Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Mr Plow

Are the RFL not accepting any new teams?

Recommended Posts

If money were no object and distance irrelevant; I might choose to follow Warrington. I have had a look at costings and timings, for the next Thursday night home match. From where I live; cheapest return train travel £50, booked in advance and committing to timed trains. The cheapest adult match ticket £22, the cheapest hotel £38 (total £110) and that's not considering meals, drinks, programme, souvenir's etc 

Want to go beyond budget; book into Hospitality in the Platinum Lounge for £125, plus a better hotel for £90, same trains, total £265. plus the extras.

The distance, from where I live, is 154 miles. The AA quote an optimistic travel time of 3 hours by road. By train it is coming out at 8 hours+ with 2-4 changes.

Have done a comparison with League 1 Coventry Bears, Season Ticket for £105. Return train ticket £12. Close enough that accommodation isn't needed.

So, one game at Wolves would cost me £110 - £265+ or I could get to see All the matches at Coventry including train tickets for that sort of cash.

For anybody reading this from USA & Canada; for historical reasons, wealthy people have tended to follow RU, working people are more likely to follow RL, so people's individual budgets are a consideration.

The idea of merging the Championship with League 1 is ridiculous. I have got no interest in seeing my local team crucified 100-0 by a team knocking on Super League's door. It's pointless and a complete turn off. Would rather see them have half a chance against a similar grade of team.

The disparities of the top and bottom of Championship and League 1 are so great that attempting to merge them would be a disaster.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2019 at 3:43 AM, NotToday said:

In the chase for big city clubs which may or may not work out in the end  you cannot throw away your core fanbase who follow those smaller clubs from their locale. I am for expanding to big cities..

There is no "chase for big city clubs" what planet are you on?. One rich investor left his City club in Salford where there is some amateur and junior Rugby League played at some serious clubs and where there are 5K RL supporters. He now appears to be awaiting his old club running out of money, so he can ship the team off to Liverpool where they will face an even bigger task to create some sort of RL culture that has been tried several times and failed badly each time.

You may be for "expanding to big cities" is this because you have found a way to get  thousands of people playing RL in them and investors wanting to pop several £Million a year in to facilitate all that?  Expanding to big cities is neither inventing phoney baloney clubs or shifting a club from one city where most people don't want to know it, to a city where nobody has ever wanted to know RL. I can certainly see why the RFL may not "accept" this new phoney club, run by a man who shut down an academy.

On 2/14/2019 at 7:51 AM, RP London said:

 Every sport regionalises very quickly To try and have League One clubs travelling constantly around the country to get bigger beatings (and to have yearly trips abroad) will probably see more go to the wall 

League one needs to be stable and needs to give new clubs somewhere to grow and older clubs that need to rebuild and find their place in the new modern game somewhere to do that. Every year on this board there is at least one debate on the way to solve the league one issue for a long time and all the same arguments pop up, yours is nothing new and (bar conferencing on a random basis, which is brought up on super league threads) has been in place before.

I like your opening point. Even the Premier League stick in the muds won't accept Celtic or Rangers, yet the Scotchy World Rugby League Premiership spans the globe from Perth to New York. 

If we look at the current funding by SKY, to the SL bosses disgust £16,398,000 at least goes to clubs outside Super League and they tried to stop that a year ago. Given the SL bosses will negotiate the next reduced deal all I can see is a number of clubs existence being financially wiped out and that "Somewhere to grow" where nobody has ever grown without a rich owner, will cease to exist.

It's not as if the proposed (but heavily opposed) 2x10 clubs only wasn't a very very obvious and heavy sign that the very existence of such as Coventry,  North Wales, Swinton and Rochdale is in doubt as well as Newcastle and Skolars unless their rich investors actually spend something significant. I'm not sure why you do not seem to get it League One is on it's last legs?? I'm not sure people get it that soon there will be no league for Manchester Rangers and maybe even Swinton to play in.

On 2/13/2019 at 4:13 PM, Angelic Cynic said:

 Factually incorrect - https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/remarkable-welsh-revolution-sees-17-13615294  If the RFL are not accepting any new clubs it looks like those M62 superstars will have to maintain the status quo.

