Sign in to follow this  
The Parksider

Mr. Davey now turns on the RFL

Recommended Posts

Three chances are:

Regular season

Middle 8s

MPG

Fair answer, I assumed Demon meant as opposed to finishing last in SL, were that is the only chance in auto P&R.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how people apply this logic to the relegation issue but not to the other end of the table. Quite happy to see a team who finished 3rd, even 5th, be crowned as champions but not a team who finished 9th or 10th be relegated.

 

The play off for the Superleague title is good for about a 70,000 all pay crowd, and a magnificent night of TV for SKY viewers. That's why they do it.

 

The other end of the table clashes can't even get a Championship Final type crowd, and as Mr. Davy says it's a commercial disaster.

 

Thought you'd get that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair answer, I assumed Demon meant as opposed to finishing last in SL, were that is the only chance in auto P&R.

 

I don't get it Gary

 

Every game is a chance to distance yourself from relegation.

 

The 14 SL clubs under straight relegation 2014 played 27 games and 14th. placed London went straight down.

 

The 12 SL clubs under this system 2015 played 30 games and 12th. placed SL club Wakefield did not go down.

 

Wakefield got a second chance and won it and stayed up. This is the major fault of the system giving SL clubs two chances to stay up and Championship clubs a dog's chance to get promotion. 

Edited by The Parksider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wakefield got a second chance and won it and stayed up. This is the major fault of the system giving SL clubs two chances to stay up and Championship clubs a dog's chance to get promotion. 

 

SL isn't the only sporting league to do that. At least the Bundesliga does (albeit in a different way) where the second top in the second division play the second bottonm in the first division to see who plays in the top division the next year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the benefit of Parksider, my meaning of 3 chances was as follows:-

 

Chance 1 - First 23 games - avoid the bottom 4

Chance 2 - The middle 8s, 7 games, 4 of which are against championship opposition, so a sporting chance of avoiding the MPG - Avoid 4th or below finish.

Chance 3 - MPG - avoid defeat against a likely championship side as that is how it should work out, unless someone upsets the expected results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Australia has two thriving Rugby League competitions below the NRL with absolutely no possibility of promotion (not even a licensing system).

 

Why is it that fans of Mackay Cutters or Wyong Roos don't abandon the sport in droves? Is it because they recognize that they are small towns and the NRL is an elite national competition? Maybe they just believe that the Queensland and NSW cups are great competitions in their own right and can enjoy supporting their club without thinking of it as a merely a stepping stone to the NRL?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oooh a naysayer......

 

 bribe: to try to make someone do something for you by giving them money

 

£300,000 will be yours if you vote for the Swiss soccer system.

 

By that definition a salary would be a bribe.

 

It was ludicrous to suggest that bribes were involved.

 

TV deals generally involve money; that does not make them bribes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Australia has two thriving Rugby League competitions below the NRL with absolutely no possibility of promotion (not even a licensing system).

 

Why is it that fans of Mackay Cutters or Wyong Roos don't abandon the sport in droves? Is it because they recognize that they are small towns and the NRL is an elite national competition? Maybe they just believe that the Queensland and NSW cups are great competitions in their own right and can enjoy supporting their club without thinking of it as a merely a stepping stone to the NRL?

 

Yep, I see your point but then again maybe," just maybe" people take a different perspective here.  As spectators do tend to fall away when a team drops from a higher league.

 

In addition commercial opportunities to grow the club are more limited when your in a lower league. 

 

The way leagues or tables have been set up in the past means that many of the traditional clubs in the lower league where also part of the higher league.   Thus for those clubs many supporters want to see those teams back as per their traditional placement.

 

Not saying I agree or disagree just suggesting why maybe a different perspective here. All-be-it I have no clue about Aussie RL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new system is only in it's 2nd year and produced a cracking game of Rugby last Saturday which showed just how good Rugby League can be.  It makes me laugh how some people slate the new system but were happy with the biggest event happening every 3 year which was blokes in suits announcing which clubs had managed to bull sheite enough to be given the nod for another 3 year licence. I pray to god we don't go back to this shambles.

