Kear sees the light on franchising

[Terry Mullaney]

the season prior to SL

Rovers average was 4,030, wakefield's was 3,233.

That's interesting. I reckon it's probably very fair to say that based on those figures there's absolutely no reason at all why Rovers couldn't have matched or indeed bettered Wakefield's SL performance. We would have been averaging 6500 comfortably, in my opinion. But we'll never know for sure unless we are given the opportunity.

[Trojan]

That's interesting. I reckon it's probably very fair to say that based on those figures there's absolutely no reason at all why Rovers couldn't have matched or indeed bettered Wakefield's SL performance. We would have been averaging 6500 comfortably, in my opinion. But we'll never know for sure unless we are given the opportunity.

That is the point. Rugby League crowds are not static with the self same people coming week in week out. They are dynamic. Because whether we like it or not, people die, become too ill or old or infirm to attend any more, or they move away. These missing fans have to be replaced. With new younger fans, but if you're a young potential RL supporter living in Wakey Met, who would you support? Wakey or Cas who are Super League sides and get max publicity and appear on TV fairly regularly, or lowly Fev? - And let's face it until recently we have been pretty lowly. If that night in 1998 Fev had won instead of losing, I reckon we'd have made at least as good a fist of SL as Wakey did. In fact possibly better, because given what happened down the line to Wakey with their financial scandal, and new ground scandal, it's possible they without the SL would have ceased to exist. In the eighties Fax who've been described on here as a "small" club were attracting 8-10k to Thrum Hall. Since their decline their crowds have diminished. The young fans described above have gone to watch the Bulls and the Giants. Whether they can recover I couldn't say. But if they remain in the Championship much longer I somehow doubt it. Halifax was a major RL centre along with Oldham and look at them both today. Unless we can give these clubs' supporters a better hope than that every three years they'll be able to apply for SL, IMO they're in danger of disappearing. All for the tenuous hope of "expansion" - much good it's done us so far.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Trojan

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

Yes MD, what were Leeds, Saints, Bradford getting through the gates back then. It's all relative.

If I remember correctly, the Hull clubs, especially Hull FC were the biggest crowdpullers in the early eighties.

Hull pulled some big crowds in the second division the year they got promoted, that must have been the late seventies.

I'd reckon Hull were averaging around 13,000 and Hull KR about 8,500 in 1982.

Don't recall the rest as being anything special, though no doubt someone will prove me wrong.

[The Parksider]

But to get back to the point and John Kear:

""The reason that has made me change my mind about relegation being a performance issue is when you get 10,000 plus at Headingley Carnegie watching a rugby union game

[Trojan]

There's only ever been about 13 clubs capable of being in the GP and either Leeds have been adrift at the bottom, Rotherham have or someone like Bristol has gone bust. Whoever goes down tends to come straight back up. There's no real relegation battles in the GP save the odd year when someone doesn't do too well and has to overcome the relegation "patsy".

Kear wants to base a whole sea change in opinion on the stregth (or should I say weakness) of one match, his comments are worth the same as Smiths when he wanted SL to reduce in numbers drastically. Two lazy and lousy proposals based on nothing substantial.

There's also of course the example of the crowd for the Wakey/Cas decider in 2006. Plus as plenty on here have testified, it's not the same game without the prospect of promotion or the threat of relegation. Admit it Parky - you're wrong. Franchising will, given enough time kill the game stone dead, then where will your expansion come from?

Promotion and relegation are like the heat in a curry, it's just as nourishing without the heat, but the heat makes it appetising - it's the spice.

Edited June 30, 2010 by Trojan

[LOWFIELD]

how come that didn't happen when fev were battling against relegation in 83, on top of which they won the cup: average attendance 2,600

what the helll as fev in 83 got to do with attendances in the last 3 weeks

would love to know how you managed to get the role of Rovers heritage officer when you show no regard for the clubs past efforts. your a disgrace

Edited June 30, 2010 by LOWFIELD

[The Parksider]

In the eighties Fax who've been described on here as a "small" club were attracting 8-10k to Thrum Hall. Since their decline their crowds have diminished. The young fans described above have gone to watch the Bulls and the Giants. Whether they can recover I couldn't say. But if they remain in the Championship much longer I somehow doubt it. Halifax was a major RL centre along with Oldham and look at them both today. Unless we can give these clubs' supporters a better hope than that every three years they'll be able to apply for SL, IMO they're in danger of disappearing. All for the tenuous hope of "expansion" - much good it's done us so far.

Well let's cut to the chase Tro.