Your quoted Wales RL puff piece does you no favours and does not in any way tackle the point I made. Look closely at the floods of professional quality Welsh SL players coming into Superleague first team squads (not pictures of welsh kids who are playing RL). There is Dudson and Flower from the old Celtic Crusaders from 10 years ago. Then there's Regan Grace. See if you can make that up to even a seven a side Welsh born Superleague quality team. 

We've had this for years and years where thankfully some kids and their families play and support RL outside of the M62 like in Wales. That does not in any way give us a Welsh Superleague player development system. That only exists from Hull to St.Helens as much as I would like it to be otherwise. Anyway it prompted me to look at a few proper welsh teams from the past, and remember the greats like David Watkins, Mike Nicholas, John Bevan,  Colin Dixon, Maurice Richards and Jim Mills.

In those days a top rugby player knew where the money was, they still do, but the money is now elsewhere.

Edited by The Parksider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

You may be for "expanding to big cities" is this because you have found a way to get  thousands of people playing RL in them and investors wanting to pop several £Million a year in to facilitate all that?  Expanding to big cities is neither inventing phoney baloney clubs or shifting a club from one city where most people don't want to know it, to a city where nobody has ever wanted to know RL. I can certainly see why the RFL may not "accept" this new phoney club, run by a man who shut down an academy.

  The Salford Academy  was NOT,as far as I am aware, shut down by Dr Koukash,but it was the governing body who reclassified some Academies,such as Sheffield Eagles and Cumbria,even though Cumbria was run by Widnes,a club which was 'elite',with a wealthy owner at the time.

  https://www.salfordreddevils.net/academy-progress-recognised-by-the-rfl/

  

48 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

Your quoted Wales RL puff piece does you no favours and does not in any way tackle the point I made. Look closely at the floods of professional quality Welsh SL players coming into Superleague first team squads (not pictures of welsh kids who are playing RL). There is Dudson and Flower from the old Celtic Crusaders from 10 years ago. Then there's Regan Grace. See if you can make that up to even a seven a side Welsh born Superleague quality team. 

We've had this for years and years where thankfully some kids and their families play and support RL outside of the M62 like in Wales. That does not in any way give us a Welsh Superleague player development system. That only exists from Hull to St.Helens as much as I would like it to be otherwise. Anyway it prompted me to look at a few proper welsh teams from the past, and remember the greats like David Watkins, Mike Nicholas, John Bevan,  Colin Dixon, Maurice Richards and Jim Mills.

In those days a top rugby player knew where the money was, they still do, but the money is now elsewhere.

   The 'greats' you mention were all of a certain age when they established themselves in rugby league - long before Super League emerged and long before the systems, structures and development all changed,along with the reserves and academies being altered.

  No doubt by the time the clocks chime midnight there will be further change.

   Your postings will be enough to change the course for all the youngsters who by geographical fate don't get schooled and taken on by clubs alongside the M62.

   The ever-altering system may be enough to deflate and defeat youngsters already seriously handicapped by this little finding

   http://trainingground.guru/articles/why-understanding-the-teenage-brain-is-key-to-coaching#.XFjZ4wyzq8c.twitter

   to be then met with rejection by those who seek instant success with their power grab and a governing body changing the goal-posts with regularity.

     With regard to Dr Koukash and Liverpool - no one knows at what level he is to start.If Manchester Rangers cannot start in League 1 after their years of cultivation,how can Liverpool start at that level? 


     Born - didn't ask. Dying - didn't argue                                 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Hemel Stag said:

If money were no object and distance irrelevant; I might choose to follow Warrington. I have had a look at costings and timings, for the next Thursday night home match. From where I live; cheapest return train travel £50, booked in advance and committing to timed trains. The cheapest adult match ticket £22, the cheapest hotel £38 (total £110) and that's not considering meals, drinks, programme, souvenir's etc 

Want to go beyond budget; book into Hospitality in the Platinum Lounge for £125, plus a better hotel for £90, same trains, total £265. plus the extras.

The distance, from where I live, is 154 miles. The AA quote an optimistic travel time of 3 hours by road. By train it is coming out at 8 hours+ with 2-4 changes.

Have done a comparison with League 1 Coventry Bears, Season Ticket for £105. Return train ticket £12. Close enough that accommodation isn't needed.

So, one game at Wolves would cost me £110 - £265+ or I could get to see All the matches at Coventry including train tickets for that sort of cash.

