Jump to content

iffleyox

Coach
  • Posts

    1,433
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

iffleyox last won the day on August 28 2023

iffleyox had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

4,372 profile views

iffleyox's Achievements

1.4k

Reputation

  1. agree, but it's 10 rather than 9. They started 22-23 with 13 clubs in the top division rather than 12.
  2. As a local, because it's the West Midlands. No one identifies with the West Midlands, they identify with their town, or to an extent which seems to surprise people who think counties have died, their county. Which unfortunately for this area means Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Staffordshire, rather than the West Midlands County, which sort of exists officially, but no one identifies with at all. It doesn't even fit neatly by area into one or other of the 'old' counties - Birmingham contains bits of all three, everywhere else is only in one of them. So the quickest way to cut off a section of fanbase is to choose 'Warwickshire' or 'Birmingham' as names. Warwickshire will lose you Worcestershire and the Black Country (Staffs mostly, with some Worcs), Birmingham will lose you anything that isn't Birmingham. Which is an issue when you've got a legacy fanbase from Coventry. The bitterest rivalry is Worcestershire vs Warwickshire - which in cricket knocks a roses match into a cocked hat except no one from away from the midlands seems to know about it. It's so bitter that many people would rather not attend the away match - so as not to put money into whichever of Worcs or Warks they don't support. Hurricanes' link up with Warwickshire CCC was a regrettable lapse that does, at a visceral level, make it difficult for both me and some other Worcs CCC fans I know to support them. Unfortunately I'm serious, even though typing it out feels ridiculous. About the only other name which they could have tried I think is something like Three Counties Hurricanes, which would also have been a dog's breakfast. They're stuck with 'Midlands' because they've come to Birmingham from Coventry and didn't want to lose existing fans. Birmingham would arguably have been cleaner in terms of trying to start from scratch, but unfortunately, Birmingham v Coventry is another massive and sometimes bitter rivalry, in cricket, football, and RU.... IMO they were right to avoid it. It's one of the problems in trying to graft a new sport into an area that's a seething mess of pre-existing rivalries. There are a lot of people in the West Midlands, but it's not straightforward.
  3. while there is definitely a fact there, it doesn't actually contradict anything in the post you've quoted?
  4. I'm not totally sure that was the issue being highlighted in the case of Huddersfield/Sheffield....
  5. as ever though this comes back to the age-old argument about what they're being taken on the road for - is it different venues in the heartlands, or on their periphery, or is it new territory? Your list works for the former, but as an RL starved southerner I'd like to throw some, any or all of the following into the mix: Stadium MK, CBS Stadium Coventry, Ashton Gate, St Marys, Home Park I get that its the ultimate pins in a map pitch, but there's a difference between taking games 'on the road' and taking games 'down the road/round the corner'
  6. been a while since someone has said this, so I might as well say it (because I believe it, which helps): or they could just, you know, contest the scrums properly... it's about the only change I'd make to the whole sport, just enforce all the rules as written... [ducks]
  7. Red herring - people keep mentioning it but it's not how the law works. Waivers enforce some things, but they don't absolve one side totally either. There will always be a possible court case, most probably on the grounds of duty of care, and there will always be an existential threat therefore to governing bodies. The most worrying, and it's behind a paywall but I read it in the Times the other week, was a throwaway line in an article/letter from a group of doctors advocating the banning of rugby (both codes) for Under 18s. They wanted to do that on the grounds that Under 18s have no competency to decide to put themselves at such risk - *but* (and here's the stinger) they also said that *no one at all* has the competency to do so either really... Now, that's extremism, but we come back to the point that 'sign something and crack on' isn't a panacea for the reason that like many simple and seductive things, it won't work.
  8. but again, how many people - not on here but in the big world outside - will have done that? I don't particularly support any of the current SL teams, but if Trin hadn't been relegated I'd have considered getting the service (I don't have Sky) because £120 or whatever it is per year is enough *just to watch their matches*. I wouldn't have sat through many of the others. As it is, I'm happy as a neutral with the BBC's FTA offering, and did watch Cas v Wigan on Saturday, which I probably wouldn't have had the BBC/C4/terrestrial not carried it. I'll be watching the WCC (probably) on the same basis. £120 isn't much to watch one game a week, and I reckon most people will be fans of one or other of the SL sides doing it to do just that. If the numbers doing that tip away from those wanting to watch multiple matches, then them's the breaks. As someone watching one match a week in a bit of focused 'time for RL' then I actually quite like the brief updates of what's going on elsewhere because I'm not going to follow them up beyond maybe the highlight clips on the BBC Sport App (which I've downloaded at the weekend, just because the BBC now has the SL highlights....). And watched them all. Seriously, having watched all the available highlight clips and the Cas match I've probably just watched more RL in a weekend than I have ever before. In here that makes me a rank amateur. Away from here I bet more of the UK RL viewing public looks more like me.
  9. In a big city, with international name recognition?
  10. I'm a bit conflicted by this too. It's very difficult to even write it, especially given the obvious and some of the most recent posts in the thread, but as a general rule I'm not sure I agree with anything being named after anyone (not just in sport) until they're no longer around. This is absolutely, categorically nothing against RB - I'm sitting here and can see his autobiography across the room.
  11. Winner - ta do you mean purchase it in advance btw?
  12. Shorter response is I’m just saying what I think’s happening
  13. And I’ve said nothing about what I think - all I’ve said is what I think the RFL thinks. FWIW I don’t think your first question will arise (or be allowed to). But if it did then when the facts change the rules change. Incidentally that cuts both ways… To your final paragraph, here’s why you should be concerned what the RFU do - on this one, they are the canary in the coal mine and if you don’t think the RFL and RFU are talking to each other, and to an extent walking down the same path and tinkering each in response to the other then can I interest you in a bridge?
  14. I don’t think you’re thinking about this conspiratorially enough. A look over the fence at the other code might help (for once) here. English RU is currently in the first season of the game from tier three down having different tackling rules from tiers 1-2. why? Because clubs in the top tier play clubs from other countries, and supply the internationals, and clubs in level 2 provide game time for level 1 players. the theory in RU is that they can’t change the fully pro game until everyone in the world does it, and so they need levels 3 down to provide a weight of evidence which makes the case. RFL is doing it slightly differently, because they are moving the top tier over unilaterally, but again it’s all about building a case for bouncing people into it who don’t want to do it. in a year’s time, the hope will be that the RFL is saying something like ‘because of this, xyz has happened. Why stand in the way of safety and who are you to deny the facts?’ so it’s absolutely not a direct comparison between the two codes, but I’d argue the RFL and RFU (for different audiences) are essentially on manoeuvres here and it’s all about message management.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.