Archived

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

gingerjon

Phoenix RL - the future of RL in London

123 posts in this topic

You just don't read the posts. No pro-RL club will just grow and grow by "hard work" if the evidence 1904-2014 is anything to go by. In 90 years clubs need men with money whether Fartown need Davey with £10,000,000 to take them to the top now or Hunslet needed Graham Liles with £10,000 to get them promotion from division 2 in the 1980's.

 

I have never ever said, and I reconfirmed this yet again that any club cannot drop lucky on a millionaire. Why would I ever say that when a busted club with nos assets and no prospects like Salford hit it big style. But the reality is that out of our 39 wonderful clubs we have today seven have that privelige. So there's the facts. Pro RL clubs have a one in five and a half chance of having a owner with enough money to tkae them into SL. Waiting for a rich man to come along is not a serious proposition for running our game.

 

7 is 50% of 14, so 50%, that's half, of the SL are propped up by an investor, so it looks like it's a quite serious proposition for SL. Featherstone and Hailifax at present and Leigh and Barrow in the past have found investors even with no p and r. With, hopefully. the return of p and r and the opening up of opportunities to advance  to SL, the lower tier clubs will become more of an attraction to investors. So the odds might improve from the one in five scenario

 

. Even with the one in five scenario, the 32 clubs who are not in the golden circle of investor financed SL clubs will  find 6 investors ( 1 in five ), so that is 6 more teams who can enhance their hard work developments with investor cash to progress to the big time. Maybe that is why Lenegan is running scared. Monopolies don't stomach competition too well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The return of p and r and the opening up of opportunities to advance  to SL, the lower tier clubs will become more of an attraction to investors.

 

You seem to forget P & R to SL 1996 to 2006. Reality tells you different. Let's debate reality or not bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with the one in five scenario, the 32 clubs who are not in the golden circle of investor financed SL clubs will  find 6 investors ( 1 in five ), so that is 6 more teams who can enhance their hard work developments with investor cash to progress to the big time.

Ah but the odds change then. Out of those 32 clubs there may be one with a big investor (Fev? There may be more - I don't know), so it isn't 1 in 5 any more, it becomes 1 in 32. It's like the probability of picking a diamond out of a pack of cards is 1 in 4 (13 in 52), so if I then take 12 diamonds out my probability is no longer 1 in 4, but instead is 1 in 40. You obviously aren't a poker player... :tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 That wasn't how I interpreted it to be fair. I thought Parksider was just highlighting the fact that without Samuels, Crusaders would never have been in Super League in the first place.

Whilst that's true, it is also the case that the club wouldn't have self-destructed after one year in SL under different ownership. That's why he is hated. He highlighted the "non-M62" bit which is bizarre because the people who hate him the most live in South Wales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who support the Broncos may have strong opinions about some of David Hughes decisions. That is only natural.I know there are some who are pleased that he has ensured that people in the south east can go and watch top level RL in London regularly. I don't know if London will stay in the Super League but I have enjoyed attending Super League matches without having to travel a very long way.

Hughes and Samuels were allowed to have a go at expanding RL into two very important areas. There's a strong history of RL in Wales - we had a Welsh presence of significant size in the league, and for many years had Welsh international sides.

London has hosted big RL games for over 100 years and Fulham weren't the first club in London.

Those gentelemen put a lot of money in. There was simply nobody with more money willling to do so, so the RFL, Hughes and Samuels took a big chance and it didn't come off as they'd like it to have done.

Along the way they proved that if the money was there then RL could suceed in these areas, they proved the Welsh and Londoners can play RL, they proved they would watch RL if the clubs could compete. But it was not to be. Soccer and RU are far too dominant for an inexpensive foothold.

Where all this "hate" stuff comes in I don't know, the main "hate" I see is sadly a widespread hatred towards any club from outside the M62 being given an SL place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hughes and Samuels were allowed to have a go at expanding RL into two very important areas. There's a strong history of RL in Wales - we had a Welsh presence of significant size in the league, and for many years had Welsh international sides.

London has hosted big RL games for over 100 years and Fulham weren't the first club in London.

Those gentelemen put a lot of money in. There was simply nobody with more money willling to do so, so the RFL, Hughes and Samuels took a big chance and it didn't come off as they'd like it to have done.