For anybody reading this from USA & Canada; for historical reasons, wealthy people have tended to follow RU, working people are more likely to follow RL, so people's individual budgets are a consideration.

The idea of merging the Championship with League 1 is ridiculous. I have got no interest in seeing my local team crucified 100-0 by a team knocking on Super League's door. It's pointless and a complete turn off. Would rather see them have half a chance against a similar grade of team.

The disparities of the top and bottom of Championship and League 1 are so great that attempting to merge them would be a disaster.

 

 

What you have not factored in for those working (no idea if you do) is that following a Super League club, specifically some of the perceived better ones who get shown on TV a lot, is that games tend to be Thursday/Friday nights so you’re looking at the loss of anything between half a day to two day’s of annual leave or loss of earnings for the self-employed, so the true cost can be an extra £100+ on top of the outgoings of travel, accommodation and a match ticket. 

It’s not exactly appealing to casual fans of the game and even for those ardent exiled fan of the game, because they’re likely to be restricted to a couple of visits a season, at most. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

What you have not factored in for those working (no idea if you do) is that following a Super League club, specifically some of the perceived better ones who get shown on TV a lot, is that games tend to be Thursday/Friday nights so you’re looking at the loss of anything between half a day to two day’s of annual leave or loss of earnings for the self-employed, so the true cost can be an extra £100+ on top of the outgoings of travel, accommodation and a match ticket. 

It’s not exactly appealing to casual fans of the game and even for those ardent exiled fan of the game, because they’re likely to be restricted to a couple of visits a season, at most. 

Quite right, I totally agree with you, thanks for adding more weight to the case. Yes, I do work for a living and no I couldn't dream of spending that sort of cash on a regular basis. So I say cherish your Championship and League 1 sides for what they are, open, friendly, accessible places providing opportunities for players at a variety of levels and some very affordable sporting entertainment. They deserve more recognition. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2019 at 10:30 AM, Angelic Cynic said:

The Salford Academy  was NOT,as far as I am aware, shut down by Dr Koukash,but it was the governing body who reclassified some Academies.........

With regard to Dr Koukash and Liverpool - no one knows at what level he is to start.If Manchester Rangers cannot start in League 1 after their years of cultivation,how can Liverpool start at that level? 

"Marwan Koukash  is scouring the local schools and communities with the intentions of attracting and encouraging the kids at grass roots into the game. he says grass roots are very, very important.  "When I came into the game I made a claim that I do want to build a successful team very, very soon but at the same time I want to spread Rugby League into Manchester".

“I have two strategies working here in parallel.  The first one will be encouraging more youngsters to take up the sport and I will personally go visit as many schools as possible in the Greater Manchester area over the next 12 months.  Not just to promote the club but to promote Rugby League in general".

As far as I am aware he talked a lot of hot air, then he shut the academy after pondering whether to have a dual academy with Leigh. After closure this discontent from fellow clubs was reported.....

"Two Super League clubs operate without academy sides, with the RFL’s category one setups costing in the region of £300,000 to run. With discontent about clubs now being able to spend more on the cap and some sides not being forced into a compulsory academy programme, a number of Super League clubs have threatened to revert to cheaper, cost-productive category‑three academy schemes".

As for Liverpool "starting", there is every chance they will not be accepted as clearly all Kooks wants to do is the same old trick tried 50 times over the years of setting up in a place they do not play RL and shipping 30 players out of the RL heartlands to play in a soccer/RU dominated city. What you have to realise is this sort of "Investment" isn't anything much to do with expanding the game. It's just a bit of rich man's fun. You may ponder the level Kooks may "start" at. but it's far more likely he will be refused, as their application appears to be ridiculous, especially compared to Manchester Rangers application that was at least based on real life junior development.

Edited by The Parksider
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a riddle,wrapped in a mystery,inside an enigma - as Churchill once said.

Maybe Super League will prevent clubs from being in with the ' elite ' if they don't run an academy.

These M62 clubs! Unreliable.