Dump Crusaders, Catalans and Quins and have two divisions of 10 clubs...

1. Wigan, Wire, Saints, Hull, Leeds, Fartown, HKR, Bradford, Wakefield, Cas

2. Salford, Fev, leigh, halifax, Barrow, sheffield, Widnes, Whitehaven, Batley, Dewsbury

Redistribute the 900K 14 clubs now get as

[Trojan]

Well let's cut to the chase Tro.

Dump Crusaders, Catalans and Quins and have two divisions of 10 clubs...

1. Wigan, Wire, Saints, Hull, Leeds, Fartown, HKR, Bradford, Wakefield, Cas

2. Salford, Fev, leigh, halifax, Barrow, sheffield, Widnes, Whitehaven, Batley, Dewsbury

Redistribute the 900K 14 clubs now get as

[l'angelo mysterioso]

That's interesting. I reckon it's probably very fair to say that based on those figures there's absolutely no reason at all why Rovers couldn't have matched or indeed bettered Wakefield's SL performance. We would have been averaging 6500 comfortably, in my opinion. But we'll never know for sure unless we are given the opportunity.

I suppose it depends on the calibre of people running the club, which has improved radically since then

both sets of figures are pretty embarrassing when yu consider the on field history of the clubs

[shrek]

The gap is too big between NL and SL for any meaningful promotion and relegation.

Sadly I agree with that 100%.

With the salary cap in the Championship be what, 450k, there or there abouts, your over a million off being with the top spenders in Super League and a good few hundred thousand from catching up with the lowest spenders. It must now be impossible to build a squad in the Championship that only needs a couple of additions to compete week in week out in Super League, so your talking wholesale changes to playing staff in what, an 8 to 10 week period, and then chances are you'll be picking up scraps from those relegated.

Scrap the salary cap and yes you could build a squad, but then as many on here will tell you that'll just lead to idiots bankrupting clubs chasing the impossible dream.

[l'angelo mysterioso]

Yes MD, what were Leeds, Saints, Bradford getting through the gates back then. It's all relative.

ision clubs

it is all relative.

I'm sure even you will understand that working out the averages for all first division clubs for that year would destroy most peaoples' will to live.

what I can offer you is the higheest lowest crowds for each clun in that division, apart from barrow, and bradford who's stats might well be inside one of the dogs

Hull: 20-569-8545

Hull KR: 13610-5006

Wigan: 12172-3883

Saints: 9438-1999

Widnes: 7841-2707

Cas: 6744-2234

Oldham: 5797-2437

Leigh: 9387-2958

warrington: 5173-2042

fev: 5148-1240

workington: 3067-435

halifax: 4104-984

carlisle: 3331-846

fev cas derbys that year: home 4134, away 3530. One would have thought that not only would they have been bigger, but that they would have been the biggest for both clubs considering the apparent significance of the game.

after rovers reached wembley and were involved in those much touted relegation games, they had crowds of 1728, 3153, 3753.

It is indeed all relative.

[Terry Mullaney]

I'm sure even you will understand that working out the averages for all first division clubs for that year would destroy most peaoples' will to live.

what I can offer you is the higheest lowest crowds for each clun in that division, apart from barrow, and bradford who's stats might well be inside one of the dogs

Hull: 20-569-8545

Hull KR: 13610-5006

Wigan: 12172-3883

Saints: 9438-1999

Widnes: 7841-2707

Cas: 6744-2234

Oldham: 5797-2437

Leigh: 9387-2958

warrington: 5173-2042

fev: 5148-1240

workington: 3067-435

halifax: 4104-984

carlisle: 3331-846

fev cas derbys that year: home 4134, away 3530. One would have thought that not only would they have been bigger, but that they would have been the biggest for both clubs considering the apparent significance of the game.

after rovers reached wembley and were involved in those much touted relegation games, they had crowds of 1728, 3153, 3753.

It is indeed all relative.

What do you mean by 'even you will understand'? You really can't be civil when it comes to responding to my postings can you?

I didn't ask anyone to work out average figures for all first division clubs and I definitely didn't ask you unless your initials are MD. I mentioned three, one of which, Leeds, you haven't covered anyway.

With regard to derbies, it would appear that Wigan v Saints attracted 12172 and the reverse fixture at Knowsley Rd 9438 assuming they were the respective top gates of the two clubs. Much much lower than now.

Yes, as I said, it is all relative to the particular era.

[l'angelo mysterioso]

What do you mean by 'even you will understand'? You really can't be civil when it comes to responding to my postings can you?

I didn't ask anyone to work out average figures for all first division clubs and I definitely didn't ask you unless your initials are MD. I mentioned three, one of which, Leeds, you haven't covered anyway.

With regard to derbies, it would appear that Wigan v Saints attracted 12172 and the reverse fixture at Knowsley Rd 9438 assuming they were the respective top gates of the two clubs. Much much lower than now.

Yes, as I said, it is all relative to the particular era.

I think your first comment is a fair one, and I apologise.

But please bear in mind that;

time and time again you are provided with detailed information by me and others, and it doesn't seem to register: this occassion being an example.

you don't back up your own statements, but expect people to go to the trouble to back up theirs, which I have done in my last post.

crowds in the 70s-early eighties were lower, but Rovers were relatively low-significantly so compared to other clubs, bearing in mind that Rovers werea cup winning side and were involved in a relegation bttle-as I showed there was no significant rise in attendances during and after Rovers cup run and subsequent victory and it's attendant battle against relegation.

when it comes to civility, might I suggest that you check pout some of your own past comments, and Lowfield's lst post on thbis thread? Not that two(or more) wrongs make a right.

[l'angelo mysterioso]

what the helll as fev in 83 got to do with attendances in the last 3 weeks

would love to know how you managed to get the role of Rovers heritage officer when you show no regard for the clubs past efforts. your a disgrace

I was replying to Trojan's previous post. I believe the post was pertinnt.

as for your second comment...I wonder what Mr Mullaney thinks.

[Terry Mullaney]

I think your first comment is a fair one, and I apologise.

But please bear in mind that;

time and time again you are provided with detailed information by me and others, and it doesn't seem to register: this occassion being an example.

you don't back up your own statements, but expect people to go to the trouble to back up theirs, which I have done in my last post.

crowds in the 70s-early eighties were lower, but Rovers were relatively low-significantly so compared to other clubs, bearing in mind that Rovers werea cup winning side and were involved in a relegation bttle-as I showed there was no significant rise in attendances during and after Rovers cup run and subsequent victory and it's attendant battle against relegation.

when it comes to civility, might I suggest that you check pout some of your own past comments, and Lowfield's lst post on thbis thread? Not that two(or more) wrongs make a right.

I give up. Your last post bears out all that I've said. Attendances were lower generally then than they are now so logically clubs such as Rovers could expect proportionate increases if allowed access to SL. John Kear has realised that Licensing is not the way forward and good on him for admitting he was mistaken. Thanks for your efforts in supplying the figures.

Edited July 1, 2010 by Terry Mullaney

[LOWFIELD]

how come that didn't happen when fev were battling against relegation in 83, on top of which they won the cup: average attendance 2,600

Its like having a conversation with a young child this is. The crowds Fev got in 83 is irrelevant maybe if there was no relegation they would of been lower. Im saying the last 3 crowds Cas have had would of been significantly higher had relegation been at stake probably by 2k a game and at

[dallymessenger]

yeah if franchsing was in les cats would be relegated now.

and barrow would be in SL ahead of widnes.

i can see why you guys like franchising so much.

the whole future of the sport should be based on one game.

[LOWFIELD]

yeah if franchsing was in les cats would be relegated now.

and barrow would be in SL ahead of widnes.

i can see why you guys like franchising so much.

the whole future of the sport should be based on one game.

Why shouldnt les cats be relegated?

Why shouldnt Barrow be in instead of Widnes?

The future wouldnt be decided on 1 game, if the division below was funded as it should be relegation wouldnt be a disaster and the relegated clubs could regroup and get promoted

[dallymessenger]

Why shouldnt les cats be relegated?

Why shouldnt Barrow be in instead of Widnes?

The future wouldnt be decided on 1 game, if the division below was funded as it should be relegation wouldnt be a disaster and the relegated clubs could regroup and get promoted

the clubs that arent in SL deserve to be where they are

if you average 2000 or less and have been around for a century or more, then that is pathetic

the RFL shouldnt kill off its expansion plans for clubs like this

Edited July 1, 2010 by dallymessenger

[Trojan]

the clubs that arent in SL deserve to be where they are

Does that include my team Featherstone Rovers? We were in the old Div I and excluded from SL for the now non existent Paris. At the time we were drawing better crowds than Wakefield. Since Wakefield have been in Superleague (in controversial circumstances) their crowds have improved and ours have declined. If we had P&R this season there's a good chance we'd be promoted. But we won't be. If we were promoted and couldn't hack it and were relegated - ce la vie. We'd at least have had our shot, which is more than we've had so far. Promotion and relegation is the meat and drink of British sport. Any game without the carrot of promotion and the stick of relegation loses something for me.

