nadera78
-
Posts
3,635 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by nadera78
-
-
as you know we dont use on field criteria to select our teams so tonights match isnt that relevant.
-
How many overseas players do the Broncos have. Sheffield are allowed 1
Soward was brought in after the comp started -is that fair? Sheffield would have exceeded the cap to get him so your argument is complete cack.
Hang on, the suggestion was that there was no significant gap between bottom SL and top Championship. On tonight's evident there clearly is.
-
A few years back, Wire were poorly supported, yet now we are strong enough. A few years back, Souths were so weak, they were kicked out.
Things change, cutting clubs off and telling them to just worry about youth development would appear harsh, especially when the standard at the bottom end of SL is so poor. Like I said earlier, if the SL clubs were all out of sight of the top Championship clubs, fair enough, but quite simply they aren't.
Well the worst team in SL this year, and possibly the worst London team I've ever seen, comfortably beat the second ranked team in the Championship tonight. And, despite the wailing on the Sheffield-London thread, it was a comfortable victory.
-
Interesting article in this months 40 20 magazine regarding the recent Supporters Direct meeting which Blake Solly from the RFL attended. There's a list of the main points Blake raised at the meeting, but here's a couple that stand out -
SL losses in 2012 were £600k - £8m as a consolidated entity - despite a rise in TV money. The Championship clubs were each losing £60k pa in 2008, this was cut to £10k in 2012.
Although clubs admit licencing is better than what went before, the administrative burden outweighs benefits, diverting resources away from commercial imperatives. It protects underperforming clubs.
Sky would prefer more jeopardy and variety.
P+R would be decided by one automatic spot and one spot decided by a play off, irrespective of the structure adopted.
Now that is utter lunacy. In order to save a few shekels the clubs are going back to a system they (and the RFL) know and admit doesn't work. Would some of these 'commercial imperatives' include an Australian scrum half by any chance?
-
Sorry Nadera, I normally have a lot of tome for your posts on other subjects, but on this one you are totally wrong.
Without P&R the game WILL die in Leigh and other towns frozen out. Fans are not interested in watching some second rate competition with no hope. People in Leigh will just stop going. And if people aint watching the game, they wont be playing it either.
I grew up playing for Leigh amateur teams wanting to emulate Leigh heroes. I was madly into watching Leigh then and enjoyed the ups and downs.
Being left with 12 teams and just a load of effectively amateur teams will see us end up like ice hockey or some other nothing game
I just don't see it like that. The Centurions might die, and that would be a shame, but the community game would continue. There are many, many people who play, coach, watch, cut oranges at community clubs who have no connection or interest or involvement with the pro game.
-
On the CEO thing, I'd have given every penny London Broncos wasted on Craig Gower to a competent CEO. We wouldn't be in the mess we are now, that's for sure.
-
I'd disagree. I don;t mean Leigh being strong within the game, I mean them being financial stable enough to support development within their area.
Having 30+ stronger clubs is better than 10 super strong clubs imho. It's not as if money is being taken from the top 10/12 - simply clubs that are not up to scratch being moved more into a level that suits them and that money being split downwards rather than up the line.
The likes of Warrington, Wigan, Leeds can continue their growth plans, and can hopefully do it in a more competitive league with a better playoff structure.
That's true enough, but Leigh could do that within the Championship. There's absolutely no need, or justification, for the game's entire structure to be determined with these clubs in mind.
The focus should be on finding an elite top tier and a strong development pathway. The bit in the middle, the semi-pro game, should be designed to fit in with those two aims.
-
I never mentioned them playing in SL.
Leigh Centurions are as strong or weak as they want to be. My point is that their strength or weakness means little to the game overall, for all the reasons I outlined in that post.
You could argue though that our clubs are the strongest development tools we have.
Would it be better to have a strong Leigh, or them to be really weak and have a development officer in that area? I'm genuinely not sure, but I suspect having a strong club there is more important.
-
A fairer comparison would be of rugby league in England to rugby union in Wales. Early 2000s they decided they couldn't afford their P&R setup and went to a fully franchised model of merged clubs. They later had the good fortune of being able to eventually shrink their professional league to the current 4 while pitching in with the Irish (4 clubs) and Scots (2 clubs) who did the same to create a single fully-pro sustainable league.
That has also allowed two Italian clubs to come into the fold without upsetting anyone greatly with the benefits to Italy of this increased level of competitive domestic level sport.
Finally, the teams that didn't make it to the franchised table in Wales, Scotland and Ireland were essentially told to lump it and they have with quite good grace after a few years to settle into the model once the likes of Leighton Samuel moved on. Professional sport in those countries has improved substantially in the last decade while allowing the host nations to concentrate resources on the wider game, recognising that it really can take a decade or more for the full fruit of a strategic reorganisation to mature. It was quite a brave move, especially in Scotland and Wales but it has paid off handsomely in my opinion.
Unfortunately, rugby league just doesn't have the neighbouring leagues to shrink into a fully competitive league. I'd quite happily sign up to a model of 12 clubs in a fully franchised, not licensed, pro league now, abandoning P&R permanently. I'd also have it written into the franchise constitution that there is an option to increase to 14 clubs if a 2nd French team meets proven criteria and a further expansion side with the same criteria.
Cracking post. The only thing I'd change is that Toulouse would be one of the 12.
-
All clubs are important to rugby league. