Archived

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

superten

london broncos

61 posts in this topic

Isn't the Widnes club for sale because the owner wants out?

David Hughes at London has through his own money made the club debt free, but the RFL want them out of Super League. Perhaps because David Hughes appears to be in a Mexican stand off with the RFL. A discision i think the RFL will regret in time.

Salford's new owner is a very rich man and is prepared to spend big. The RFL want a bigger precence in that part of Manchester and see the doc as the man who can give them that precence.

Castleford will stay in Super League if Wakefield are cut.

Isn't the Widnes club for sale because the owner wants out?

David Hughes at London has through his own money made the club debt free, but the RFL want them out of Super League. Perhaps because David Hughes appears to be in a Mexican stand off with the RFL. A discision i think the RFL will regret in time.

Salford's new owner is a very rich man and is prepared to spend big. The RFL want a bigger precence in that part of Manchester and see the doc as the man who can give them that precence.

Castleford will stay in Super League if Wakefield are cut.

steve o'connor still holds the majority share holding, the actual announcement was to encourage new investment in the club hence we have 4 new board members who are investing in the club along side steve, the is not for sale end of story...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hearing in July that it would be 12 teams in 2014. London being one of the teams going

The big big fear could be the rfl returning to the heart lands with London going and if going to twelve could catalan be the other to go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big big fear could be the rfl returning to the heart lands with London going and if going to twelve could catalan be the other to go

I'm in the camp that thinks in 5 years time that there won't be any professional or semi professional clubs in the UK south of the Trent and that the even the top clubs will be part time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the camp that thinks in 5 years time that there won't be any professional or semi professional clubs in the UK south of the Trent and that the even the top clubs will be part time.

That has got to be the fear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the camp that thinks in 5 years time that there won't be any professional or semi professional clubs in the UK south of the Trent and that the even the top clubs will be part time.

That might be your fear, and it might be mine too, but some people actively want that to happen. How many times have we heard people say that the game can't support a full-time professional competition? These same people would rather see us spread our limited resources over 24 clubs and end up with a semi-pro comp, just so that some mid-level clubs can get to play in the top league - regardless of the standard of that league. Seeing our best players then disappear to the NRL and rugby union is a price they'll happily pay for that vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the camp that thinks in 5 years time that there won't be any professional or semi professional clubs in the UK south of the Trent and that the even the top clubs will be part time.

No chance, the six that walked out last night are set up to be professional, and have independent funds, so in that respect as much as I hate supporting anything that doesn't appear to be 'for the good of the game' I accept that as a sport we are undersold, under marketed and quite simply rubbish at selling the game. If you were a professional set up you would want to know big brother, the RFL in this case, was as good at what you do locally, but at a national level.

 

I recall the giants wanted an 8-10 team super league, and I think Warrington wanted that as well, an idea that was rejected overall. They don't want 28 matches a year clearly, and I think that is because the owners carry the teams so although the match fees are important its more important to get season passes sold. All the chairmen have said in the last year season tickets are what counts and at the Giants there are loads of spin off's and money off vouchers that go with one. So less matches aren't the issue for those clubs.

 

What is the issue appears to be the lack of any other income that they generate alone, and that is the single biggest fear I have, no major sponsors a la NRL means we have gone back to 1994 when only Wigan were truly full time, the only progress has been we now have 5 or 6 teams that could stay full time.

 

The progress has been on the field in many ways, off the field there is now a major block to progress because some teams have naturally outstripped others. I understand the good of the game argument but if you run a full time business I don't think that holds water. All the team sponsors at super league level have local connections, even where they are national players so its the local branch effectively sponsoring a team. There's no real money in that. If you look at soccer or RU they have national sponsors. Big difference and that's the issue, how to sell the competition.

 

I do think the 3X8 system would be worthwhile if the draw was made more appealing and possible seeded which would reduce the top tier games between the top 8, which seems to be a sticking point. The only alternative is three divisions of 10, 2 up 2 down every year, which as I noted above has already been rejected. Although thinking about it, the make up of the comp might be a red herring, its the long term sustainability of a competition that's the issue here.

 

Ken Davy is no mug and I would imagine the Warrington board aren't idiots either, and Pearson at Hull is a ruthless business man. So its no longer just Leneghan, and I am a little surprised Koukash didn't side with them, possibly because his mate at Saints and Hetherington might have his ear.

 

Leeds are a bit odd because they have a shed load of central funding from the RFU for Leeds Rugby and run/own both teams, plus they make a year on year profit. So perhaps they can afford largesse.