  • Like 1

     Born - didn't ask. Dying - didn't argue                                 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expansion of Super League to other countries. In Football (Soccer) terms, this is like trying to create a Champions League before the contributing countries have developed their own leagues fully and produced creditable contenders. Red Star Belgrade may be the Serbian league champions, but if Millom can take them out they are not top flight even though they are national champions. They are not the equivalent of Real Madrid to England's Chelsea or Manchester City. In Soccer world, Barcelona, Man City, Paris PSG, Real Madrid etc etc have topped difficult domestic leagues before being accepted to the top tier. In R.L. & Superleague  there are not enough international Super Teams to run a Champions League, so they are cannibalising the U.K. domestic top league to accommodate the unusual quality teams from France, Catalonia, Canada and maybe USA. The soccer teams have to compete in national as well as international competitions, not homogenised one's. Perhaps this would be acceptable, given the scale of the sport, if money were more than trickled down into the Championship to bolster the domestic and local game? So you could guarantee a solid and well funded national game and grass roots investment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, The Parksider said:

You may ponder the level Kooks may "start" at. but it's far more likely he will be refused, as their application appears to be ridiculous, especially compared to Manchester Rangers application that was at least based on real life junior development. 

I actually agree with this.

It's also a massive shame and disappointment that Rangers were denied. What more could the Rfl want from a club?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Omott91 said:

I actually agree with this. It's also a massive shame and disappointment that Rangers were denied. What more could the RFL want from a club?

What exactly do you know about Manchester Rangers?

I know that they exist, and have access to a very decent ground they don't own, and some good RL people on their committee that have been involved in trying to grow the game in the Manchester Area.   Their senior team is a low level amateur side. They have a few teams at junior level. None of these teams are anywhere near the playing level of bigger amateur clubs in the National Conference League.

So the RFL could possibly want a club that was actually producing young players through a series of teams at all age levels up the ladder the best of which would be capable of playing academy level RL which is the level from which our stars of tomorrow are produced.  Manchester Rangers are not this club. Liverpool are even less than such a club.

Rangers say they offer "Investment". So maybe the RFL want this? Do you know how much Manchester Rangers have to invest? You just haven't a clue have you?

What the RFL wanted was Manchester Rangers to invest in Oldham RLFC. This is a club that were formed in 1889, once drew a 28,000 crowd, and were League Champions four times and Runners up four times. Last time in SL 8,000 turned up for the opening game. But Manchester Rangers did not give the RFL what they wanted, which was to take over and rejuvinate Oldham.

So the RFL asked them if they could develop players for Salford who have no academy and Manchester Rangers said no to this link up. They wanted to "grow" their own club brand in an area not known for Rugby league, which Rangers themselves admit. 

So to ask me "what more could the RFL want from a club" is one of the stupidest things I have ever been asked and shows your ignorance of the game here. If Rangers have money and the ability to develop players they could have had a place in the pro-ranks as Oldham, or have become part of Salford with a view to maybe taking them over. But they don't want to do these things, they wanted to create a self sustaining professional Rugby league club in an area that contains the obvious barrier of one of the World's biggest soccer clubs, arguably now bigger than Liverpool FC and where Rugby league died out as long ago as supposedly 1955. But the reality is that the club that died out in Manchester was  not a Manchester club, but was Broughton Rangers who played in Manchester for a few years (1933-1941 and 1946-1955 a mere 17 years) after their ground in Salford became unsuitable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheReaper said:

You can't blame anyone for wanting to be independent. 

Indeed and why would anyone who has helped to build up a club from scratch want to jack it all in to take over a basket case homeless club in another town. It's absurd.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The Parksider said:

What exactly do you know about Manchester Rangers?

I know that they exist, and have access to a very decent ground they don't own, and some good RL people on their committee that have been involved in trying to grow the game in the Manchester Area.   Their senior team is a low level amateur side. They have a few teams at junior level. None of these teams are anywhere near the playing level of bigger amateur clubs in the National Conference League.

So the RFL could possibly want a club that was actually producing young players through a series of teams at all age levels up the ladder the best of which would be capable of playing academy level RL which is the level from which our stars of tomorrow are produced.  Manchester Rangers are not this club. Liverpool are even less than such a club.

Rangers say they offer "Investment". So maybe the RFL want this? Do you know how much Manchester Rangers have to invest? You just haven't a clue have you?

What the RFL wanted was Manchester Rangers to invest in Oldham RLFC. This is a club that were formed in 1889, once drew a 28,000 crowd, and were League Champions four times and Runners up four times. Last time in SL 8,000 turned up for the opening game. But Manchester Rangers did not give the RFL what they wanted, which was to take over and rejuvinate Oldham.

