Archived

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

hindle xiii

01/04/13 - Hull Kingston Rovers v Wigan Warriors - KO 3pm

Who will win?   10 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Hull Kingston Rovers
      0
    • Wigan Warriors
      9
    • Draw
      1

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

190 posts in this topic

no excuses kr have been a disgrace and sandercockup is to blame he has talked the team out of any chance they had of making a game of it, wigan are playing with a patched up side sandercock should hav used that to inspire is team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a Wigan fan

You certainly used to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made the comment that it seems significant that the teams that have depth in the squads have all managed big wins today.

I'll sound like lobby but it always seems to me that that's how it works every year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trades to replace transfer fees to prevent success from breeding success and failure from breeding failure.

Wigan are a fine side and I'm not in any way bitter but they have the easiest job in the world of recruiting. I simply want to see better games. The kind of better games Nigel Wood told me on Sky Sports text today that I'm supposed to be regularly seeing.

How would that work in the current system? Would clubs not suffer from loss of transfer revenue (Green, Taylor and Smith all commanded fees agreed between the clubs)?

I like trades where they are workable, but they are only really suited to the circumstances of American Sports such as the college system of player development, revenue sharing by franchised clubs and associated drafts to professional sport. Such a set of unique circumstances cannot realistically be replicated for RL, so there is no foundation for a trade system.

The simple answer to today's result is not to overreact to a scoreline that is heavily influenced by the Easter short turnaround, injuries and respective depths of quality squad players. HKR just need to get better at producing and retaining home grown players to ensure sufficient squad depth, but by their own methods rather the assistance by rule making. Sport is intended to be based upon competition that provides rewards to the efforts of successful competitors, the salary cap already skews the playing field to benefit smaller clubs, but if they still can't compete then it is an issue with the club itself. The solution isn't to make more rules to pander to the weak, but for those clubs to strive to get better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they have bought up the best players of other teams, this isn't in doubt. That they bring so many good players through their own system is all the more reason to not allow them to do so.

Do we want a competitive league or do we want Leeds vs Wigan in the GF for the next 5 years?

I for one certainly don't wan't social engineering of the sort you seem to be proposing. One possible outcome from stopping good players from bettering themselves would be to see them lost to the game altogether. Another would be to see young players not joining less successful teams in the first place.

Each game is competitive, each club is competitive, the whole sport is competitive. HKR just need to compete. Shackling a whole sport like this is NOT the way forward. Might as well give the lower teams a five try start

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they have bought up the best players of other teams, this isn't in doubt. That they bring so many good players through their own system is all the more reason to not allow them to do so.

Do we want a competitive league or do we want Leeds vs Wigan in the GF for the next 5 years?

If a club has needs in certain positions, do they not have the right to make an approach? HKR and Salford didn't have to sell. Did HKR produce Dobson, Burns, Green, Patterson, Mika, D. Hodgson, Hall? Player movement benefits all clubs, would such a restriction apply to all clubs or do you just want double standards to suit your club?

It seems a perverse suggestion that the likes of Wigan and Leeds could be punished for excellent youth development, whilst lesser clubs are allowed to do as they please because they invest less in youth development and consequently produce less quality home grown players. If HKR can't cope under the current system in SL without special assistance to restrain the big boys, maybe the problem lies with them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is stopping HKR getting their act together at youth level, and therefore having a stronger overall squad? Are the big teams sabotaging that as well?

In recent seasons we've had some very fine youth sides, this only a few years after being semi-pro and in the RL wilderness. We're doing our best on that front and without the 30 or 40 years of continuous on-field success that the likes of Wigan bear the fruits of in terms of young player participation. The problem is that as long as the likes of Taylor and Green (an import but the point still stands) are picked off at will by bigger sides, any production line can realistically only move players in the same direction. Why would the next Scott Taylor stay at HKR?

What it boils down to, ultimately, is whether Wood and the RFL have the bottle to back up statements like today's with genuine action. All SL sides are capable of producing young talent given a level playing field. It's not rocket science. As long as there are hierarchies these will inevitable trickle down into said systems. A youth system can't buck the trend of shedding elite established pros.

