Archived

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

weloveyouwakefield2

Tony Smith

80 posts in this topic

Haven't read TS's bit but do think that P&R should be consigned to history.

For SL to move on it needs to grab hold of youngsters in their formative years 10+.

They are the future players and fans who will be shaping the game in the years ahead.

My son has now got 3 mates from school going to watch Hull FC (admittedly son has been indoctrinated by a zealous father) and they all ask why SL doesn't get the media coverage it deserves after 3 games!

The RL should spend millions on getting a top notch PR/Marketing team in place and the rest would follow.

Koukash is like a breath of fresh air and I really hope others start to speak out and follow his lead.

Bit drunk (so sorry if I'm off thread) :P:)

What about youngsters in towns not in SL? The game will die there so you'll be left with a player pool restricted to those in SL.

If licensing is working why have you just signed an Aussie?

I think you might be a tad afraid of being relegated!

P.S. I agree about the bit regarding spend on marketing. I'd prefer a highly professional centralised marketing team to do the work for all teams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't read TS's bit but do think that P&R should be consigned to history.

For SL to move on it needs to grab hold of youngsters in their formative years 10+.

They are the future players and fans who will be shaping the game in the years ahead.

My son has now got 3 mates from school going to watch Hull FC (admittedly son has been indoctrinated by a zealous father) and they all ask why SL doesn't get the media coverage it deserves after 3 games!

The RL should spend millions on getting a top notch PR/Marketing team in place and the rest would follow.

Koukash is like a breath of fresh air and I really hope others start to speak out and follow his lead.

Bit drunk (so sorry if I'm off thread) :P:)

Not at all. Koukash engaging with the local population especially the schools is great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had P&R for years, It was disastrous

We have had licensing for a handful of years

It has improved the competition for the better

It has improved the player pool immeasurably

It's improved the marketability of the game and allowed its expansion beyond the m62

It has succeeded on every level that P&R had failed on.

I really agree with this post but IMHO you have missed the rest of the story out.

Under both the principles of licensing Leeds & Wigan followed before it came along, and Hull and Warrington met when it did come along and Catalans and Saints have met under licensing, it certainly has "worked" and it has improved matters.

Under licensing now Bradford have a new business minded board, and Wakefield have a possible new stadium so I'd hope it will work for them. Also Salford have the money and the owner has the drive to meet the licensing terms on all counts.

But you can see the problem. After what?? Seven years of licensing we have a six club Superleague.

Sure there's three clubs who remain "work in progress" after seven years but we've hit a point where we are looking at the next round of licenses and as it stands we can't fill 10 spots let alone 12 or 14.

OK you may say persevere with licensing as clubs will get there??? Not on the evidence I see?

London - can't get anywhere under licensing and even with RFL help are going backwards

Cas - No ground and the owner has given up and will allow team to disintegrate

HKR - owner also given up and will allow team to disintegrate

Widnes - Chairman steps down from the board and invites others to invest

Huddersfield - crowds gone nowhere in over six year a point made by the chairman!!!

One can only hope Featherstone and Halifax are up to filling the spots, but will they grow to be "A" grade licencees? Or just be propped up in the same way Cas, London, Widnes, Fartown and HKR are???

Maybe Toulouse can shore things up.

But whilst licensing has improved several clubs and is pushing a couple more to get there there are not enough resources for the others to have any hope of making the standards licensing sets, and so you see them talking "glass ceilings" and giving up.

Let's hope we aren't going to continue the debate on Licensing.v.P & R because IMHO neither works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cas - No ground and the owner has given up and will allow team to disintegrate

Christ - we've got a game on June 8th, where are we going to play and can you point me to the press release showing about the owner having given up please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've got a game on June 8th, where are we going to play and can you point me to the press release showing about the owner having given up please

Wheldon road, and the owner and CEO have said they are having to cut their "cloth" so they are giving up on chasing Superleage licensing criteria and looking to just stay afloat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can fill as many slots as we like.

 

Licensing as I see it was about having the best XX teams in one league. 

 

They don't all have to be A graded to be classed as a SL team.

 

If you are taking that stance then you could take that stance on pretty much any league in the world and find that the English Premier League is a 5 team league, the NRL is a 6 team league and so on.

 

The reason for having criteria is to encourage clubs to improve on key areas, if a team is struggling in one area, it doesn;t mean they are not a SL team.

 

We have 14 SL teams now - it is nonsense to say we are struggling to fill it etc. It may not be made up of teams of the standard we all want in a Perfect World, but then no league anywhere is, even hand-picked 10 team leagues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christ - Cas haven't got a ground to meet the licensing requirements for an "A" grade.

