Archived

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

Wellsy4HullFC

The SL Licensing v Promotion & Relegation debate thread

293 posts in this topic

If this is the option then the Championship GF must be early August latest, the last PT team to stay up was Widnes after an August GF v Oldham allowed them a chance to recruit, something the October GF doesn't and no team can now be FT on £300k cap.

I always felt when we had P & R the big clubs put up with it because the promoted clubs were on a hiding to nothing in terms of player recruitment. That could be got over using Aussies. I'm not sure it can now.

How well Salford do with late recruitment and results may be an indicator of how annual promotion could be a poisoned chalice, hence why when people say "this is the only fair way to decide" I ask them to consider that it maybe isn't that fair....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean as in " let's only licnce 10 teams because there will be no blowouts" which provoked such a flurry of nensense when I disputed that assertion.

I think we should let this drop, I'm not going to go over it again. My position remains that if reducing the size of an uneven league evens out the resources better, then that league would become more competitive. The thing to do if you want to expand an uneven league is work out a way to spread the resources, like reducing the cap significantly, something you and others are agreeing on. Fair and logical points with no bias towards either 10 clubs or 16 clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not my season, my season would be two tens.

If we go to P&R from/to a PT league then I would have the first fixture as boxing day, then New years day. To end of July gives 31 fixture opportunities, incl Fri/Mon at Easter = 26 league 3 for CC and the start of play offs. Play offs to conclude in first 2 weeks of August, followed by NRC. This gives promoted club 2 months extra to prepare and a chance to get stuck into the transfer merry go round when players become available.

Too much winter. Again - we used to do this. We stopped doing it because it was no good.

Two tens ? That's much better. Start in March, 18 league games - excellent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 tens are 27 fixtures, cant see clubs surviving on 9 home games.

No ? It's games that cost the money.

If it's not, why do clubs run fundraising dinners and lotteries ? :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No ? It's games that cost the money.

If it's not, why do clubs run fundraising dinners and lotteries ? :mellow:

What an interesting point?

But isn't the revenue from fans cut significantly on 18 games yet you still carry all the wages and salaries and ground overheads?

What am I missing here Griff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What an interesting point?

But isn't the revenue from fans cut significantly on 18 games yet you still carry all the wages and salaries and ground overheads?

What am I missing here Griff.

You wouldn't need to pay the players so much.

You'd lose the appropriate proportion of match day costs.

Most clubs rent their grounds these days.

When you're doing your back-of-envelope calculations, don't forget that each home (league) game is matched by an away game where you have costs but no revenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wouldn't need to pay the players so much.

You'd lose the appropriate proportion of match day costs.

Most clubs rent their grounds these days.

When you're doing your back-of-envelope calculations, don't forget that each home (league) game is matched by an away game where you have costs but no revenue.

Interesting, but I'd be devastated with such a short season, and such a long break. Would fans buy into a short season or long gaps between matches?

It's be OK if we had product to fill the gap like meaningful rep games etc. We don't

Or would they pick and choose less and pack out the games??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still getting my head around players taking 30% less to go into work just as often in a FT structure, it could work at a PT club with poor crowds who rent facilities and pay players by the game.

The structure works for Premiership RU due to all the cups with qualifying leagues they play in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, but I'd be devastated with such a short season, and such a long break. Would fans buy into a short season or long gaps between matches?

It's be OK if we had product to fill the gap like meaningful rep games etc. We don't

Or would they pick and choose less and pack out the games??

Who says a season has to be 9 months long, may be run two 5 month seasons in a year with P & R, this could keep the interest going especially with a yo yo club and if worked correctly would produce more games and open up two transfer windows within a year.

I'm impressed with all your figures but eventhough I may fail slightly with my A,B & C's I'm wise enough to know Super League clubs just can not afford to live at the maximum and the more clubs try the more Salfords, Castlefords & Bradfords we will have, IMO the RFL are trying to structure the whole of the Rugby League with only one goal in mind and I'm not convinced thats the best goal for the entire game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just start the Championship at Christmas

We've already done that and dismissed it as a bad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who says a season has to be 9 months long, may be run two 5 month seasons in a year with P & R, this could keep the interest going especially with a yo yo club and if worked correctly would produce more games and open up two transfer windows within a year.

I'm impressed with all your figures but eventhough I may fail slightly with my A,B & C's I'm wise enough to know Super League clubs just can not afford to live at the maximum and the more clubs try the more Salfords, Castlefords & Bradfords we will have, IMO the RFL are trying to structure the whole of the Rugby League with only one goal in mind and I'm not convinced thats the best goal for the entire game.

I have never found you failing with your "A,B,C's".

I take your point entirely although wonder about definitions.

Does "The game" mean our traditional 30 or so clubs?

Or does "The game" mean Rugby league from top to bottom.

There's a difference and one can conflict with the other.