I wasn't really drawn to the forum by this result - naturally RL is the last thing I want to talk about right now as a HKR fan! :) - more by the irony of it and a couple of other results as regarding the timing of Wood's "Most competitive SL ever" press release. I suspect he feels a bit daft right now, for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Salford and HKR did have to sell, both had money problems. Salford had the choice of selling Smith with 8 games or get nothing 2 months later. I can't believe you are that naïve. Sport is a business whether we like it or not.

Teams like Wigan will always be first choice for youngsters such as Hansen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one certainly don't wan't social engineering of the sort you seem to be proposing. One possible outcome from stopping good players from bettering themselves would be to see them lost to the game altogether. Another would be to see young players not joining less successful teams in the first place.

Each game is competitive, each club is competitive, the whole sport is competitive. HKR just need to compete. Shackling a whole sport like this is NOT the way forward. Might as well give the lower teams a five try start

So how does Taylor get better playing 30 mins a game at Wigan as opposed to 60+ at HKR? Hoist by your own petard. EPL shoots itself in the foot by allowing box office players to pack benches at elite sides, whereas in NRL the best sharpen their skills against each other every week.

By spreading maybe 20 calibre squad players across the 5 or 6 worst SL sides we would undoubtedly see better games and at the same time improve the standard of everyone pulling on a shirt every weekend. No-one gets better by playing less, or alongside better players than are on the opposing side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he was at HKR, no doubt today he would have played the whole game, and had the cleaners put through him like the rest of them.

On what basis? He was our best forward last year. We've replaced him with Paterson but I want to see them paired up in the back row. Wigan have no right to him.

Let me put it another way, because people are inevitably reading sour grapes into this.

Imagine I am neutral. Tell me why I should go to see the likes of Hull KR play Wigan and pay 23 quid for the pleasure. Ignore today's result if you want. Sell it to me in more general terms. Sell me Leeds vs Widnes. I'm wrong that there is anything dysfunctional about SL so this should be easy for you, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In recent seasons we've had some very fine youth sides, this only a few years after being semi-pro and in the RL wilderness. We're doing our best on that front and without the 30 or 40 years of continuous on-field success that the likes of Wigan bear the fruits of in terms of young player participation. The problem is that as long as the likes of Taylor and Green (an import but the point still stands) are picked off at will by bigger sides, any production line can realistically only move players in the same direction. Why would the next Scott Taylor stay at HKR?

What it boils down to, ultimately, is whether Wood and the RFL have the bottle to back up statements like today's with genuine action. All SL sides are capable of producing young talent given a level playing field. It's not rocket science. As long as there are hierarchies these will inevitable trickle down into said systems. A youth system can't buck the trend of shedding elite established pros.

I wasn't really drawn to the forum by this result - naturally RL is the last thing I want to talk about right now as a HKR fan! :) - more by the irony of it and a couple of other results as regarding the timing of Wood's "Most competitive SL ever" press release. I suspect he feels a bit daft right now, for sure.

Hardly the best timed statement from Wood, but this 'level playing field' you seek is frankly bizarre when RL is intended to be a sport and the health of the game is best served by promoting competition and incentivising growth, as opposed to constraining teams to the level of the lowest quality. HKR rose to the top of the game in the 1980s without the need for a salary cap or any levelling down of competition. There is nothing stopping them reaching those heights again without engineering of the game, provided that they reflect upon their weaknesses and strive to improve. Your attitude is symptomatic of an easy option / quick fix, as opposed to the clubs taking responsibility for their own success or lack of. Wigan as an example were an absolute shambles in the mid 2000s and their rise back toward the top of the game has been largely due to positive management and decisions taken during a period of self reflection when the club was at its lowest point for 25 years and done against the backdrop of a more successful Saints side and the growth of Warrington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS, it isn't embarrassing for SL that a side of Wigan's quality grace it. HKR just need to get better to be able to compete twice over the Easter period. We've seen similar failings today from Wakefield and Widnes after good performances on Friday.