Christ - Fulton is cutting player spending failing the meet the licensing requirements for an "A" grade.

Christ - Cas are moving backwards from the licensing requirements

Christ - Why change the context of the debate from licensing and is it working for Cas to post that?

when you start posting facts I'll come back to you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had P&R for years

It was disastrous

We have had licensing for a handful of years

It has improved the competition for the better - increasing the quality of games and competitiveness of games and from week to week the games are no longer a foregone conclusion

It has improved the player pool immeasurably - no longer are lower level teams filled with journeymen Aussies & Kiwis but younger English players are given a better chance

It's improved the marketability of the game and allowed its expansion beyond the m62 (or rather the old Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway routes)

It has succeeded on every level that P&R had failed on.

 

 

 

We can fill as many slots as we like.

 

Licensing as I see it was about having the best XX teams in one league. 

 

They don't all have to be A graded to be classed as a SL team.

 

If you are taking that stance then you could take that stance on pretty much any league in the world and find that the English Premier League is a 5 team league, the NRL is a 6 team league and so on.

 

The reason for having criteria is to encourage clubs to improve on key areas, if a team is struggling in one area, it doesn;t mean they are not a SL team.

 

We have 14 SL teams now - it is nonsense to say we are struggling to fill it etc. It may not be made up of teams of the standard we all want in a Perfect World, but then no league anywhere is, even hand-picked 10 team leagues.

 

Sensible posts.

 

Makes me wonder just what exactly is going on at the RFL if this is evident to people on the ground but not to them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when you start posting facts I'll come back to you

Don't bother to come back to me just take the point in the right context. As far as chasing the licensing standards go Castleford are simply not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can fill as many slots as we like.

 

Licensing as I see it was about having the best XX teams in one league. 

 

They don't all have to be A graded to be classed as a SL team.

 

If you are taking that stance then you could take that stance on pretty much any league in the world and find that the English Premier League is a 5 team league, the NRL is a 6 team league and so on.

 

The reason for having criteria is to encourage clubs to improve on key areas, if a team is struggling in one area, it doesn;t mean they are not a SL team.

 

We have 14 SL teams now - it is nonsense to say we are struggling to fill it etc. It may not be made up of teams of the standard we all want in a Perfect World, but then no league anywhere is, even hand-picked 10 team leagues.

Of course we can fill as many slots as we like.

We can fill them with the current cash strapped Cas & HKR, failing London, we can put crusaders in, we can put Halifax in money or not, in can go Hunslet and on the most basic of definitions they will be "Superleague" clubs simply because they are in erm Superleague.

That's hardly the way to create a competitive elite division to deliver the SKY contract though.

Your analogy with the EPL is as all these analogies are with other sports, spurious with respect.

Pick out the 24 clubs for Superleague 1 & 2 and at the top you have clubs on 15,000 crowds, £6-7,000,000 turnover, and professional players being paid an average of over £60,000 a year.

At the bottom of the 24 the other week was Hunslet on 400 crowds, £150K turnover if that, and semi pro players on low match payments. The EPL is no comparison when it has clubs like Nottingham Forest and Sheffield Wednesday all the way down their supporting structure.

Licensing as explained by Ralph Rimmer at the outset was to allow clubs time to grow their businesses so we could get to 12 (then 14) competetive clubs, all well marketed, all playing in front of decent sized crowds in good stadia, and all producing their own players, to best deliver the SKY contract and make the professional game strong.

Rimmer never said that the purpose of licensing was to just have the best teams in the top league Dave - P & R was always delivering that..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes me wonder just what exactly is going on at the RFL if this is evident to people on the ground but not to them...

IMHO what's going on is under licensing the salary cap is too high for enough clubs to compete and leaves several that do only having enough money to pay out full cap but nowt left for marketing, ground developments, and junior production which was Hudgell's beef.

I'm sure the RFL certainly DO recognise this (I don't subscribe to the simplistic "they are clueless") and it makes me wonder whether given the recent reactions of chairmen at HKR, London, Widnes and Castleford wether any of them will bother to seriously apply for a license next time.

Last time there were only 15 applications and even then the Halifax application was deemed to be insufficient, inadequate, speculative and "below the standards of a Superleague club".

