Archived

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

Bearman

We need our own stadium

77 posts in this topic

I thought the council bought Elland Road when Leeds were in financial trouble in the 80's and that it was the ownership of Leeds United that was the secret

The club bought it back shortly after quite cheap,but sold it again when they went bust in the noughties

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The club bought it back shortly after quite cheap,but sold it again when they went bust in the noughties

GFHC bought the club off Bates last year,but back on track owning our own stadium is a nice thought I admire the GAA owning Croke park and they stricty amatuer.Maybe we should have done this in the 1950s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most on here that Old Trafford and Wembley should stay.However if the RFL have to re-locate I would like it to be done with the inclusion of playing,training facilties such as the England soccer set up at Burton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see any benefit in this idea. If we had the money, which we don't, there are loads of more important things to spend it on.

We have ready access to the best stadia in the country and access to excellent training facilities at Loughborough for the national side. We have the flexibility to select from a wide choice of stadia to suit the crowd we are expecting for any given game.

Why would we choose to tie ourselves to one location with a stadium capacity that is the same whether it is the Northern Rail cup final, or the World Cup final?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were a good idea (and it isn't, it is a stupid idea), they would use Osdal.

 

But they won't as, and this is important, it is a stupid idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a nice idea, but that's all. As already stated you need to build big to accomodate the Challenge Cup and GF. World Cup semi's/finals are too infrequent. Unlike the RFU and FA, RL hasn't got the international calender to provide 70-80,000 crowds. Any club sharing would suffer from poor atmosphere, and be at home during any finals. Let's not even bother talking about cost!

 

Wembley is great for it's current use. The north has plenty of large football grounds and the coice will grow with both Merseyside clubs needing more capacity, Man City expanding, Elland Road is decent for tests. No need for change here.

 

I do think Coventry may be worth a future event though. Maybe a test v Aus/NZ, maybe a high profile SL double header. The midlands was one of the few areas left out by the WC, and with Coventry and Leicester looking to progress it's a target area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought about it. But to be honest it's pie in the sky really. Why? Because the RFL don't have the cash.

If they did then they could build a mid-sized stadium for non-Finals internationals.

Combine this with the fact that I think Bradford and Leeds could do with a new stadium and well you've got a strong connection there.

Leeds is undoubtedly the biggest RL city and the only RL city (bar Manchester) with the credibility of having a 'national stadium'.

Of course the SLGF, CCF, and World Cup and Four Nations Finals would no doubt stay in London or Manchester. It is out of the question to move them.

But the World Club Challenge, England internationals and Rhinos home matches would be great for a 40,000 seater at Leeds.

One can dream (and yes this is one hell of a dream!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think of this the better it seems,

I would keep the current finals where they are but magic, CC double header semis, championship finals, amateur cup finals, school finals, uni finals and internationals!

All in a development area the current RFL buildings could be relocated there,

If the local council truly make a profit then it should be a nice little earner for RL....

(As long as theres room for expansion)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, as a recent convert far be it from me to get involved in the politics, but the one bit of rugby league I ever watched regular as clockwork before Oxford RL was set up was the challenge cup final, every year for 30 years on the TV. To me, and millions of others that are/were casual viewers of one game a year the challenge cup final *means* Wembley, it's what you expect to see. Moving it back up north (which you would have to because the finances would only have a chance of working if you put everything in it) because it's "in the heartlands" is the kind of small-minded thinking that would have anybody south of the Trent saying "cheerio, don't let the door hit you on the way out."

 

There is an audience for big games south of the M62, the expansion clubs need to be given time to bed in, and the world cup's just been actually quite good.

 

I'm afraid "we need our own stadium" is probably wrong - not when the money could be better spent on development of the game full stop, rather than a totally unnecessary bauble for the big clubs you've already got. The Challenge Cup final is the once a year showcase for what RL is in England, and why people ought to watch it (having said that, I've never been so bored as watching this year's....). The Grand Final is another chance, but it doesn't have the heritage or part-of-the-furniture cut through for the non-committed Englishman outside the M62 (take it from me).

 

Basically, much as I hate London and spend as little time there as possible, we've got to keep the Challenge Cup final there as a statement of intent and "this is us and this is what we do." The pressure to move it in the event of getting a dedicated national stadium would be immense and probably economically irresistible. But it would be the wrong thing to do.

 

Incidentally, the Ricoh would be a starter on paper, but I suspect a hostile bid from a third party (the RFL), doesn't figure anywhere in the Coventry City fans' rescue plans, so it might be affordable, but I guarantee it would be a public relations disaster in the city itself (and one that promised not to go away any time soon).

Well said to all of that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Build it in London and it can solve the Broncos home ground dilemma too. I am sure there 2000 or so fans would appreciate having 70,000 seats to choose from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Build it in London and it can solve the Broncos home ground dilemma too. I am sure there 2000 or so fans would appreciate having 70,000 seats to choose from.

 

Queens park in Glasgow play in-front of 500.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think Coventry may be worth a future event though. Maybe a test v Aus/NZ, maybe a high profile SL double header. The midlands was one of the few areas left out by the WC, and with Coventry and Leicester looking to progress it's a target area.

They should maybe put the CCSFs (as a double header) out to tender and have rival cities bid for it each year. That is an event that really needs a boost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, what would be the advantages over Wembley? To build our own stadium of anything like the required size would cost an amount that the game would be paying back over all of our lifetimes - never mind the ongoing maintenance.