 

The new system has also had to battle awful biased propaganda with the likes of Sadler coming out with his usual garbage in his garbage rag along with the likes of selfish owners and players who want to be rewarded for failure.  It's such a shame these people didn't highlight the shambles of the licensing system where clubs were given millions but time and time again broke promises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...some of the most sensible and well-reasoned thoughts I have read on here for a good while.

It keeps coming down to the same issue: far, far too little money in the game; and far, far too big a gulf between funding for SL and funding for the Championship. 

 

Now the salary cap changes have made promotion actually POSSIBLE, barring a SL club meltdown the only realistic way of getting promotion, AND then having a decent chance of staying up, is by assembling a SL-level squad while still in the championship.

 

Given the huge gulf in central funding and also other income streams, that means you need a rich owner prepared to bankroll the club for probably several seasons.  Without that, forget promotion.

 

The problem there is that you are only likely to get the odd one or two, at best, who might do that at any one time.  Why?  If any MORE did it, with realistically only one club likely to go up the odds of YOUR club being the one are that much lower.  And the odds of it costing you years of chucking in maybe a million quid a year for nothing are that much higher. I could see a rich owner prepared to get into a financial arms race with another rich owner.  I can't see many being keen on getting into one with SEVERAL other rich owners?

 

And if you have a Championship dominated by one or at best two clubs, you again have the situation of the rest having realistically little to play for?

 

Absent a load more money into the game generally, I too struggle to see a solution.  I too have come round to the opinion that a one-year exemption from relegation is unfair.  Having seen the lottery that was London and Bradford relegated (and Bradford probably never to return to SL) because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time and nothing else, I could fully understand the reaction of a team finishing 11th getting relegated.

 

OK, so absent sensible ideas, time for crazy ones!  How about, as a wild example: promoted team salary cap spend at the start of the season is compared with that of the lowest existing SL club.  For every £100k the promoted team's spend is BELOW that SL club, (say) 1 extra point. To try and level the playing field a bit. If it is ABOVE, then tough - you should be strong enough to have a decent chance of survival.

 

As I said...crazy ideas..maybe?  And I can shoot loads of holes in the above crazy idea anyway - like, promoted club has to buy up cast-offs from other SL clubs, and ship-jumpers from the relegated club, and ends up paying a lot more than they need becuase everyone knows they are desperate to build a squad very very quickly.  So they spend more than some other SL clubs but on a worse squad.

 

But unless someone thinks really outside the box, I really do not know what the answer is.

Edited by Adeybull

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It keeps coming down to the same issue: far, far too little money in the game; and far, far too big a gulf between funding for SL and funding for the Championship. 

That's the main issue and reorganising the divisions and how promotion and relegation operates has not solved this so far.

 

No doubt the clubs will soon have the figures concerning what income they have generated in the past two seasons under the new structures in addition to the TV monies.

Edited by longboard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By that definition a salary would be a bribe.

 

It was ludicrous to suggest that bribes were involved.

 

TV deals generally involve money; that does not make them bribes.

 

Of course paying a salary to do a job is not a bribe. Now that is truly ludicrous.

 

The RFL wanted the backing of the clubs over the TV deal/new system and they knew they had opposition. As reflected in Mr. Sadlers article clubs "did not need much persuading particularly when they were told they would each receive £300,000 into their bank accounts within a couple of weeks"

 

Look it up, look up the definition of a Bribe, it does NOT say a "salary" It says an "Inducement", it's an underhand way of persuading someone to do your bidding, and that is what was reported at the time. The clubs were split half and half over the new deal and new system.

 

It was also reported at the time that Bradford, Wakefield, London and Castleford were in dire straits financially. This money was a "lifeline". to them at a time clubs had a collective debt of £68,000, 000 but not shared between them, the top clubs were OK. So the clubs in massive debt took the inducement.

