Jump to content

Wellsy4HullFC

Coach
  • Posts

    11,454
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Everything posted by Wellsy4HullFC

  1. Personally, I'd have had top of Championship promoted, and bottom 2 SL clubs enter into the Championship playoffs. One guaranteed relegation, with potential for two.
  2. I think the S8s showed there was a real appetite for inter-division competition. But I think the consensus by most was 7 weeks + final was too long. Naturally, we never explored the concept of playoffs between top and bottom clubs again in another form.
  3. Yet we've been even worse in the first half each of those games. I thought 28-0 was bad, but letting in 40 is horrendous.
  4. Saints away next round. Unlike the other teams we've played, they can actually go for 2 halves.
  5. We were saying this at half time against Rovers. I just couldn't bring myself to wanting us to get hammered against them though so I'm glad we had a rally. Here though, I can only see one way in the second half. Starting with 12 for the first 8 minutes, they'll have an immediate roll on and we'll give up like the dejected players we've become under Smith. Don't think Pearson can afford to sack him. Nor does he dare after getting rid of so many changes in the last 4 years.
  6. This is the worst Hull team I've seen since the Sharks era. Whoever was involved in putting this squad together needs sacking. Absolutely dreadful.
  7. London have done well to keep the score this low after that 2nd quarter. They're not very good in the second half it seems are Rovers.
  8. Let's be honest, London were never intended to be in the SL under this system. They scraped in under the previous system. You can't judge it on Broncos' presence. They won't be in next year and won't be in for a while until they invest in many other areas (which hopefully they do because a DECENT capital presence would be great for the game).
  9. I think we're both in agreement that SL clubs should enter a round earlier (like they used to). I'd be tempted to give the SL champions a bye so there's a free weekend for them to play the WCC. Enjoyed this conversation, Martyn. Enjoy Easter.
  10. I think the only way they'd go that route would be if there were looking to reduce loop fixtures in the league and replace them with this. I wouldn't mind too much in that again the magic of the cup for me is those matches against teams from a different league. That variety is interesting to me. I'd rather a 14 team SL to eradicate that issue though.
  11. I agree completely. The CC needs to decide what it wants to be and whether that is an attractive enough proposition. At the moment, it's a series of poorly attended games on a run to a final that is getting more empty every year. We've moved the date several times recently, so it's not the date. That tells me the it's current format is just not capturing the interest of the clubs or supporters. By making it an RFL promoted event in fixed cities, you're guaranteeing something different. At present, the big clubs don't even enter at the stage I proposed and haven't for about 10 years, so the chance of a big club being knocked out would actually increase (only slightly). I take your point about leaving it more open, however I'm torn. In a now fully professional sport, we need to maximise revenue, hence why I suggested Magic Rounds (bigger crowds than combined attendance). Increasing the chance of knocking out your biggest clubs from that initial magic round seemed financial suicide, which is why I leaned on a seeded first round (I was tempted to call it a "qualifying round" but thought that would take too much away!). The other reason I leaned that way was that personally I found the most magic of the cup came from the top clubs playing the lower league clubs. Increasing the chance of a cup upset would do far more to build the magic than Saints knocking out Leeds early in front of half the attendance of a regular SL game 7 days prior. At the end of the day, the sport is far different than it was pre-SL, with different goals (finance). An open draw competition may not achieve that goal anymore so we either look to adapt it or wait until it dies.
  12. At present, only 4 teams will get a hope of that potential cash reward, and only 1 might get it. Wigan v Sheffield only pulled 5k and Leigh v Fev only 4k. The other 2 played at home. Not really groundbreaking. In my proposal, those same 4 teams (potentially more if someone knocks off a SL side in the proposed earlier round) would all get a guaranteed equal share of a Magic Weekend gate. And all will play in front of a larger crowd in a larger stadium than they usually do that year. Ticks your boxes.
  13. What did you think of the "neutral venue" proposal out of interest, Martyn? For arguments sake, if you kept the format the same this year (SL clubs entering at round of 16)... The combined Last 16 attendance for 6/8 games was 24,028 (Batley and HKR didn't give their attendance). A safe guess would be around 6k combined. The bar is set at about 30k. Surely the clubs aren't making money off that? Last 10 years Round 6 aggregate attendances: 2023 - 31,650; 2022 - 29,509; 2020 & 2021 - COVID; 2019 - 36,677 (2 big ties); 2018 - 28,748; 2017 - 31,847; 2016 - 26,706; 2015 - 33,597 [average = 31,248] The Magic Round 1 day attendance is about the same. By going the Magic route, potentially you could double the round attendance, create an event of it that people want to attend, have all games broadcast live and hit a target city. Or, you could carry on with sub 4k average attendances that make SL clubs look unattractive. In addition, the QFs have had around 25k combined over the last 10 years, only 1 year broke 30k. Less than one day at Magic. I'd say take the show on the road and make it something unique.