[Crusade]

There's only ever been about 13 clubs capable of being in the GP and either Leeds have been adrift at the bottom, Rotherham have or someone like Bristol has gone bust. Whoever goes down tends to come straight back up. There's no real relegation battles in the GP save the odd year when someone doesn't do too well and has to overcome the relegation "patsy".

not bad for a competition that had no history and only just started in 1987. no real battle? sale, wocester, newcastle and leeds were still fight it out till the last game of the season. exeter chiefs and bristols were going hard in the championship which got good crowds for the two finals in both towns. it has work great for the english union comp so far.

[LOWFIELD]

the clubs that arent in SL deserve to be where they are

if you average 2000 or less and have been around for a century or more, then that is pathetic

the RFL shouldnt kill off its expansion plans for clubs like this

fool

[dallymessenger]

Does that include my team Featherstone Rovers? We were in the old Div I and excluded from SL for the now non existent Paris. At the time we were drawing better crowds than Wakefield. Since Wakefield have been in Superleague (in controversial circumstances) their crowds have improved and ours have declined. If we had P&R this season there's a good chance we'd be promoted. But we won't be. If we were promoted and couldn't hack it and were relegated - ce la vie. We'd at least have had our shot, which is more than we've had so far. Promotion and relegation is the meat and drink of British sport. Any game without the carrot of promotion and the stick of relegation loses something for me.

maybe 20 years ago they suffered a bad turn

but today they arent a SL club.

the talk of a new ground could change that.

[dallymessenger]

fool

the only club currently outside SL which is a SL club is widnes.

the rest all arent currently good enough for SL.

[Pride & Heritage]

To all of the pro franchise people. I can see your argument about the promoted team not being competitive enough etc. but this has been caused by the larger clubs in SL who are running the game getting away with feathering there own nests for years. Remember Gateshull and Shuddersfield mergers, the rules have been consistantly bent to favour the select few since the inception of SL. Why should the bigger clubs get 2 votes to 1??? Could you imagine it in any other walk of life? Like a general election for example? The game is a farce at the moment and needs to be run independently of the likes of Mr Hetherington at Leeds with vested interests in what decisions are made for the game as a whole.

Why not set a pool of cash aside from all of the SL clubs to finance the promotion of a team? Like the parachute payment made to Castleford when they were last relegated, but this time give the newly promoted team the cash to be competitive? Surely that is the best solution and will without doubt strengthen that club for the future. The greater the number of strong teams in the game the better the game will be!

Surely the answer is to make the gap between the top clubs and the bottom smaller not bigger, which has been the case for years. Yes, I'm a Batley supporter, a very small club, but it isn't that long ago we drew with St. Helens in the Challenge Cup and would have won it if it wasn't for a last minute touchline goal by Bobby Goulding to get them the draw. Can you imagine that happening in any sort of competition now between SL and the CH's? Don't you think that is why the attendances for the Challenge cup have dropped? Who the hell wants to watch a game where the result is a dead cert before a ball is kicked? Is the game any better for this gulf in class between all of the divisions? I know the arguement for continually strengthening the top tier is to make the international GB/England team stronger, but has this happened in the last 20 years? Can any of you give me any proof that this has worked in any way? I think not, we are no closer now than we were in the 80's to toppling the Aussies, it could even be argued after the last internationals we are now further away than we were. Have we even looked like winning a Tri Nations tournament or World Cup in the last few years?

How good is it for the sport to be dominated by 2 or 3 clubs for decades on end, is that an exciting prospect for enticing new fans to a minority sport? Wigan dominated in the 80's, Leeds and St. Helens almost exclusively ever since with the exception of an odd couple of years of Bradford doing well? We need to get the balance right and have 14 equally matched teams in SL with promotion and relegation brought back in, giving everyone something to play for, and without doubt this boys club smokescreen, known as the franchised system has to be scrapped. Please pull your heads out of the sand and realise that this franchise system is just a smokescreen to protect the few at the cost of all the others! It is not good for the game. That is the only way to strengthen the international game, by making players play to the best of their ability every week, as you would have a few stars in all of the SL clubs rather than the likes of Leeds, St. Helens etc. dominating the talent pool with enough strength in depth to fill 2 1st teams capable of finishing in the top 4 of SL.

If you think that the game is balanced at the moment, and everyone has a good chance of winning, I ask you how many of you would be willing to bet