the City of Salford.

So to change the name would probably be a waste of time and effort. I don't see a problem in making Salford appeal to supporters throughout the Greater Manchester conurbation while continuing to carry the name of the city in which it plays its games.

Unfortunately the Reds have been moribund off the field for several years, but it's hard to deny the potential the club has to be successful. I'm sure Mr Koukash is smart enough to recognise that potential.

Arsenal are a huge maga soccer club but the name "Arsenal" does not denote that they are a london club ior even that they are a North London vlub and it is not the name of any geographical location in London. I don't think rebranding them "London Arsenal" or "Highbury Arsenal" would add anything to their allure or marketing and supporter recruitment potential.

I think the same arguments are valid in the Salford/Manchester debate. I don't think rebranding as Manchester Reds would help any, it would just bring attention to the fact that they are a poor third in the Manchester name recognition stakes behind man U ansd Man City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pedant mode: Arsenal is a shortened version of their original name, Woolwich arsenal, due to its location next to the old Gun making facility, known as the Arsenal. They moved to North London from Woolwich sometime in the 1800's i think. Pedant mode off. apologies..

I say keep them as Salford and adopt the old moniker of 'Red Devils'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Sale Sharks are doing their best to lose the `Sale` from their monika. Should Salford do the same and be called `City Reds`? Not for me but the title would please Man C & Man U fans I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sale's attempts to drop their prefix is causing uproar which is surprising given how few of their fans have any tangible link with Sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too would support the moniker of 'Red Devils' returning but in conjunction with Salford, not instead of,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pedant mode: Arsenal is a shortened version of their original name, Woolwich arsenal, due to its location next to the old Gun making facility, known as the Arsenal. They moved to North London from Woolwich sometime in the 1800's i think. Pedant mode off. apologies..

I say keep them as Salford and adopt the old moniker of 'Red Devils'.

You are correct but they dropped Woolwich from their title and moved away from there and so the word arsenal had no connection with an area or anything to link it to London and none of those facts have prevented the club being a huge success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be picky, but Eccles has been in Salford since before I was born. Moreover, the ground is actually in Barton (which is also in Salford).

Only if you allow the post 1974 Boundary Commission to define community with its lines. It just so happens Eccles and Salford fall within the administrative boundary of the same local authority, which in my opinion does not make them part of the same place. The Boundary Commission does these things on the basis of a numbers game, nothing more. The two places are geographically and culturally entirely seperate communities.

In the same way Leigh is not in Wigan. Featherstone and Castleford are not in Wakefield. Radcliffe is not in Bury. Bootle is not in Southport. Horwich is not in Bolton.

Salford City Stadium being just one strand of a determined campaign by John Merry to socially engineer the meaning of what makes up Salford. I for one will never agree with him and frankly believe the whole "IN Salford" thing was a totally unnecessary vanity project on his behalf that has done a lot of damage to civic pride in the areas he's tried to annex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if you allow the post 1974 Boundary Commission to define community with its lines. It just so happens Eccles and Salford fall within the administrative boundary of the same local authority, which in my opinion does not make them part of the same place. The Boundary Commission does these things on the basis of a numbers game, nothing more. The two places are geographically and culturally entirely seperate communities.

In the same way Leigh is not in Wigan. Featherstone and Castleford are not in Wakefield. Radcliffe is not in Bury. Bootle is not in Southport. Horwich is not in Bolton.

Salford City Stadium being just one strand of a determined campaign by John Merry to socially engineer the meaning of what makes up Salford. I for one will never agree with him and frankly believe the whole "IN Salford" thing was a totally unnecessary vanity project on his behalf that has done a lot of damage to civic pride in the areas he's tried to annex.

And Swinton was it's own enitity also and I think I read that Salford moved in and annexed a rather nice town hall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Eventually, I knew you'd manage to get something right, Parky ;)

2. If the game can afford to wave bye bye to a core support of 5,500 (and a latent support of similar size) then good luck to them.

But do you really think there are a similar number of supporters in Manchester ready and waiting to fill the void?

1. I only came up with that after reading an inspirational article on half of page 27 of this weeks league Express.

he's good that Andrews bloke :lol:

2. In 1977 Salford were the second best supported club in the league. They stopped wining things and sank slowly to become a yo-yo also ran team. In Superleague they've really done nothing except let some big scores in embarrassing their fans and had to sit back whilst big clubs take their best players.

Fans just don't want that, and no amount of "marketing" is going to alter it because fans aren't dumb and know what they want. When the Willows closed they wanted to go see the old ground for the last time and you got a taste of the latent support. I don't think there's another 5,000 fans just waiting to come back - maybe a thousand or two.

But its half about the old fans and half about the new. Certainly there's big numbers of fans who are new to the top SL clubs and who enjoy top class RL, but top class RL stops around half way down the Superleague.

