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

That's the problem parky at the minute. The RFL are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I mean we want to improve our game get more through the gates etc and we could do x, y and z but would it benefit the game? ( no one knows) But what I will say as licencing improved our game? To be honest I don't know I'm more swayed to no at the minute but we need a system if P&R comes back where teams are not yo yoing. Obviously to make the yo yo system non existent would be very hard unless the team that goes up cant go down till the season after which IMO wouldn't be a bad idea.

Winning is a drug regardless of what standard you play sport at and Yo Yoing is what has kept some clubs alive in sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to know exactly what you feel they say and others.

For me they say that in some places the concentration of RL fans is high, but that's against a low local population so crowds of 5,000, 6,000 and 7,000 are magnificent achievements. However these crowds have plunged the SL clubs into administration, near financial collapse, or they survive by rich chairmans handouts.

In other places top clubs have top crowds and do well with five figure fan bases, it's highly likely they pull fans from a wider region e.g. merseyside, cheshire, greater manchester for Saints, Wire and Wigan.

But salford can't pull 8,000 from a local catchment of two and a half million.

For west yorkshire my stamping ground I've enjoyed watching 12 pro clubs over the years, but that's a lot for a population of 2.2M to support.

What this means to P & R and licensing I'm not sure. Again should the financial level SL is pitched at be matched to the pulling power of the clubs in SL.

I don't believe SL is a good enough competition to draw the fans across the board, and as per pre 1996 fans follow the successfull clubs. Would an even competition pull more fans? Would evening up the competition financially damage the game.

You have a very good point parky. Maybe that's where the minimum salary cap could come in. I mean obviously have a maximum cap of say 2m and a minimum of 1m. There is only an handful of clubs that could pay the 2m anyway and they are the teams that are dominating anyway so would it make a difference I doubt it. And the minimum would make the league more competitive IMO and the teams that can't pay it should be demoted then IMO we will have a better system and a more competitive league and maybe after 5 to 10 years of it being in action we may be able to compete against the Aussies ( Maybe being a big word) But I do think it would be a big help bridging the gap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to get honesty into the Licensing system, I'd love to get honesty from the clubs.

Completely agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a very good point parky. Maybe that's where the minimum salary cap could come in. I mean obviously have a maximum cap of say 2m and a minimum of 1m. There is only an handful of clubs that could pay the 2m anyway and they are the teams that are dominating anyway so would it make a difference I doubt it.

The licensing system is looking for 14 clubs capable of staging professional RL and paying wages of up to ideally £1.65M. They aren't there and haven't been there for all 17 years of Superleague.

At the same time as they are asking clubs to pay wages they can't afford, they are asking them to build grounds they can't build, fund ancillary staff they can't afford and spend large sums of money on junior development that doesn't develop many juniors.

Take Wakefield. IMHO they are one of the games big clubs, and although they aren't that today they have the most potential to be a monster club. look at the crowds reaction last year to Glovers positive approach.

The idea of licensing was providing a sustained period in SL to chosen clubs in which a club could "build" and not fear relegation and the disaster that can bring.

Wakefield got their license over 10 years ago.

What did they build from 2000 to the end of 2011?

Nowt.

Having just this week passed Newmarket again, if only to see a sign with an artists impression on it (like the one that got ripped down at Glasshoughton) which wasn't there, how can we run a system that has expectations even some of our biggest and most famous clubs can't manage to meet.

Should the bar be lowered. Should the the "standards" be reviewed??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree.

I look closely at how clubs operate. I see Mr. Hudgell struggle on crowds of 8,000 and I see him lose millions and end up slashing his SL wages spend to £1.1M.

I see the despondency of Mr. O'Connor at the 6,000 crowds he got and his inability to find quality new players for his squad.

I see one of the modern games highest achieving small clubs struggling badly and IMHO Castleford are the biggest small club we have seen with sustained runs at the top table over the 40 plus years I have watched them.

Yet I hear bleatings from CC clubs that nobody could ever logically argue could ever become a HKR, a Widnes or a Cas say they are "building for SL", aiming for 2018 etc etc.

P & R is great in theory, in time and in truth will anyone really want promotion to a place they can't hack?

The truth is that for our game to be more that it fundamentally is we need rich men to back it.

Should the licensing system be primarily open to rich men to come in and bid for licenses?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting points, for me the most important was the statement about about how few clubs are currently interested in SL from outside. The current system protects 4/5 clubs from relegation and excludes the same number from promotion, two tens is the obvious solution to our current challenges. The top operate on an open ended max 50% salary cap with a £1.5m min spend, same for second tier with a £1m min spend.

Hull, Wigan, Saints, Wire, Bradford, Leeds, London, Cats, Hudds, Wakey(at Newmarket) would be a great spectacle, as would Widnes, Cas, HKR, Salford, Fax, Fev, Leigh, Toulouse, Sheffield, Cardiff/Swansea/Wrexham.