Wigan didn't force HKR to sell Green and Taylor, and didn't cause the injuries to the current squad. We have the salary cap, what more do you want to handcuff the bigger clubs? Maybe it's time to look at how HKR need to get better rather than identifying a scapegoat. When overseas recruits are getting sparser it is inevitable that the better domestic players will be in demand, nevertheless Wigan can hardly be accused of 'reloading at will' at the expense of small clubs when the majority of the squad are home grown and ex-Wigan produced players are scattered throughout SL.

Wakefield lost by 12 points, that's hardly comparable with the 78 point margin at HKR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An embarrassment for the league and it is ironic it comes as Wood is talking about this year as being the most competitive yet. I can sympathise with Wood's stance but I called this kind of score in the off-season as the better sides like Wigan reloaded at will from the little boys' small elite crop. We reap what we sow.

Glad I didn't go is all I can say.

I did go! Club record defeat. At least I can say I was there!

The sad thing is Hull KR are a top half of the table side looking at the last five years as an average but players won't stay with them because there are only two trophies up for grabs, almost uniquely in British sport and they are not one of the bigger clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In recent seasons we've had some very fine youth sides, this only a few years after being semi-pro and in the RL wilderness. We're doing our best on that front and without the 30 or 40 years of continuous on-field success that the likes of Wigan bear the fruits of in terms of young player participation. The problem is that as long as the likes of Taylor and Green (an import but the point still stands) are picked off at will by bigger sides, any production line can realistically only move players in the same direction. Why would the next Scott Taylor stay at HKR?

What it boils down to, ultimately, is whether Wood and the RFL have the bottle to back up statements like today's with genuine action. All SL sides are capable of producing young talent given a level playing field. It's not rocket science. As long as there are hierarchies these will inevitable trickle down into said systems. A youth system can't buck the trend of shedding elite established pros.

I don't agree with you DSK.

Wigan are allowed to build their squad within the rules that work to keep top teams from running away with things.

The reality IMHO is you have two clubs in Hull who chase the same young players, and Rovers boss Hudgell decided to stop making up the difference between what they could afford on the salary cap (£1.1M I think) and what the top clubs afford i.e. the full £1.65M.

I think it would be outrageous to re-engineer and manipulate Superleague to ensure two clubs can compete from the one place, and that they can also compete paying only 2/3 of what clubs are supposed to strive to pay for a quality league.

The problems are entirely of HKR's making, it's sad, and I don't like it because we need 14 clubs that can produce quality kids and pay wages up to a competitive level.

But Wigan are not at fault and nor are the RFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for calling my proposal "social engineering", fine. I'm happy with that. I'll call the current system you all seem to love what it is - "pandering to bullies". In the US and Aus they have no issue with leveling measures designed to create the best product and players and it seems to work for them, while we have a small parochial sport to cheer about from the margins.

My system would see top-down competition week in-week out, whereas the current system gave us 2 horrible scorelines today.

I'll leave Nigel Wood and the RFL to decide which system they like best, as ultimately it's their opinions that count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you suggesting we have an entire lower league geared up for providing the Superleague with players, but that can also create a huge fanbase of it's own (like the NCAA and NFL and NBA)?

How do they do it in Aus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with you DSK.

Wigan are allowed to build their squad within the rules that work to keep top teams from running away with things.

The reality IMHO is you have two clubs in Hull who chase the same young players, and Rovers boss Hudgell decided to stop making up the difference between what they could afford on the salary cap (£1.1M I think) and what the top clubs afford i.e. the full £1.65M.

I think it would be outrageous to re-engineer and manipulate Superleague to ensure two clubs can compete from the one place, and that they can also compete paying only 2/3 of what clubs are supposed to strive to pay for a quality league.

The problems are entirely of HKR's making, it's sad, and I don't like it because we need 14 clubs that can produce quality kids and pay wages up to a competitive level.

But Wigan are not at fault and nor are the RFL.

This is just your usual assault on the City of Hull though Parky - the same issue exists (more so) with Wakey and Cas and even with Wire and Widnes. It is a demographic issue but it is not JUST a demographic issue. 20K fans packed the KC on Friday so clearly there is considerable demand for RL in Hull. 2 SL sides? It's a debate. But the debate here is more subtle - it's better teams getting better off worse teams and where that leaves any attempts to create a competitive league.