Salford can easily draw the 8,000 fans they need to break even all this new guy has to do is buy some top players....... :unsure:

Oh dear. They are all taken and this new guy can't outbid those clubs who have them all because of the cap. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good players often become available over the course of a season, though. There are some great players in the championships who can be bought, plus, sadly, you can bet on at least on other club being short of cash during the season and potentially open to offers. Maybe not year one, but it is eminently possible to put together a good side within 12 months, spending up to the cap and willing to pay transfer fees when, sadly, a fair few clubs can't afford to pay that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arsenal are a huge maga soccer club but the name "Arsenal" does not denote that they are a london club ior even that they are a North London vlub and it is not the name of any geographical location in London. I don't think rebranding them "London Arsenal" or "Highbury Arsenal" would add anything to their allure or marketing and supporter recruitment potential.

In fact, and I've live 5 minutes of the Highbury ground for several years in total, the area has in some ways come to be known as "Arsenal". Maybe it's because of the tube station (which was named after the club) but I reckon more people in London would be able to place "Arsenal" as a place than "Highbury".

It's a lovely part of the World BTW. I hugely enjoyed my time there. If I ever went back to live in London, it would be somewhere round there. It's the part of London I feel at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having watched Salford home and away from the early 70's, and having lived in the City all my life, I reckon more than 50% of the supporters would find something else to do rather than watch their team change their name to Manchester. Manchester, being a football City, would not replace those fans. It really gets on my nerves when people who know nothing about living in Salford keep bringing up this suggestion. Manchester and Salford are seperated by the river Irwell, but it might as well be the Atlantic ocean! Sure, some Salford fans will come on and say they would still follow the team as Manchester, but they would lose more than they gain. Mancunians ARLFC seeem to be doing a great job of promoting RL in the City of Manchester. Give them more support and let them carry on the good work they are doning and leave Salford alone.

That's very nice of you to say that. Thank you.

We'd welcome more support of course!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having watched Salford home and away from the early 70's, and having lived in the City all my life, I reckon more than 50% of the supporters would find something else to do rather than watch their team change their name to Manchester. Manchester, being a football City, would not replace those fans. It really gets on my nerves when people who know nothing about living in Salford keep bringing up this suggestion. Manchester and Salford are seperated by the river Irwell, but it might as well be the Atlantic ocean! Sure, some Salford fans will come on and say they would still follow the team as Manchester, but they would lose more than they gain. Mancunians ARLFC seeem to be doing a great job of promoting RL in the City of Manchester. Give them more support and let them carry on the good work they are doning and leave Salford alone.

By your logic nobody from the Salford side of the "Atlantic Ocean", as you call it, would ever take a trip across "the pond" to watch Manchester United or Manchester City on a regular basis then.

:wacko: :wacko: :blink: :blink: :lol: :lol:

Get real!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be for rebranding the club to Manchester.....the sport needs a strong Manchester club and Salford have the potential to fill that void.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's ludicrous to pretend the club are Manchester, they aren't. A waste of time to even think about it. There's nothing wrong with Salford that a few quid and a bit of success won't solve. Oh, and a new stadium; that new one in the middle of nowhere is terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is this based on? I think you'll find more Salfordians out in Manchester on a Friday and Saturday night than knocking around Salford Precinct. It's about 20 minutes walk to Manchester town centre from there. I've always viewed Salford as more of an extension of Manchester than an independent city. That's no criticism of the place or its facilities but with Manchester joined to your hip you'd have to be pretty pigheaded and stubborn to not take advantage of the shops, pubs, clubs etc. just a stone's throw away. I know a lot of proud Salfordians but not one that harbours any bitterness towards Manchester, most have even moved to Manchester, usually due to work.

If you had read my post you will see that a number of sports have tried to cash in on the Manchester name Basketball and Ice Hockey being the first 2 that spring to mind. (Giants and Storm) After the initial set up when huge sums of money were thrown at the resepctive sports both clubs failed and now Manchester Phoenix attract a small band of fans to the ice hockey.

There are 2 RU clubs in the Greater Manchester area. One called Manchester and one called Sale. Which gets the greater number of fans? the one that has money thrown at it and achieves the success, and that isn't the club called Manchester.

As for work in the community, Salford are doing some great work in Trafford with the schools and have also gone into a number of high schools in Manchester, this for me is the area that money will make a difference.

There is a Cas fan that teaches in Manchester and he speaks highly of the support he received from the Reds. They have also gone into the Children's hospital at Christmas.

We should make more of the Original Red Devils tag.

The Reds is a long term investment which can reap great rewards for both RL and Salford as a club but it needs new blood and a modern approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 2 RU clubs in the Greater Manchester area. One called Manchester and one called Sale. Which gets the greater number of fans? the one that has money thrown at it and achieves the success, and that isn't the club called Manchester.

There are many, many more than 2!

Broughton Park, Sedgley Park, Eccles, Tyldesley, Leigh, Orrell.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017