They only had 14 applications they could take seriously, or at least pretend to be serious about, so the lot of them went in even though as we have found out Bradford were going bust, Salford were going bust, Wakefield HAD gone bust, Cas were not getting a new ground, HKR's chairman was going to pull investment and London were going backwards not forwards. In fact IMHO only seven of the applications were anywhere near "the standards of a Superleague club"

The RFL are IMHO clearly frightened that Licensing an Elite division on standards may lead to the crushing embarrassment of not enough clubs applying on a serious basis. People on here have regularly asked such as "how can London have got a license" and "Why did they give Bradford a licence" and "Why did salford get a licence"

I now think they have a point and that these clubs should not have got a licence.....

The RFL need to get the number of Superleague clubs down which they are trying to do, they also need to deal with the problem Martyn Sadler pointed out that if you just dump a club out of Superleague for not being good enough it can go into freefall.

The proposed changes are confusing but they serve two purposes IMHO.

1. To maintain a Superleague of 8 clubs.

2. To give the clubs who have failed in SL and the CC clubs who are not good enough for SL somewhere to have a competition that will keep the fans interest and maybe (fingers crossed) provide an environment that will see a couple of these club able to build their businesses....

Many see this as a short term panic measure, and I believe it is for the reasons stated...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will actually happen in Leeds and Wigan will dominate the league for years to come

Saints,Wire and maybe the Bulls will manfully try to compete but ultimately be plucky losers

Everyone else will shuffle from boom to bust and investment in those teams will evaporate overnight & the next thing we know is we are watching 1980s standard RL again

Or Rugby Union

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO what's going on is under licensing the salary cap is too high for enough clubs to compete and leaves several that do only having enough money to pay out full cap but nowt left for marketing, ground developments, and junior production which was Hudgell's beef.

I'm sure the RFL certainly DO recognise this (I don't subscribe to the simplistic "they are clueless") and it makes me wonder whether given the recent reactions of chairmen at HKR, London, Widnes and Castleford wether any of them will bother to seriously apply for a license next time.

Last time there were only 15 applications and even then the Halifax application was deemed to be insufficient, inadequate, speculative and "below the standards of a Superleague club".

They only had 14 applications they could take seriously, or at least pretend to be serious about, so the lot of them went in even though as we have found out Bradford were going bust, Salford were going bust, Wakefield HAD gone bust, Cas were not getting a new ground, HKR's chairman was going to pull investment and London were going backwards not forwards. In fact IMHO only seven of the applications were anywhere near "the standards of a Superleague club"

The RFL are IMHO clearly frightened that Licensing an Elite division on standards may lead to the crushing embarrassment of not enough clubs applying on a serious basis. People on here have regularly asked such as "how can London have got a license" and "Why did they give Bradford a licence" and "Why did salford get a licence"

I now think they have a point and that these clubs should not have got a licence.....

The RFL need to get the number of Superleague clubs down which they are trying to do, they also need to deal with the problem Martyn Sadler pointed out that if you just dump a club out of Superleague for not being good enough it can go into freefall.

The proposed changes are confusing but they serve two purposes IMHO.

1. To maintain a Superleague of 8 clubs.

2. To give the clubs who have failed in SL and the CC clubs who are not good enough for SL somewhere to have a competition that will keep the fans interest.....

 

I think you're just about bang on the money there.

 

If I could add that I think licensing also became anti-expansion.  The fiancés required were clearly too much for fledgling clubs, who had yet to build sufficient crowd numbers to allow them to compete.  At least with a less challenging financial environment the expansion clubs can get themselves decent crowd numbers before they find themselves in with the big boys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will actually happen in Leeds and Wigan will dominate the league for years to come

Saints,Wire and maybe the Bulls will manfully try to compete but ultimately be plucky losers

Everyone else will shuffle from boom to bust and investment in those teams will evaporate overnight & the next thing we know is we are watching 1980s standard RL again

Or Rugby Union

 

Who's to say that that wouldn't happen with licensing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that's not what's happened is it?

Look at the issue between Cas & Widnes when Cas won promotion. Free gangway, two clubs vying for the promotion

Whichever failed went bankrupt

THAT is the only thing P&R has ever delivered and will ever deliver. Uncertainty, financial instability and the drive to be not bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's to say that that wouldn't happen with licensing?

Other than Leed's freakish ability to win three games in a row it hasn't happened yet has it?

Yes the biggest & richest clubs will always be at the top, but no one team has been utterly dominant under licensing have they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that's not what's happened is it?

Look at the issue between Cas & Widnes when Cas won promotion. Free gangway, two clubs vying for the promotion

Whichever failed went bankrupt

THAT is the only thing P&R has ever delivered and will ever deliver. Uncertainty, financial instability and the drive to be not bottom.

 

Except that it has, in the licensing era there have been two winners of Super League, Wigan and Leeds.