Lay off the Hull-bashing or at least confine it to more suitable threads. This is about how we stop the big sides packing their squads while at the same time thinning those of the small sides. Double jeopardy.

No-one sold me Leeds-Widnes yet then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My system would see top-down competition week in-week out, whereas the current system gave us 2 horrible scorelines today

Have to disagree there. 2 horrible scorelines today out of 14 games? and how many horrible scorelines in the season so far? at the end of the season.

Is this what you want? In 2009 , the Detroit lions agreed to a 6-year, $78 million deal with $41.7 million guaranteed with first draft pick Stafford a day before the draft officially started.

In any case, what happens to the drafted player after the first season. If HKR want to attract and retain players, they has better up their game rather than asking the better teams to go easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no excuses kr have been a disgrace and sandercockup is to blame he has talked the team out of any chance they had of making a game of it, wigan are playing with a patched up side sandercock should hav used that to inspire is team.

Very negative talk pre-match. Gave the team an excuse to fail and feel sorry for themselves. Hull KR are much better than this and we all know who they are missing - but poor work from the coach on this occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is about how we stop the big sides packing their squads while at the same time thinning those of the small sides.

Not sure your logic adds up Wigans wheeling and dealing towards the back end of 2012 and in the off season

Out;

Leuluai

Carmont

Lima

Finch

Marsh

Mellor

Fielden

Russell

Hock

In

Smith

Thornley

Green

Taylor

Hardly "packing" the squad if you don't mind me saying, I'd be amazed given the nature of Hocks departure if Wigan are even paying up to the cap, plenty on here seemingly had a lot to say in the build up to this season about Wigans perceived lack of depth if I recall correctly.

I think Hull KRs issues are a lot closer to home than Wigans recruitment policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they have bought up the best players of other teams, this isn't in doubt.

The players become available because the club are usually in a financial mess at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Hull KRs issues are a lot closer to home than Wigans recruitment policy.

Yes but, if nobody blames Wigan, you lot don't come out to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure your logic adds up Wigans wheeling and dealing towards the back end of 2012 and in the off season

Out;

Leuluai

Carmont

Lima

Finch

Marsh

Mellor

Fielden

Russell

Hock

In

Smith

Thornley

Green

Taylor

Hardly "packing" the squad if you don't mind me saying, I'd be amazed given the nature of Hocks departure if Wigan are even paying up to the cap, plenty on here seemingly had a lot to say in the build up to this season about Wigans perceived lack of depth if I recall correctly.

I think Hull KRs issues are a lot closer to home than Wigans recruitment policy.

Wigan lost some key players, for sure, but the fact remains - whether you like it or not - that them signing Smith, Green and Taylor was bad for (and I will say this in bold so I cannot be misunderstood) the competitive balance of the league. That is - quite plainly and simply - a fact, unless we agree that they are bad players. Whilst I also think there is an issue with regard to fairness (Taylor is our player! etc.), that isn't even my point here. My point is the hypocrisy of people arguing in this thread that all is right with SL as a competitive beast when we have so many players moving up the hierarchy.

We have to decide what we want in SL. The fairly ruthless hierarchical system (salary cap notwithstanding) we have now or something more balanced and competitive. Which is why I'm interested in (and baffled by) Wood's comments, although I do like the fact that he made them - it shows that he acknowledges the problem. But this result was not a freak, and nor will it be the last of its nature this season IMHO. And such results will hurt us both at the turnstiles and in respect to the marketability of our sports' elite league. No-one will watch or want to be seen to support in any way an obvious mismatch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DSK, I can understand your frustration, and you must be bitterly disappointed but Hudgell went for the spend big on players, win games, fill stands model. Its an ancient and outmoded sports business model. I can understand why he went for that when you were first promoted, you could have been relegated at the end of your first season. Since licensing has been brought in though there has been ample opportunity for HKR to change the model, they didn't. They kept on throwing money at overseas players hoping to buy that success that would fill the stands and pay the bills.

In the modern game it is more important to get your youth policy right than have a big wallet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017