 

If you want to liken it to a salary, imagine your skint and the bank is after you. Your boss says he'll give you advance salary payments on a new pay structure you don't really want if you acept the new structure. It's an inducement,  It's a bribe

 

Nobody had been skinter than Salford, but they didn't vote for it. They didn't need the money as Koukash had come in.

 

Now lets switch to skint Castleford. They voted "for" the system, yet Mr. Gill told Mr. Carter at Wakefield they had lost money on it. Your own Mr. Davy/Davey says it's a "commercial disaster".  It's quite a co-incidence that the rich clubs voted for straight P & R and wanted to talk to BT but the poor clubs just wanted the £300K on offer tied in to their deal and the RFL carried the day. 

Edited by The Parksider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new system is only in it's 2nd year and produced a cracking game of Rugby last Saturday which showed just how good Rugby League can be. 

 

Stop right there Mr. Pencil.

 

The new system was not the reason the game produced a close finish and an amazing comeback.

 

Such a game could easily have been a championship final to see who is promoted.....

 

1998 Wakefield 24.v.Fev 22

 

or an end of season four pointer to see who goes down

 

2006 Wakefield.v.Castleford before 11,000 in a packed out Belle Vue.

 

Mr. Davey has declared the system to have no value as a "commercial disaster" and in a weird manifestation of turkeys voting for Christmas aren't you a Featherstone Rovers fan supporting a system which clearly shuts your lot out of Superleague. Far from using the MPG to justify this system, you should be using all the walkovers clubs inflicted on Featherstone as ammunition against the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the main issue and reorganising the divisions and how promotion and relegation operates has not solved this so far. No doubt the clubs will soon have the figures concerning what income they have generated in the past two seasons under the new structures in addition to the TV monies.

 

No doubt your not listening to Mr. Davy. Read his lips "commercial disaster". Mr. Gill at Castleford told Mr. Carter they had "lost money on it".........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It keeps coming down to the same issue: far, far too little money in the game; and far, far too big a gulf between funding for SL and funding for the Championship. 

 

 

Like many others on here you appear to be laying much of the blame on lack of money just at the door of the RFL. While I agree that they haven't done a particularly good job of promoting the game and bringing in the big bucks from sponsors and TV the clubs themselves have equally as much responsibility to generate income for themselves.

 

So instead of just stomping their feet and demanding bigger hand outs all of these clubs should be looking at themselves and asking how THEY can generate more money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with licencing, or any other method that eliminates promotion for a season or more, is that they render entire seasons of Championship rugby completely meaningless.

But ultimately, the results on the pitch have to mean something, otherwise you may as well hand out trophies or promotions based on who's got the best facilities and save us all the bother of actually staging any matches. Why the hell would anybody want to sit/stand through 3 season's worth of Championship rugby that is of virtually zero significance to the chances of seeing your team progress to the next level?

I don't have enormously strong views about what method of promotion/relegation to use, provided it is results based, so i'm not opposed to Davey's suggestions about going back to straight P&R. But if i've understood it correctly, then I don't like this 2 year cycle concept.

The step up from Championship to Super League is a big one and in principle i'm all for initiatives that allow newly promoted clubs to develop a squad that prevents them being relegation certainties without putting themselves in financial peril should they still go down and return to Championship level incomes. Nobody wants to see the same teams go up and down every year. 

 

A really thoughtful post. The 2 year concept was a reply from the big SL clubs to the accusations that under straight P & R clubs will Yo-Yo, your "same club up and down scenario". I think we forget that we had P & R from 1996 to 2008.

 

But is wasn't "automatic" a term I'm guilty of throwing about. Dewsbury and Hunslet didn't get promoted despite winning that prize. One way or another they were deemed not to be up to it, and remained in the Championship..