For I fear there is no format to the pro and semi pro "game" that will do it's best for the advancement of 30 AND the game in general.

e.g. a retreat to semi pro across all clubs liked by the few (including your good self) would kill the game according to the many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And so thread 78 on P & R dies a death, and another shedload of posts sink down into the archives.

In summary IMHO Licensing is pretty much a dead duck, it hasn't done what Rimmer said it would do, whether that was the fault of licensing per se or the financials in SL it doesn't really matter. Nobody really defended it

Does that then mean P & R wins the day. I don't think so. We've had some great theories but until it's tried in practice for a few seasons under whatever P & R system is best who knows. Craiq's system was the most exciting suggestion for me.

I personally would have it back only to see if it does work (which I'd hope it would) and if it doesn't then we can get it out of our system. Whilst we go back to whatever it may be.

If there was a concensus then it was one for honesty, hands up if your in SL and can't hack it, hands up if your in CC and can?

Be honest about it. Then let them in that can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there was a concensus then it was one for honesty, hands up if your in SL and can't hack it, hands up if your in CC and can?

Be honest about it. Then let them in that can.

So no expansion then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So no expansion then?

Expansion and P+R are completely different topics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expansion and P+R are completely different topics.

They are but they are also linked. If there is p and r, an expansion club in CC1 has a route to SL. Improbable but not impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just start the Championship at Christmas

No thanks, have you been to any friendlies this January, it's bloody freezing out there.

I do not miss freezing my nuts off one little bit, viva summer rugby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've already done that and dismissed it as a bad idea.

Who's "we"?

A boxing day start is a good idea to kick the league off with derbies. That way you get the bumper Xmas and New Year gates. I recall Widnes and Leigh drawing 6600 in a second div game on boxing day about 10 years ago - I was there.

Then the Northern ###### Cup could fill in for Jan and Feb

Far better than watching pathetic ripoff friendlies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's "we"?

The clubs. They decided they didn't want it.

They did it ten years ago, they don't do it now. If they liked it, they wouldn't have changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Far better than watching pathetic ripoff friendlies

Agreed. I can't understand why people throng to these - but while they do, they'll continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are but they are also linked. If there is p and r, an expansion club in CC1 has a route to SL. Improbable but not impossible.

They do now. They can make a licence application and get selected for $uperleague.

Improbable but not impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a system where to fall out of the the top flight is to be doomed perhaps forever to be excluded. A system where a huge gap in standards doesn't appear between the top and next level - you know - like all the other sports in the UK!

You seem to be overlooking one very important point. Actually, it might be two if you really think the gap between premier division soccer and the next level isn't massive. However the real difference in RL is that we don't have enough fans or sponsorship (or simply money, to get down to basics) within the game as a whole to support two professional divisions. As long as the second tier remains semi-pro you can forget soccer-style P&R, because as history has shown, it doesn't work.

Licensing is far from perfect, but it does allow promoted clubs to get up to speed before being judged. The old yo-yo system was a disaster, with too many clubs throwing money, often the 'leccy' money, at the team to try and avoid relegation. It was a nonsense and it was right to end it ansd only a masochist would want it back.

There is a further alternative which no-one seems to have mentioned, but which I'll throw into the ring even though I would dismiss it out of hand - how about we go back to everyone being semi-pro? We could have P&R again then, couldn't we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a further alternative which no-one seems to have mentioned, but which I'll throw into the ring even though I would dismiss it out of hand - how about we go back to everyone being semi-pro? We could have P&R again then, couldn't we?

We did that one in a rather extensive thread.

The proposition for harmony and a return to all clubs being competitive against each other was refuse the SKY contract and sell the game to the BBC.

The bulk of the opinion was BBC would not be greatly intersted and the loss of revenue would see the game either shrink or die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be overlooking one very important point. Actually, it might be two if you really think the gap between premier division soccer and the next level isn't massive. However the real difference in RL is that we don't have enough fans or sponsorship (or simply money, to get down to basics) within the game as a whole to support two professional divisions. As long as the second tier remains semi-pro you can forget soccer-style P&R, because as history has shown, it doesn't work.

Licensing is far from perfect, but it does allow promoted clubs to get up to speed before being judged. The old yo-yo system was a disaster, with too many clubs throwing money, often the 'leccy' money, at the team to try and avoid relegation. It was a nonsense and it was right to end it ansd only a masochist would want it back.

There is a further alternative which no-one seems to have mentioned, but which I'll throw into the ring even though I would dismiss it out of hand - how about we go back to everyone being semi-pro? We could have P&R again then, couldn't we?

Your last paragraph is interesting. It does raise a question over why clubs suddenly went full time in 1995 when the game got the sky money. Would it not have been better to stay part time or mixed full/part time and to have used more money across the clubs to spend on facilities and structures.

My view is that crowds would be just as good and perhaps higher if clubs were mixed full time and part time, if scores were closer. We would not lose our best players because there would be some money for marquee full timers. I still think the rules with real scrums and a 5m rule also encouraged closer more interesting games

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