 

Can anyone recall superleague Europe kicking off in a similar way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That might be your fear, and it might be mine too, but some people actively want that to happen. How many times have we heard people say that the game can't support a full-time professional competition? These same people would rather see us spread our limited resources over 24 clubs and end up with a semi-pro comp, just so that some mid-level clubs can get to play in the top league - regardless of the standard of that league. Seeing our best players then disappear to the NRL and rugby union is a price they'll happily pay for that vision.

 

Brilliantly put.

 

The blood of the sport will not just be on the hands of the RFL but also the hands of the stubborn fans of Featherstone, Halifax, Leigh and their ilk who simply would not man up and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the return of P&R will be the death knell for the game. especially for london. with licensing they can hava a chance to re-group and rebuild the club without the fear of going down,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the camp that thinks in 5 years time that there won't be any professional or semi professional clubs in the UK south of the Trent and that the even the top clubs will be part time.

been hearing talk like this for 60 years, the game is a fantastic product, never bettered by any other sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the return of P&R will be the death knell for the game. especially for london. with licensing they can hava a chance to re-group and rebuild the club without the fear of going down,

They are in favour of the new structure, they will find "their" level in the new format, and then hopefully rebuild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are in favour of the new structure, they will find "their" level in the new format, and then hopefully rebuild.

They are looking for a series of concessions from the RFL, ranging from an increased number of overseas players through to the RFL running and funding the academy. They also like the idea of reducing stadium criteria because that would mean they could move to Barnet. That's why they're supporting the RFL.

 

I'd also suggest that there are clear political reasons why Bradford are supporting the RFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are in favour of the new structure, they will find "their" level in the new format, and then hopefully rebuild.

 

Interesting, at lower level an effective academy could be the platform for some success. They'd need to have the money for them to stay though??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are looking for a series of concessions from the RFL, ranging from an increased number of overseas players through to the RFL running and funding the academy. They also like the idea of reducing stadium criteria because that would mean they could move to Barnet.

 

Interesting again. That they are shedding players may not mean impending doom? My word some people will be mega-unhappy if they get those concessions AND survive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the return of P&R will be the death knell for the game. especially for london. with licensing they can hava a chance to re-group and rebuild the club without the fear of going down,

I agree 100% with you on that. Some clubs will use P&R as an excuse not to develop juniors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliantly put.

 

The blood of the sport will not just be on the hands of the RFL but also the hands of the stubborn fans of Featherstone, Halifax, Leigh and their ilk who simply would not man up and move on.

The stubborn fans of Featherstone, Halifax, Leigh and their ilk have absolutely no influence on the progress, or otherwise, of the sport; they have not had any influence for two decades. No decisions in the past twenty years have taken them into account, or their wishes and dreams, or the aspirations of their teams. They turn up, or otherwise, to watch their team, under whatever conditions are imposed on them, and no more than that. A few sad, self-centred, small-minded dinosaurs expressing a victim mentality on forums are not bringing down the sport. Look elsewhere to place any blame.

 

The approaching crisis is a financial one: there is insufficient total income to maintain a sizeable fully professional league, and a supporting structure. Dealing with this is the true issue. Any blood will be on the hands of those who get this wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interesting part is who goes with London?

I thought at one time it woulld be Bradford, but lately the RFL seem to have given a lot of vocal support to them. If you held a gun to my head i would say its a toss up between Wakefield and Widnes.

As VW says there is no reason why Widnes should not be in Super League  next season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the camp for a smaller super league but only in return for more international matches. If we take super league down to 12 playing 22 weekly rounds plus the magic week end to make 23 , Top six make playoffs round 1 3rd v 6th and 4th v 5th 1st and 2nd getting a bye. Round two 1st v lowest rank team and second v the other with the final between the two winners . So that's 26 weeks for the league instead of the current 31. We could then use those weeks for a European  international competition. A six team five week comp either played in one country which is my own preferred option or spread through out. Look how the world cup is taking off this year we need to build on this . We failed to build on Wales success in 1995 and Ireland in 2008 lets not do the same after this world cup . Another point on world cup as much as im looking forward to it I do think the quarter final venues are poor. Only the DW STADIUM good enough for quarters in my eyes. If they wanted a quarter final in wales it should have been at Cardiff or Swansea. For West Yorkshire it should have been at Huddersfield.  I would have looked at Reebox Bolton as an option for a quarter final and the KC in Hull .Also would have given London two group matches one involving Australia and one involving New Zealand .  So back to European cup go for 2015 along with smaller super league. Let Wales host it say two pools of three where teams play every team from the other pool for three matches . Top two in each pool make semis and then a final so five games.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliantly put.

 

The blood of the sport will not just be on the hands of the RFL but also the hands of the stubborn fans of Featherstone, Halifax, Leigh and their ilk who simply would not man up and move on.