So the RFL asked them if they could develop players for Salford who have no academy and Manchester Rangers said no to this link up. They wanted to "grow" their own club brand in an area not known for Rugby league, which Rangers themselves admit. 

So to ask me "what more could the RFL want from a club" is one of the stupidest things I have ever been asked and shows your ignorance of the game here. If Rangers have money and the ability to develop players they could have had a place in the pro-ranks as Oldham, or have become part of Salford with a view to maybe taking them over. But they don't want to do these things, they wanted to create a self sustaining professional Rugby league club in an area that contains the obvious barrier of one of the World's biggest soccer clubs, arguably now bigger than Liverpool FC and where Rugby league died out as long ago as supposedly 1955. But the reality is that the club that died out in Manchester was  not a Manchester club, but was Broughton Rangers who played in Manchester for a few years (1933-1941 and 1946-1955 a mere 17 years) after their ground in Salford became unsuitable.

You mentioned rangers taking over at Oldham. I've been an Oldham fan most of my life but rugby league doesn't seem to be as relevant as it used to be in the town, unfortunately. Some people I know who are from the town didn't even realize we still have a rugby league club until they found out off me. The crowds used to be in the thousands now we're lucky if we get "a" thousand at a game. Rugby league for me is indeed a sport in terminal decline because it's run by people who don't have a clue. For instance Rochdale stayed in the championship last season by default,what other game would allow that. Unless the RFL don't get a grid we won't have a game to follow. It's hard for me to talk like this about the game, I'm from an area that's about a ten minute walk from the old watersheddings stadium so rugby league has been part of me since childhood. My thought is that the games on life support.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, moorside roughyed said:

You mentioned rangers taking over at Oldham. I've been an Oldham fan most of my life but rugby league doesn't seem to be as relevant as it used to be in the town, unfortunately. Some people I know who are from the town didn't even realize we still have a rugby league club until they found out off me. The crowds used to be in the thousands now we're lucky if we get "a" thousand at a game. Rugby league for me is indeed a sport in terminal decline because it's run by people who don't have a clue. For instance Rochdale stayed in the championship last season by default,what other game would allow that. Unless the RFL don't get a grid we won't have a game to follow. It's hard for me to talk like this about the game, I'm from an area that's about a ten minute walk from the old watersheddings stadium so rugby league has been part of me since childhood. My thought is that the games on life support.

I'm afraid to say that all the while Rimmer is in charge of the RFL things wont get any better.

We need a person in charge who has vision, Rimmer is not that man.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of interest Parky (and this isn't a dig at you), which current clubs outside of SL do you think would benefit from a rich investor? Bradford being the obvious one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, The Parksider said:

What exactly do you know about Manchester Rangers?

I know that they exist, and have access to a very decent ground they don't own, and some good RL people on their committee that have been involved in trying to grow the game in the Manchester Area.   Their senior team is a low level amateur side. They have a few teams at junior level. None of these teams are anywhere near the playing level of bigger amateur clubs in the National Conference League.

So the RFL could possibly want a club that was actually producing young players through a series of teams at all age levels up the ladder the best of which would be capable of playing academy level RL which is the level from which our stars of tomorrow are produced.  Manchester Rangers are not this club. Liverpool are even less than such a club.

Rangers say they offer "Investment". So maybe the RFL want this? Do you know how much Manchester Rangers have to invest? You just haven't a clue have you?

What the RFL wanted was Manchester Rangers to invest in Oldham RLFC. This is a club that were formed in 1889, once drew a 28,000 crowd, and were League Champions four times and Runners up four times. Last time in SL 8,000 turned up for the opening game. But Manchester Rangers did not give the RFL what they wanted, which was to take over and rejuvinate Oldham.

So the RFL asked them if they could develop players for Salford who have no academy and Manchester Rangers said no to this link up. They wanted to "grow" their own club brand in an area not known for Rugby league, which Rangers themselves admit. 