  14. Thanks for the reply Martyn. To push back a bit on your reply, you've already noted that we've moved away from that. I'm assuming that's in relation to the fact that teams enter the cup at different stages. SL clubs entering in the round of 16 (rather than the ribs of 32 as previously) has killed a lot of the enjoyment of the cup for me, but regardless all teams don't enter at the same stage so it's not entirely open and unrestricted. I don't think being open and unrestricted is necessarily the main selling point of the cup either. I'd say more people spoke about the fixtures involving SL v Championship clubs this weekend than Leeds v Saints. I'd say the USP is that variety. The CC needs to offer something completely different to that of SL, which is why I proposed the initial round of guaranteeing SL clubs don't meet each other, as well as magic-style neutral grounds thereafter. I'd even consider a French-only bracket to the draw to garner interest there. Catalans, Toulouse and two Elite 1 teams at the round of 32, with winners playing each other at round of 16 (just to guarantee only 1 overseas club could make the final and protecting the event from a potential low attended final). In an ideal world, you'd have all pro clubs ever at the same time (as well amateurs) with an open random draw, but that wouldn't necessary be more attractive, just more "open and unrestricted". Attracting the punters is the number one objective, which is why we've got to offer them something they want to come and pay for. So far they only want to see a Wembley Final (and even that is dying down).
  15. Really enjoying these podcasts, Martyn. Keep it up! In regards to the headline question, my take... The problem with the Challenge Cup is that its early rounds are compared to SL, thus it looks an inferior version of something we already have. Same teams playing at the same venues in front of lower crowds. I'd have all SL teams (except the champions) entering at round of 32. All seeded away to lower league sides (different venue, different opposition). SL champions have a free weekend to play WCC. All remaining rounds (Ro16, QF, SF, F) played at a neutral venue like Magic Weekend. Gives a fixed date in the calendar, a fixed venue to sell to a new local market, can pool resources together to create a unique event, all can be televised easily with one setup, won't be compared with SL fixtures as it's at a neutral venue, has a low bar set in terms of crowds (did the combined attendance of the last round even break 30k?). Also gives new life to Magic Weekend and removes an extra loop fixture from the league. I await my invite to a future podcast panel
  16. We've signed some average players to replace far better ones leaving. We haven't actually replaced them all. No leaders. No halves. No discipline. Really, what were we expecting? Our forwards spend more time off the pitch being punished (in and out of games). At this stage, I'd really appreciate some honesty from the club and not the same old tired "stick with us, we're working on it, we're hurting, blah blah" because it's just not good enough anymore. We need something to be optimistic about. Our season is over before Easter.
  17. I've been saying this a while. We bang on about our youth, but it never kicks on. We've had some above average players develop. When they get to the first team, they never develop further.
  18. I'd agree, but he'd no doubt go to another club and they'll suddenly become world beaters The hardest job in rugby league is this. Any coach who thinks they're worth their salt should take on this to see if they're as good as they think they are!
  19. The Friday overlap annoys me. I can't choose which game I want to watch and when I do, you know I'll end up not picking the most exciting one! Came in late on Friday so chose to watch Leigh v Leeds after HT scores. Always fun watching Leeds get beat, right?... Should have watched the Saints/Salford game! First World problems!
  20. I don't think that's true. For it to be a voluntary tackle, a player must play the ball without being called held. There doesn't need to be any tackler involved (hence the voluntary part). Example: I recall (whilst at Huddersfield) Stanley Gene getting penalised for throwing himself to the ground before making contact with the defenders and playing the ball as if he'd been tackled. I assume he was anticipating contact within that maneuver and attempting a quick PTB to catch them offside. It's the exact type of play the rule is designed to prevent.
  21. Unless we abolish the offside rule, it is imperative that we keep the voluntary tackle rule. Otherwise you'll see players in possession playing the ball randomly to trap players in offside positions (a bit like the "dumping" tactic in touch rugby). As for the deliberate knock on rule, could it possibly be that the interpretation may players who are actually in possession of the ball deliberating throwing it to the ground?
×
×
  • 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.