 

Wakefield edged Fev in 1999 for promotion and have stayed in SL for 17 years, Hull have stayed in SL for longer since getting promotion IIRC on the back of the collapse of Oldham and Paris. They lost their Championship final to Huddersfield who were bottom club from 1998-2001 but were promoted anyway.

 

I'd guess if Batley had won the MPG on some sort of freak run of results, Mr, Nicholas would think twice about accepting promotion 

 

Well before licensing came in to decide matters "off the field" the clubs were already deciding matters of promotion and relegation off the field in a very pragmatic and sensible way. 

 

Post that era, licensing was introduced and had little pragmatism. It trapped clubs inside a league that was too large and underfunded and led to club after club collapsing.

 

Do therefore consider the debate isn't "automatic" Promotion.v.Licensing. The way things worked 1996 to 2008 was largely a sensible management of a difficult situation where the two leagues were financially and playing wise poles apart.

 

That was a problem 1996 to 2008 but the game to a large extent "managed" their way through this. 

Edited by The Parksider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But unless someone thinks really outside the box, I really do not know what the answer is.

 

The answer has to be whatever is the best warts and all approach. As my post above we never did have automatic P & R we pragmatically managed P & R against the collapse of SL clubs and the inadequacies of CC clubs who found themselves winning the Championship.

 

What rises above all this is the need for more rich clubs. You yourself open with "too little money in the game". And so it is vital that Toulouse and Toronto have the door to Superleague fully open to them. Not by the failed "licensing" (could we really countenance either club being licensed in the way Catalans were in 2006) system but by winning promotion.

 

If Toulouse or Toronto came top of the Championship, and lost their MPG to Widnes or Wakefield and therefore didn't bring their alleged riches we crave into the game then that would be the game shooting itself in the foot big style. The system has to go and Davy says now.

 

Again look back on how we got our richest clubs in SL. When Neil Hudgell came in at HKR and started putting large amounts of money in they won a salary capped Championship over Widnes and Leigh beating Widnes in front of a wonderful 13,000 crowd in Warrington.

 

What is wrong with going back to that? What we had in terms of a "system" 1996 - 2008 worked in difficult circimstances. The choice is simple - either go back to that warts and all, or agonise for damaging year after year trying to "think outside the box" for a system that does not and cannot exist.

 

It;s a business and businesses have to look at the options and do whatever is best and make the most of it. Just put P & R back as it was, open the door to rich clubs, and give the small clubs a chance of competing. This IS the answer and despite how many warts people can and will pick at, they need to come up with something better to prove going back to managed P & R and a lower salary capped Championship isn't the answer

Edited by The Parksider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What rises above all this is the need for more rich clubs. You yourself open with "too little money in the game". And so it is vital that Toulouse and Toronto have the door to Superleague fully open to them. Not by the failed "licensing" (could we really countenance either club being licensed in the way Catalans were in 2006) system but by winning promotion.

 

If Toulouse or Toronto came top of the Championship, and lost their MPG to Widnes or Wakefield and therefore didn't bring their alleged riches we crave into the game then that would be the game shooting itself in the foot big style. The system has to go and Davy says now.

 

 

FIngers crossed then that in say 10 years and we could have a Super League consisting of no English clubs. :dry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Mr. Davey has declared the system to have no value as a "commercial disaster" and in a weird manifestation of turkeys voting for Christmas aren't you a Featherstone Rovers fan supporting a system which clearly shuts your lot out of Superleague. Far from using the MPG to justify this system, you should be using all the walkovers clubs inflicted on Featherstone as ammunition against the system.

First of all, hope you are well Parky?

 

The new system makes it very difficult to make top 4 consistently, let alone get into Super League and this goes against everything Fev fans have been accused of in the past. This is of course caring only for what happens at Post Office Road and not in the in the interests of the game.  I like the new system and if you had actually watched all of the games you would know that we were competitive in 3 of our games and we were unlucky to lose against both full time teams Leigh & Hull KR.  Yes we had some hammerings which is disappointing but hammerings happen in Super League, only this year Wakefield dished out an hammering to an under par Wigan team.