Objective to expand every 3 years should criteria be met refn ground and £1m min spend, after winning the right to apply. Expansion need not happen and clubs need not move out of the FT structure. One up/down annually between the 2 comps.

The top needs to compete with RU for players by being truly SUPER, and not restricted by mediocrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting points, for me the most important was the statement about about how few clubs are currently interested in SL from outside. The current system protects 4/5 clubs from relegation and excludes the same number from promotion, two tens is the obvious solution to our current challenges. The top operate on an open ended max 50% salary cap with a £1.5m min spend, same for second tier with a £1m min spend.

Hull, Wigan, Saints, Wire, Bradford, Leeds, London, Cats, Hudds, Wakey(at Newmarket) would be a great spectacle, as would Widnes, Cas, HKR, Salford, Fax, Fev, Leigh, Toulouse, Sheffield, Cardiff/Swansea/Wrexham.

Objective to expand every 3 years should criteria be met refn ground and £1m min spend, after winning the right to apply.

Expansion need not happen and clubs need not move out of the FT structure. One up/down annually between the 2 comps.

The top needs to compete with RU for players by being truly SUPER, and not restricted by mediocrity.

Thanks for breaking our ranks shuffling round the problem and offering a possible solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was ripped to shreds.

The bit that was disclosed might have been.

Doubtless lessons will have been learned from that and I therefore don't expect major disclosures in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2011 census has the population of Wakefield District as 325,800 (rounded to nearest 100) roughly the same as Wigan Borough 317,800 (rounded to nearest 100)

According to the 2001 Census the populations of the towns/city breakdown as follows, this doesn't include any outying districts that have their own population figures. Thus Wigan/Leigh doesn't include places like Standish, Atherton and Wakefield etc. doesn't include Normanton and Pontefract etc.

Featherstone 10,382

Castleford 37,525

Wakefield 76,886

Wigan 81,203

Leigh 43,006

St.Helens 102,629

Warrington 80,661

Widnes 55,686

2011 census gives regional populations as the following.

West Yorkshire 2,225,359

Gtr Manchester 2,681,735

Merseyside 1,380,612

Warrington District 202,137

Wirral 319,585

I think those figures tell a lot.

Population of Sheffield and Rotherham is around 750,000. What does that tell us ? :mellow:

It's not about how many people there are, at the end of the day, it's how many come to games. Sure a big population gives you something to work with but it's footfall that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to know exactly what you feel they say and others.

To be honest I'm sick of posting what the figures say, I've posted it time after time and really can't be bothered going through it all again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I'm sick of posting what the figures say, I've posted it time after time and really can't be bothered going through it all again.

Thank you very much for at least posting them then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Population of Sheffield and Rotherham is around 750,000. What does that tell us ? :mellow:

Exactly the same as the numerical size of populations of all other big areas of Britain that have no RL culture.

The size of the RL "Culture" is the most important factor, but the size of the immediate catchment area can however be important too.

Castleford is steeped in an RL culture and can pull 7,000 fans based on a 37,000 immediate population fanbase.

Leeds can double that off a vastly bigger immediate catchment

Sheffield got 3,500 fans last time in SL and collapsed on that - it was from a very large immediate population base.

It probably says that if you want to maximise fans per se, put SL clubs in areas where there's a strong RL culture.

Out goes London, In comes Halifax, Fev and Leigh and you have a sixteen club SL and probably an impressive total aggregate attendance with maximum inclusivity.

In doing that alone you will probably add three more struggling clubs and create a very large rump of Superleague failures.

So it can't all be about fans through the gate? Or can it???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The licensing system is looking for 14 clubs capable of staging professional RL and paying wages of up to ideally £1.65M. They aren't there and haven't been there for all 17 years of Superleague.

At the same time as they are asking clubs to pay wages they can't afford, they are asking them to build grounds they can't build, fund ancillary staff they can't afford and spend large sums of money on junior development that doesn't develop many juniors.

Take Wakefield. IMHO they are one of the games big clubs, and although they aren't that today they have the most potential to be a monster club. look at the crowds reaction last year to Glovers positive approach.

The idea of licensing was providing a sustained period in SL to chosen clubs in which a club could "build" and not fear relegation and the disaster that can bring.

Wakefield got their license over 10 years ago.

What did they build from 2000 to the end of 2011?

Nowt.

Having just this week passed Newmarket again, if only to see a sign with an artists impression on it (like the one that got ripped down at Glasshoughton) which wasn't there, how can we run a system that has expectations even some of our biggest and most famous clubs can't manage to meet.

Should the bar be lowered. Should the the "standards" be reviewed??

The bar has to be lower in these financial times, 5 years ago a very small business wouldn't have batted an eyelid giving £500 in sponsorship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Care to discuss P & R/Licensing?

The mergers were brought up by you, remember, don't throw thread drift at me when it was you that went down that path.