Along the way they proved that if the money was there then RL could suceed in these areas, they proved the Welsh and Londoners can play RL, they proved they would watch RL if the clubs could compete. But it was not to be. Soccer and RU are far too dominant for an inexpensive foothold.

Where all this "hate" stuff comes in I don't know, the main "hate" I see is sadly a widespread hatred towards any club from outside the M62 being given an SL place.

I don't think anyone hates Hughes. Even people who think he has run the club into the ground think he was well intentioned and very generous with his money.

 

As for Samuel, the reason why people hate him is that he sold a dream to the good folk of South Wales then pulled the plug. He shouldn't have made promises that he couldn't keep.

 

Now former Crusaders fans hating him has nothing to do with "widespread hatred towards any club from outside the M62 being given a SL place". Only in your head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to forget P & R to SL 1996 to 2006. Reality tells you different. Let's debate reality or not bother.

 

I think we got Davy and Hudgell on board for Huddersfield and Hull KR's promotions and Castleford were promoted twice and survived relegation as did Huddersfield. lLeigh were the only club who got promoted and then relegated immediately and even they did not lose any money of the exercise. So, yes, what reality would you like to debate. ? Wakefield also won promotion and, despite no Sky money for their first season are still there, albeit by the skin of their teeth.

 

The failures during that period were the appointed/anointed clubs of Paris Crusaders and London. The disasters or near disasters amongst relegated clubs were the forcebly relegated Widnes and Featherstone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah but the odds change then. Out of those 32 clubs there may be one with a big investor (Fev? There may be more - I don't know), so it isn't 1 in 5 any more, it becomes 1 in 32. It's like the probability of picking a diamond out of a pack of cards is 1 in 4 (13 in 52), so if I then take 12 diamonds out my probability is no longer 1 in 4, but instead is 1 in 40. You obviously aren't a poker player... :tongue:

 

You are right about that. All gambling leaves me cold. In the end you will lose. My maths isn't too good either but you have lost me there. If there is one investor  for every five clubs then there should 6 in a pool of 30. Anything more complicated than that and my eyes will begin to glaze over. 

 

Your example with the cards seems to be dependent upon the fact that there are only 13 diamonds in a deck and this is fixed  number but with investors, they being human beings and not cards, the odds might be 5 to I at any given moment but further cards can be added to the deck for any number of reasons, as it were, and this will indeed change the odds but in a favourable way as humans are capricious beings and not set in stone by precedent as the number of diamonds in a deck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are suggesting Genesis as a name perhaps Exodus would be more appropriate !

Maybe if the board got their "Act(s)" together the fanbase could increase in "Numbers" as RL becomes a "Revelation" to Londoners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if the board got their "Act(s)" together the fanbase could increase in "Numbers" as RL becomes a "Revelation" to Londoners.

 

I don't Noah bout that.

 

Jesus wept...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if the board got their "Act(s)" together the fanbase could increase in "Numbers" as RL becomes a "Revelation" to Londoners.

Yes. Which board did you have in mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hughes and Samuels were allowed to have a go at expanding RL into two very important areas. There's a strong history of RL in Wales - we had a Welsh presence of significant size in the league, and for many years had Welsh international sides.London has hosted big RL games for over 100 years and Fulham weren't the first club in London.Those gentelemen put a lot of money in. There was simply nobody with more money willling to do so, so the RFL, Hughes and Samuels took a big chance and it didn't come off as they'd like it to have done.Along the way they proved that if the money was there then RL could suceed in these areas, they proved the Welsh and Londoners can play RL, they proved they would watch RL if the clubs could compete. But it was not to be. Soccer and RU are far too dominant for an inexpensive foothold.Where all this "hate" stuff comes in I don't know, the main "hate" I see is sadly a widespread hatred towards any club from outside the M62 being given an SL place.

I cannot remember the names but I distinctly remember people who were on the ground at the time posting on this forum that they didn't lay all the blame at the feet of Samuels for Crusaders demise. It was a real setback for RL that Crusaders did not survive in a Super League in my view. I don't think it was a cause for celebration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot remember the names but I distinctly remember people who were on the ground at the time posting on this forum that they didn't lay all the blame at the feet of Samuels for Crusaders demise. It was a real setback for RL that Crusaders did not survive in a Super League in my view. I don't think it was a cause for celebration.