So to ask me "what more could the RFL want from a club" is one of the stupidest things I have ever been asked and shows your ignorance of the game here. If Rangers have money and the ability to develop players they could have had a place in the pro-ranks as Oldham, or have become part of Salford with a view to maybe taking them over. But they don't want to do these things, they wanted to create a self sustaining professional Rugby league club in an area that contains the obvious barrier of one of the World's biggest soccer clubs, arguably now bigger than Liverpool FC and where Rugby league died out as long ago as supposedly 1955. But the reality is that the club that died out in Manchester was  not a Manchester club, but was Broughton Rangers who played in Manchester for a few years (1933-1941 and 1946-1955 a mere 17 years) after their ground in Salford became unsuitable. 

great post, shame on the RFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Damien said:

Indeed and why would anyone who has helped to build up a club from scratch want to jack it all in to take over a basket case homeless club in another town. It's absurd.

Your problem is you keep calling real life RL clubs with some structure, history, success, and substance - especially a local junior and amateur scene -  "basket cases",  whilst forever supporting any fantasy club headed by people who tell us they are the future. You are not the only one to be a manifestation of a type of RL fan who hates reality and therefore sinks into fantasy. 29 other people on here think the future of RL is anywhere but along the M62. No offence to you, but can you stop your sniping and explain this "vision" to me? 

12 hours ago, moorside roughyed said:

You mentioned rangers taking over at Oldham. I've been an Oldham fan most of my life but rugby league doesn't seem to be as relevant as it used to be in the town, unfortunately. Some people I know who are from the town didn't even realize we still have a rugby league club until they found out off me. The crowds used to be in the thousands now we're lucky if we get "a" thousand at a game. Rugby league for me is indeed a sport in terminal decline because it's run by people who don't have a clue. It's hard for me to talk like this about the game, I'm from an area that's about a ten minute walk from the old watersheddings stadium so rugby league has been part of me since childhood. My thought is that the games on life support.

It is on life support, and that life support is the TV contract. We all agreed a few years back on here if that goes the game goes.

But it is very unfair to lash out at the games administrators and leaders. Read on.......

12 hours ago, The Future is League said:

I'm afraid to say that all the while Rimmer is in charge of the RFL things wont get any better.We need a person in charge who has vision, Rimmer is not that man.

These kind of pathetic posts that blame individual people doing their best to keep the game alive despite the crushing historical success of soccer and Union over us, are the most gutless, ignorant and pathetic posts on here. I get told off for repeating that all these fantasy clubs won't work, yet you and your ilk are allowed to slaughter the RFL if not SL bosses daily.

Have you no sense of reality or any idea of history? Rugby in the north dominated forms of "football" until Soccer came on the scene and squashed the Rugby version of football. This was in the 1880's. In 1896 Rugby split and over 100 years on we have been beaten by Rugby Union, who eventually won when they went professional and took our players rather than the other way round.

Today's administrators are just trying to save the game from issues that occurred well over 100 years ago and keep it going where we still succeed. For goodness sake cut the ignorant garbage man and get behind the real game, and cut the fantasy stuff.

11 hours ago, JM2010 said:

Out of interest Parky (and this isn't a dig at you), which current clubs outside of SL do you think would benefit from a rich investor? Bradford being the obvious one

It's easy to analyse where the game has strength, as you yourself have done. The problem is that we rely on rich owners to make the most of a clubs strength and potential. They can choose to back whoever they want. We all probably know that Bradford would be a mega club again if someone like Simon Moran was in charge. Conversely the duke of Westminster one of England's richest would have a difficulty making a club in Liverpool a success.

What prevents the mega rich, like Branson is/was when he took over London, is the salary cap. That has to stay or we end up a pathetic low grade version of Scottish Football. So the clubs who have the most local fans and the best junior set ups are the ones we need to have the rich investors at. Outside SL that means Bradford, Widnes, Leigh and Halifax who could be as good as anyone inside SL.

It's pathetic a club who gets lucky with a rich investor is a shining light and one that doesn't is somehow a "basket case". Excuse me whilst I am called an idiot and you are encouraged to ignore me...?

Edited by The Parksider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Parksider said:

Your problem is you keep calling real life RL clubs with some structure, history, success, and substance - especially a local junior and amateur scene -  "basket cases",  whilst forever supporting any fantasy club headed by people who tell us they are the future. You are not the only one to be a manifestation of a type of RL fan who hates reality and therefore sinks into fantasy. 29 other people on here think the future of RL is anywhere but along the M62. No offence to you, but can you stop your sniping and explain this "vision" to me? 