 

I'm hoping we've learnt our lesson in the past and we can invest wisely and give John Sharp the necessary funds to have another crack at top 4.  This system gives us hope after years of watching our local rivals tell fibs time and time again about new stadiums to remain in Super League.  While we were finishing top of the League 4 years on the trot some SL teams were treading water happy in the licensing system and improving nothing off the field, yet Davey and the rest of the baying mob remained silent. It's only when one of the old pals act is effected that they speak out, that's for me is a disgrace. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, hope you are well Parky?

 

This system gives us hope 

 

I am good sir and I hope you are well too.

 

I still do not get it Ian.

 

I see no hope for Rovers with Toulouse spending big 2017, Toronto's $$$ coming through 2018, Neil Hudgell able to outspend you at HKR, David Hughes able to outspend you at Broncos.

 

In 2011 Fev should have gone up and Crusaders out.

 

You lost to Fax, Leigh and Sheffield in other finals, you topped the league several times.

 

You should have had your chance, they should make the Championship a competitive league again by making it all semi pro with champions promoted, so that you can compete with these clubs for a place in SL, and if you get it have a chance to survive there.

 

What we have now gives you no chance - how can Fev fans not see this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like many others on here you appear to be laying much of the blame on lack of money just at the door of the RFL. While I agree that they haven't done a particularly good job of promoting the game and bringing in the big bucks from sponsors and TV the clubs themselves have equally as much responsibility to generate income for themselves.

 

So instead of just stomping their feet and demanding bigger hand outs all of these clubs should be looking at themselves and asking how THEY can generate more money

Do I?  Where do you divine that from? The RFL can only distribute the money they get.  Plenty wrong with the self-servers who run the RFL, for sure.  But if there is an issue with to whom the monies are distributed, blame rests predominantly with the SL clubs who understandably seek to secure as much as possible of a seriously inadequate pot for themselves.

 

But as for Championship clubs generating more money - and by this, I am talking about serious money, not just a few thousands here or there - what are YOUR suggestions?  Since you clearly feel they need help in coming up with ideas?

 

If a Championship club is to break into SL, and have realistic prospects of REMAINING there, then they will need to have an income and cost base that is close to certainly the weakest SL clubs.  But they are starting from a base of central funding £1m-£1.6m or more less than those SL clubs.  So they have to find at LEAST £1m more "income" to be able to compete effectively. Just where exactly are Championship clubs suposed to find that sort of money, over and above the income a SL club can raise?  What income streams are open to them, that are not open to SL clubs and so will give the Chgampionship clubs a way of overcoming the massive central funding disparity?

 

Attendances, sponsorship and most other corporate income streams will in general be far lower in the championship, same as they are in every other sport for the next level/s down. No rocket science there.  if you have a friendly council, or come up good on the ground redevelopment/cost paid by major retail development lottery, then that maybe gives you a chance. But otherwise, I ask you again: what specifically would you advise a Championship club to do that is different to what a SL club does, to plug the £1m+ central funding gap, plus the additional gap caused by lower opportunity for other income streams?

 

Comes back to what I keep saying: you need to find a rich owner fan prepared to pump millions in, for probably no realistic prospect of getting it back. Find one, and you have a chance. Ask Leigh. Otherwise, very low chances of getting anywhewre.

Edited by Adeybull

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they should make the Championship a competitive league again by making it all semi pro.

I have been agreeing with you up to now Parky, but now you want to shackle the ambition of individual clubs and virtually put a ceiling on what they can spend, not all players want to be part-time, being that theoretically the better players have earned the full-time employment position, you will effectively reduce the overall quality of the league.

Sorry cannot agree with you there friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


League Express - Online Now

League Express - Every Monday



Rugby League World - Online 28 Jun - July 2018

Rugby League World - July 2018 - Out Fri 29 Jun

Rugby League Books On Sale Here