I think most sporting organisations are waking up to the fact that the 'Big White Elephant' model is now way since out of fashion. The good news for RL is that our national ground has already been built, more than fulfils our needs and was paid for by someone else. We should rejoice in what a good deal we got for ourselves. Meanwhile, as Manchester United slide back into the pack as far as football is concerned, they'll need us more rather than less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old Trafford is perfect!! And let's not forget that Manchester United's ground staff and board said no to rugby union for the World Cup but are very happy to stage rugby league as it does less damage to the playing surface!! Which is a big issue for football clubs and wembley for that matter!! So why can we not work with Manchester United and make that are home? No need to build are own stadium when we have good relations with a club and stadium that is famous around the world!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Seriously, what would be the advantages over Wembley? To build our own stadium of anything like the required size would cost an amount that the game would be paying back over all of our lifetimes - never mind the ongoing maintenance.

I think most sporting organisations are waking up to the fact that the 'Big White Elephant' model is now way since out of fashion. The good news for RL is that our national ground has already been built, more than fulfils our needs and was paid for by someone else. We should rejoice in what a good deal we got for ourselves. Meanwhile, as Manchester United slide back into the pack as far as football is concerned, they'll need us more rather than less.

 

Tongue firmly in cheek, right? They won't ever allow more than one game there, and only if its the final (WC year exception that doesn't happen often). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tongue was firmly in cheek, yes. And when I said they'll need us more, I meant for the game(s) they already host rather than 'more games'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, what would be the advantages over Wembley? To build our own stadium of anything like the required size would cost an amount that the game would be paying back over all of our lifetimes - never mind the ongoing maintenance.

I think most sporting organisations are waking up to the fact that the 'Big White Elephant' model is now way since out of fashion. The good news for RL is that our national ground has already been built, more than fulfils our needs and was paid for by someone else. We should rejoice in what a good deal we got for ourselves. Meanwhile, as Manchester United slide back into the pack as far as football is concerned, they'll need us more rather than less.

This.

There are better things for The RFL to be spending money on than a stadium that will be barely used. The RLWC proved we don't need one. Take the game to the people and they will come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This.

There are better things for The RFL to be spending money on than a stadium that will be barely used. The RLWC proved we don't need one. Take the game to the people and they will come.

At the moment, true. But if the game grows, with regular internationals, having its own stadium shows that it is a major sport and provides a focal point. Having internationals played at a variety of football grounds does not provide a good image for non RL fans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment, true. But if the game grows, with regular internationals, having its own stadium shows that it is a major sport and provides a focal point. Having internationals played at a variety of football grounds does not provide a good image for non RL fans

Rubbish getting 67,500 at Wembley and 74,500 at Old Trafford looks great for non RL fans. We need more of these big internationals at these stadiums.

As for smaller internationals the England games in the world cup in front of packed crowds at Huddersfield, Hull and Wigan looked great on the BBC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be nice to see the RFL have a national stadium with 90,000 seats, it'd be also nice to see another 90,000 children pick up a ball and join their local club too. I know both are expensive, but I think I'd go with the second part.

 

Kiddies look so cute running around in oversized jumpers and footballs as big as their heads, makes me smile that the game is going good while I get a massive laugh at their expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rubbish getting 67,500 at Wembley and 74,500 at Old Trafford looks great for non RL fans. We need more of these big internationals at these stadiums.

As for smaller internationals the England games in the world cup in front of packed crowds at Huddersfield, Hull and Wigan looked great on the BBC.

But unfortunately the RFL will no doubt bottle it and go back to grounds the size of 12k for games against France/Wales etc and 25k against the Kiwis and Roos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment, true. But if the game grows, with regular internationals, having its own stadium shows that it is a major sport and provides a focal point. Having internationals played at a variety of football grounds does not provide a good image for non RL fans

Playing at Wembley is a good look.  Playing at Old Trafford is a good look.

 

Either playing at a shoddy imitation or being a billion in debt is a bad look.

 

If you had a billion to develop the game, is this really what you would spend it on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had a billion to spend, then yes, some of it would go on a national stadium to be the home of rugby league. Borrowing grounds from other sports is fine in the short and medium term, but having a stadium that was synonymous with Rugby League would aid the profile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had a billion to spend, then yes, some of it would go on a national stadium to be the home of rugby league. Borrowing grounds from other sports is fine in the short and medium term, but having a stadium that was synonymous with Rugby League would aid the profile.

 

Would it really though? And like it or not there is one - ask anyone in the south who isn't a dyed in the wool League fan what they know about rugby league and I guarantee you'll get Eddie Waring and the Challenge Cup Final *at Wembley.*

 

That might not be as "good" for the psychology of the already converted as not having  "our own" version of Wembley, Twickenham, Wimbledon, Lord's, wherever, but rugby league is synonymous with Wembley for many many of the people you are wanting to win over.

 

Using myself as an example, as someone who's been watching League properly (ie more than just the CC final) for precisely one season,  I can only name about 5 rugby league grounds of the top of my head* - and one of those is Wembley...

 

Given outside the M62 we're up against that startling level of ignorance (hell, we've all got to start somewhere), and with the expansion clubs it's people *with* that startling level of ignorance like me that are the ones who are going to have to do it, I think it's probably far more necessary to get on with evangelising the game as a game, than it is to worry about the lack of a flagship HQ.

 

*For the record: Wembley, Belle Vue, Derwent Park, Odsal, Post Office Road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I'd use Wembley as efficively our national stadium, all games v Australia and NZ there. With proper planning and say never more than a two yr break without playing, along with a bit of promotion, I reckon we could always pull in excess of 50k and intime start to fill the ground. In a city of 8million people that loves big events there's much more potential for massive crowds than anywhere up north. Sponsors and the press would also begin to notice us more if we were packing out Wembley more than once every 20yrs. Would the big hit have pulled 67.5k at old Trafford? I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017