It is on life support, and that life support is the TV contract. We all agreed a few years back on here if that goes the game goes.

But it is very unfair to lash out at the games administrators and leaders. Read on.......

These kind of pathetic posts that blame individual people doing their best to keep the game alive despite the crushing historical success of soccer and Union over us, are the most gutless, ignorant and pathetic posts on here. I get told off for repeating that all these fantasy clubs won't work, yet you and your ilk are allowed to slaughter the RFL if not SL bosses daily.

Have you no sense of reality or any idea of history? Rugby in the north dominated forms of "football" until Soccer came on the scene and squashed the Rugby version of football. This was in the 1880's. In 1896 Rugby split and over 100 years on we have been beaten by Rugby Union, who eventually won when they went professional and took our players rather than the other way round.

Today's administrators are just trying to save the game from issues that occurred well over 100 years ago and keep it going where we still succeed. For goodness sake cut the ignorant garbage man and get behind the real game, and cut the fantasy stuff.

It's easy to analyse where the game has strength, as you yourself have done. The problem is that we rely on rich owners to make the most of a clubs strength and potential. They can choose to back whoever they want. We all probably know that Bradford would be a mega club again if someone like Simon Moran was in charge. Conversely the duke of Westminster one of England's richest would have a difficulty making a club in Liverpool a success.

What prevents the mega rich, like Branson is/was when he took over London, is the salary cap. That has to stay or we end up a pathetic low grade version of Scottish Football. So the clubs who have the most local fans and the best junior set ups are the ones we need to have the rich investors at. Outside SL that means Bradford, Widnes, Leigh and Halifax who could be as good as anyone inside SL.

It's pathetic a club who gets lucky with a rich investor is a shining light and one that doesn't is somehow a "basket case". Excuse me whilst I am called an idiot and you are encouraged to ignore me...?

We all have our opinions mate. As far as Oldham's concerned,the game's more or less finished. The crowds are more like a large gathering. It's probably the same in other towns as well sadly. The next few years will be interesting just to see who's going to survive them. It's knackered pure and simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, The Future is League said:

I'm afraid to say that all the while Rimmer is in charge of the RFL things wont get any better.

We need a person in charge who has vision, Rimmer is not that man.

Couldn't agree with you more mate. I think superleague will suffocate the life out of the lower league clubs when the next TV deal is negociated. I hope to god I'm wrong.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, TheReaper said:

You can't blame anyone for wanting to be independent. 

Parky can. In fact, he can blame everyone for everything even a bit 'out-of-the'box' or, horror of horrors, ambitious.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Your problem is you keep calling real life RL clubs with some structure, history, success, and substance - especially a local junior and amateur scene -  "basket cases",  whilst forever supporting any fantasy club headed by people who tell us they are the future. You are not the only one to be a manifestation of a type of RL fan who hates reality and therefore sinks into fantasy. 29 other people on here think the future of RL is anywhere but along the M62. No offence to you, but can you stop your sniping and explain this "vision" to me? 

It is on life support, and that life support is the TV contract. We all agreed a few years back on here if that goes the game goes.

But it is very unfair to lash out at the games administrators and leaders. Read on.......

These kind of pathetic posts that blame individual people doing their best to keep the game alive despite the crushing historical success of soccer and Union over us, are the most gutless, ignorant and pathetic posts on here. I get told off for repeating that all these fantasy clubs won't work, yet you and your ilk are allowed to slaughter the RFL if not SL bosses daily.

Have you no sense of reality or any idea of history? Rugby in the north dominated forms of "football" until Soccer came on the scene and squashed the Rugby version of football. This was in the 1880's. In 1896 Rugby split and over 100 years on we have been beaten by Rugby Union, who eventually won when they went professional and took our players rather than the other way round.

Today's administrators are just trying to save the game from issues that occurred well over 100 years ago and keep it going where we still succeed. For goodness sake cut the ignorant garbage man and get behind the real game, and cut the fantasy stuff.

It's easy to analyse where the game has strength, as you yourself have done. The problem is that we rely on rich owners to make the most of a clubs strength and potential. They can choose to back whoever they want. We all probably know that Bradford would be a mega club again if someone like Simon Moran was in charge. Conversely the duke of Westminster one of England's richest would have a difficulty making a club in Liverpool a success.