The point being that even those who didn't entirely blame him thought him partially responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People tend to forget that Samuels' company did the majority of its business with Woolworths, and when thet went phut he didn't have the money to support the Crusaders any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People tend to forget that Samuels' company did the majority of its business with Woolworths, and when thet went phut he didn't have the money to support the Crusaders any more.

True but he also did the "sugar daddy then leave you in the lurch" routine in RU and soccer as well. He ought not to have known better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot remember the names but I distinctly remember people who were on the ground at the time posting on this forum that they didn't lay all the blame at the feet of Samuels for Crusaders demise. It was a real setback for RL that Crusaders did not survive in a Super League in my view. I don't think it was a cause for celebration.

 

Well it depends on who you are and what you personally like or dislike about the game.

 

For those who wanted to see expansion Crusaders and London were a delight. I saw both clubs beat mighty Leeds at Headingley and certainly both clubs were capable of attendances as good as M62 clubs at times. When Gateshead came in they were sixth best team in the league on 4,000 crowds in year one!!

 

For those who did not like the idea of foreigners being parachuted in, or clubs being "created" rather than "growing" through the league system (which nobody can ever do without private money) then there had to be something wrong about these clubs. Stuff like the chairman is dodgy, or the locals don't support Rugby league, or they are full of imports.

 

The M62 clubs have been full of dodgy Chairmen, Chairmen who have walked away and left their clubs to die, traditional clubs that attracted less fans than Cru, Gateshead and London, clubs that have gone bust and clubs stacked with imports. But the strength of feeling against the "new clubs" in many parts is so very very strong that often it has brought satisfied smiles to many people, a sense of celebration tinged with a large dose of double standards. I'd guess that if Neil Hudgell walked away, like John Wilkinson did there'd not be anywhere near the amount of venom spat at Leighton Samuels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who really cared about expansion, Crusaders were a disaster. They set expansion back a decade or so. Still as long as they gave the "pins in a map" brigade a vacarious thrill, it doesn't really matter, does it?

 

As for chairman walking away. Reactions to this tend to come from the fans of that club rather than the game. John Wilko is a legend with Salford fans, Hudgell even if he left now would be thought of as someone who did well for the club but wasn't quite rich enough, Hughes is considered a gent but hopeless at club management and Samuel would probably need a bodyguard in many parts of South Wales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good that the Broncos 2014 situation has been resolved, but still leaves many questions about the long-term open. I think the Supporters Trust idea has momentum and whether inside or outside the Broncos it can build a stable future for our game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the number of community clubs in sw london will be more than happy for an extra set of hands to carry on their excellent work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good that the Broncos 2014 situation has been resolved, but still leaves many questions about the long-term open. I think the Supporters Trust idea has momentum and whether inside or outside the Broncos it can build a stable future for our game.

I'm not sure that the guy behind it saw Phoenix as a successor to Broncos so much as an successor to the old Fulham RLFC. Broncos moving to NW London still leaves something of a gap in SW London. Obviously the project will have less impetus as there aren't a couple of thousand hacked off Broncos fans looking for a club to follow but there are enough people who want a specifically SW London club with Fulham nostagia thrown in then there might be room for another entry club in the London league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that the guy behind it saw Phoenix as a successor to Broncos so much as an successor to the old Fulham RLFC. Broncos moving to NW London still leaves something of a gap in SW London. Obviously the project will have less impetus as there aren't a couple of thousand hacked off Broncos fans looking for a club to follow but there are enough people who want a specifically SW London club with Fulham nostagia thrown in then there might be room for another entry club in the London league.

Thanks for that. You're right but it would be wrong to rule anything out right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True but he also did the "sugar daddy then leave you in the lurch" routine in RU and soccer as well. He ought not to have known better.

I assume you mean he ought to have known better? You make him sound like an older man seducing innocent 19 year old girls. I have to say I don't really see Gary Hetherington and Nigel Wood in that light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume you mean he ought to have known better? You make him sound like an older man seducing innocent 19 year old girls. I have to say I don't really see Gary Hetherington and Nigel Wood in that light.

I'm saying that he has a history of saying one thing and doing another. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leighton_Samuel

 

Yeah, I know it's only Wikipedia but I spent a lot of time writing that and referencing it.

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