Anyhow, to be fair, the mergers were all part of the original grand plan when the original SL franchises were being sorted out by St Mo, so that is pertinent to any discussion of licencing and the removal of p and r.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2011 census has the population of Wakefield District as 325,800 (rounded to nearest 100) roughly the same as Wigan Borough 317,800 (rounded to nearest 100)

According to the 2001 Census the populations of the towns/city breakdown as follows, this doesn't include any outying districts that have their own population figures. Thus Wigan/Leigh doesn't include places like Standish, Atherton and Wakefield etc. doesn't include Normanton and Pontefract etc.

Featherstone 10,382

Castleford 37,525

Wakefield 76,886

Wigan 81,203

Leigh 43,006

St.Helens 102,629

Warrington 80,661

Widnes 55,686

2011 census gives regional populations as the following.

West Yorkshire 2,225,359

Gtr Manchester 2,681,735

Merseyside 1,380,612

Warrington District 202,137

Wirral 319,585

I think those figures tell a lot.

The figures are intersting but taken in isolation are misleading. There are 5 premier league soccer clubs in Greater mancjester amd merseyide as opposed to none in West Yorkshire and Humberside.Premier league Soccer sucks in a lolt of the potential support for RL in Lancashire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Population of Sheffield and Rotherham is around 750,000. What does that tell us ? :mellow:

It's not about how many people there are, at the end of the day, it's how many come to games. Sure a big population gives you something to work with but it's footfall that matters.

Why have you tagged Rotherham with Sheffield when Doncaster also has a boundry with Rotherham, If Doncaster start to do Well next season their crowds will be higher than Sheffields and thats a fact.

I'm hopeful that Carl Hall will continue to make the steady progress with the Dons (Made a profit over the last two seasons) but a lot of the off field work thats been going on will depend on if the RFL will continue with the funding of their development officers who have now got Rugby League in just about every school in the district.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to get honesty into the Licensing system, I'd love to get honesty from the clubs.

Again how many clubs (clubs not fans) seriously want to be in Superleague. When challenged some clubs will say "we're not ready yet". Seventeen years this leagues been going.

It's great you hanker back to the good old days when clubs went up and down and I can remember so many of our member clubs had stints at the top table, receiving the likes of Wigan and Leeds.

But today we know that several clubs have refused promotion, several more are not interested, a couple already in can't hack Superleague, and couple more may need a stint in SL to realise they can't hack it either.

Is it the case that if we bring back P & R. we may end up with many championship clubs being tested and saying "no thank you", in the end and some SL clubs going down and collapsing to the point where you may be hard pressed to get 14 applications or anyone who wants to be promoted?

If many clubs cannot hack it in SL and many CC clubs could not hack it, then the end result will be a very small SL.

Maybe we need to reduce the costs needed to run a SL club, probably by reducing wages, so that a bigger SL and any promoted teams can be reasonably expected to survive in the top tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The figures are intersting but taken in isolation are misleading. There are 5 premier league soccer clubs in Greater mancjester amd merseyide as opposed to none in West Yorkshire and Humberside.Premier league Soccer sucks in a lolt of the potential support for RL in Lancashire.

Thats it then, Doncaster for Super League :rolleyes: - the district has a population of 289,000 (2001 Census, probably got another 30,000 poles since then)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have you tagged Rotherham with Sheffield when Doncaster also has a boundry with Rotherham, If Doncaster start to do Well next season their crowds will be higher than Sheffields and thats a fact.

I'm hopeful that Carl Hall will continue to make the steady progress with the Dons (Made a profit over the last two seasons) but a lot of the off field work thats been going on will depend on if the RFL will continue with the funding of their development officers who have now got Rugby League in just about every school in the district.

I hope the World Cup makes a big profit and the RFL use it to continue to funding of development officers all over the country as their results seem to be impressive almost everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have you tagged Rotherham with Sheffield when Doncaster also has a boundry with Rotherham,

Because Rotherham town centre is about two miles from Don Valley and 20 from the Keepmoat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyhow, to be fair, the mergers were all part of the original grand plan when the original SL franchises were being sorted out by St Mo, so that is pertinent to any discussion of licencing and the removal of p and r.

I don't think it's pertinent to this discussion at all. All the evidence by word of mouth and action is they are not wanted.

Hence an option to create bigger clubs who have more of the local fan base and all the local juniors so they can compete with the bigger clubs is to engineer a geographical spread of clubs.

Now that's an option SL/RFL could consider. It risks alienating old fans it risks attracting new fans.

Don't start haranguing me as suggesting or supporting it though please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If many clubs cannot hack it in SL and many CC clubs could not hack it, then the end result will be a very small SL.

Maybe we need to reduce the costs needed to run a SL club, probably by reducing wages, so that a bigger SL and any promoted teams can be reasonably expected to survive in the top tier.

The terms and expectations of the license create a high player salary spend, and a high spend on other items it seems indisputable up to ten potential/current SL clubs can't hack..

P & R or change the licensing requirements?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Rotherham town centre is about two miles from Don Valley and 20 from the Keepmoat.

Cutting hairs the Keepmoat is 13 miles from Rotherham town centre and Bramall Lane is 9.6 miles.

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