What prevents the mega rich, like Branson is/was when he took over London, is the salary cap. That has to stay or we end up a pathetic low grade version of Scottish Football. So the clubs who have the most local fans and the best junior set ups are the ones we need to have the rich investors at. Outside SL that means Bradford, Widnes, Leigh and Halifax who could be as good as anyone inside SL.

It's pathetic a club who gets lucky with a rich investor is a shining light and one that doesn't is somehow a "basket case". Excuse me whilst I am called an idiot and you are encouraged to ignore me...?

You have obviously forgotten about Rimmers plan B for when the catalans reached the cup final. You obviously thought it was a good idea for Rimmers wanting to charge The challenge cup holders 500,000 to defend the challenge cup.

Not sure what sporting circles you mix in but them 2 things alone made the game a laughing stock.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parky I certainly don't have a problem. I support any and all Rugby League club's and the expansion of the game. You are that insular that you think there is only one way. I don't see it like that. I will never understand why it has to be a binary choice.

I've been quite clear that I want to see Rugby League clubs in every town and city. I don't see it as a choice of Oldham or Manchester, I want Oldham and Manchester. Similarly I want Liverpool and St Helens. This is not a binary choice, we can do both and should want to do both. I will certainly never support the cannabilisation of one club for another, particularly when that club offers far more currently than one that has been failing for 2 decades or more.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get why they are trying to make someone buy a club that is struggling in an area that may well be struggling generally. History is full of change, once York was the biggest city in Yorkshire, London wasnt the capital and Lancashire was a barren wasteland (ok somethings dont change)... If someone wants to try and start something, and has backing and everything they say they have, in Manchester why not let them have a pop at it, why force them to buy Oldham (which may be doomed to failure no matter how much money you pump in). If i want to invest my money I dont really want to be told where to do it thats not really how it should work.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, RP London said:

I dont get why they are trying to make someone buy a club that is struggling in an area that may well be struggling generally. History is full of change, once York was the biggest city in Yorkshire, London wasnt the capital and Lancashire was a barren wasteland (ok somethings dont change)... If someone wants to try and start something, and has backing and everything they say they have, in Manchester why not let them have a pop at it, why force them to buy Oldham (which may be doomed to failure no matter how much money you pump in). If i want to invest my money I dont really want to be told where to do it thats not really how it should work.

The simple answer is shameless self-interest. Clubs only think of themselves and Rimmer wants over paying for the job he does. 

Rimmer protects those clubs by stopping new and ambitious clubs entering the structure and usurping them. Rimmer gets a few hundred thousand a year for being the pantomime villain 

What have existing clubs without two brass farthings to rub together, little ambition and even less ability to realise any ambition they may have got to gain from admitting a new club? Whether it's Manchester, Liverpool or new York. It's another rival that will probably move you down a step.

For a large proportion of lower league clubs and some SL clubs plus some very loud, very empty vessels like parky failure isn't the threat. Success is. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

The simple answer is shameless self-interest. Clubs only think of themselves and Rimmer wants over paying for the job he does. 

Rimmer protects those clubs by stopping new and ambitious clubs entering the structure and usurping them. Rimmer gets a few hundred thousand a year for being the pantomime villain 

What have existing clubs without two brass farthings to rub together, little ambition and even less ability to realise any ambition they may have got to gain from admitting a new club? Whether it's Manchester, Liverpool or new York. It's another rival that will probably move you down a step.

For a large proportion of lower league clubs and some SL clubs plus some very loud, very empty vessels like parky failure isn't the threat. Success is. 

i agree.. its worrying that they are sitting there thinking "buts that money we could have had" rather than wondering "why didnt they want to invest in us?" 

is rarely an either/or decision ie I'll either invest in a new Manchester set up or Oldham.. its normally the case of "this is what i want to do as i think it will work" compared to investing in a club down the road that I just dont see any future in... so if you say Manchester is not an option they just walk away... it seems daft. 

having Manchester does not exclude Oldham or the kids that are coming through the system there, in fact it may just help them. Equally if Manchester grows the likes of Oldham can be pulled along too, equally they may not but it is up to Oldham to try and capitalise on it.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...