I don't think it's the fault of clubs like Featherstone, Leigh and Halifax that London are struggling, but rather the big guns in Super League!

They are very good at saying that certain small town clubs should move aside to let them in Super League, then saying that certain clubs can't be relegated- That's artificial! If they can be artificial to put the smaller club's noses out of joint, why can't they be artificial in the case of London and let them have more of the Sky money so they can attract the best players and compete at the very top? The reason is that they would have to give something up and maybe not win as many trophies if they were to make the Broncos successful.

For years they have been happy to let them squander at the foot of Super League, but they don't want them to be successful in case it's at their expense instead of clubs like Fev, Fax & Leigh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why not castleford or salford? widnes are on a secure financial footing mate and are continuing to build. we will be in super league without a doubt.

So will Salford VW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the plan is to abandon London after what 35 years or whatever it has been, and bring in a system to prop up teams who have had 100 years and are still permanently always teetering , or at best struggling. ( and yes that would include the Giants if they were in that catagory )

 

Has the RFL sounded out Sky to see how they feel about dropping London, Probably not It's not really their style to think ahead.

 

If super league goes down to 12, why can the Super league clubs not pass the "two clubs money" on to London,

not long ago they were going ( and rightly so IMO) to buy Bradford to keep them alive, which i think is what gave the RFL a nudge that Super league can survive without the RFL if it has too, Dont think the opposite would apply, So the theorists about Bradford supporting The RFL out of nescessity could be short lived.

 

London is worth saving for me, and to talk of dropping Catalan is madness, Still what do they matter , when you can always tootle down the road and watch a good local derby, even if it is at a low level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there should be an SL team in London, but arguing that clubs up north are teetering after 100 years and london have only had 35 years to teeter seems a little hollow.

 

Absolutely shouldn't drop catalans, but surely we need to now be looking into how to make their sucess into a) international sucess and B) a better league in France? How long were NZ/Auckland warriors  about until NZ started competing? Or did they always because of their boys playing in the NRL?

 

You last sentence doesn't make sense to me. London have had 35 years to improve rugby league in the uk. Have they? If not, what evidence is there to say that they will in the next 35?

 

I know that seems a little negative, but I am struggling to see the answers. To give them three clubs' worth of money would seem unfair to the northern teeterers (if you will), but I definitely think that they should get a london weighting - and I don't think 10% would suffice. I can't see what else you can do to attract the stars - I mean plenty of young lads snap up the chance to move to london, why not league players?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean plenty of young lads snap up the chance to move to london, why not league players?

Because the job market dictates that the best Rugby League jobs (and better pay - i.e. the money goes alot further) are not in London - they're up north. This is why the salary cap and share of tv money probably needs to be around 3x what it is now for London to ever have a successful RL team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very odd thread. It suggests the RFL have a plan, and are capable of closing down, propping up or maybe even setting clubs up in the first place. I can't see any evidence of their ability to do any of these.

The Broncos were in SL for a couple of reasons - the Global News Corp plan in 1996 thought it might be a good idea, but mainly because some independent businessmen put their money on the line to run the club in the top league. Since then the Broncos have been like most other clubs - they stayed in the league on merit and because people still wanted to put their own money into them. If they aren't around next year it's because no one wants to fund them any more and that's the same story you will find in any professional sport. Clubs come and go, and sometimes fellow clubs or the overall organisation help them out from time to time.

For better or for worse there isn't any grand plan to retreat to the heartlands or expand SL elsewhere because this suggests a level of organisational competence or funding hitherto not seen in the sport.

Personally I think a rubbish Broncos don't do the game any favours and getting a successful business plan together to make them good seems tough.

Meanwhile to claim elsewhere in this thread that SL will diminish or become part time is crazy talk for me. There are enough successful businessmen and philanthropists in the game to make sure this doesn't happen. There aren't enough to go around yet so as ever some clubs will do well and others won't - that's professional sport. A lot of the current internal disputes are sabre rattling and powers struggles rather than a sign of impending doom. And again this happens in every sport from time to time.

And regardless, aren't we having a wonderful World Cup? Cheer up folks!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the job market dictates that the best Rugby League jobs (and better pay - i.e. the money goes alot further) are not in London - they're up north. This is why the salary cap and share of tv money probably needs to be around 3x what it is now for London to ever have a successful RL team.

 

I am all for London having an increased salary cap, but you can really think it should be three times the salary cap for teams up north? How come the London wieghting isn't that much for other professions (which do see northerners going down south)?

 

EDIT: Sorry, just read what you said again - it's not JUST the money, but the better jobs being up north. I take it this means winning teams too. But would making London able to just completely buy their way to the top whilst also denying other clubs (e.g. Salford) not be a bit, well, wrong?

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