 

Failure to win promotion does not mean bankruptcy, failure to adequately plan for both eventualities probably does though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a finely crafted argument Lobby?

It's up there with his best. I've seen colanders hold more water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that it has, in the licensing era there have been two winners of Super League, Wigan and Leeds.

Failure to win promotion does not mean bankruptcy, failure to adequately plan for both eventualities probably does though.

That's an argument against the grand final format

How many minor premiers have there been?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course we can fill as many slots as we like.

We can fill them with the current cash strapped Cas & HKR, failing London, we can put crusaders in, we can put Halifax in money or not, in can go Hunslet and on the most basic of definitions they will be "Superleague" clubs simply because they are in erm Superleague.

That's hardly the way to create a competitive elite division to deliver the SKY contract though.

Your analogy with the EPL is as all these analogies are with other sports, spurious with respect.

Pick out the 24 clubs for Superleague 1 & 2 and at the top you have clubs on 15,000 crowds, £6-7,000,000 turnover, and professional players being paid an average of over £60,000 a year.

At the bottom of the 24 the other week was Hunslet on 400 crowds, £150K turnover if that, and semi pro players on low match payments. The EPL is no comparison when it has clubs like Nottingham Forest and Sheffield Wednesday all the way down their supporting structure.

Licensing as explained by Ralph Rimmer at the outset was to allow clubs time to grow their businesses so we could get to 12 (then 14) competetive clubs, all well marketed, all playing in front of decent sized crowds in good stadia, and all producing their own players, to best deliver the SKY contract and make the professional game strong.

Rimmer never said that the purpose of licensing was to just have the best teams in the top league Dave - P & R was always delivering that..............

My point on EPL was very relevant.

 

In that division there are giants like Man U getting 75k per week, Arsenal getting 62k per week and Man City getting 48k per week. At the other end of the scale you have QPR with 17k, Wigan with 19k and Swansea with 20k. Whilst these clubs are all bigger than Rl clubs, there are still giants and minnows in their own field. There are some that make profit and there are some that lose millions. There are those that can realistically win, the others are making up the numbers. It's pretty much the same as SL tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, we had the sort of strong leadership that Tony Smith is calling for last year. It got us the Stobart sponsorship deal, which the RFL pushed the clubs to support.

 

A situation infinitely more preferable than no title sponsor, at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that's not what's happened is it?

Look at the issue between Cas & Widnes when Cas won promotion. Free gangway, two clubs vying for the promotion

Whichever failed went bankrupt

THAT is the only thing P&R has ever delivered and will ever deliver. Uncertainty, financial instability and the drive to be not bottom.

And of course, licensing has done away with financial instability hasn't it?

As for the drive not to be bottom, it's pretty much the same as the drive to be top.

That's my idea of sport...it's called competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point on EPL was very relevant.

 

In that division there are giants like Man U getting 75k per week, Arsenal getting 62k per week and Man City getting 48k per week. At the other end of the scale you have QPR with 17k, Wigan with 19k and Swansea with 20k. Whilst these clubs are all bigger than Rl clubs, there are still giants and minnows in their own field. There are some that make profit and there are some that lose millions. There are those that can realistically win, the others are making up the numbers. It's pretty much the same as SL tbh.

We'd best agree to disagree here, bottom SL club Castleford are skint, bottom EPL club QPR went out and spent tens of millions on players to try to avoid relegation. Soccer has millionaires backing championship clubs and many clubs outside the EPL have the ability to attract 30,000 crowds plus.

If Cas were relegated this year Sadler suggests it would destroy them. In contrast QPR will be spending millions to get back into the EPL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'd best agree to disagree here, bottom SL club Castleford are skint, bottom EPL club QPR went out and spent tens of millions on players to try to avoid relegation. Soccer has millionaires backing championship clubs and many clubs outside the EPL have the ability to attract 30,000 crowds plus.

Exactly. The EPL ain't that great a competition. Sure, it has lots of hype and money, but everyone knows Man Utd are gonna win just about every year. It's pretty rare that another club does. This year was one of the dullest yet, with Man Utd virtually assured of the title after the first month.

I like SL right now because it's not like that. Right now, up to 7 clubs are a genuine chance of winning this year's title. Thats half the league! If we went back to P&R, I fear it would go the way of the EPL with 1-2 clubs all-conquering. The rest would be more concerned with not being relegated.

Those pro-P&R people that claim that licensing has not stopped clubs going bust (therefore is a failure) need to remember the country was, and may still be in the worst financial climate since the 1930's. that is 90% of the reason behind SL's woes, not licensing.

Although some people on here will probably blame licensing for the GFC too!

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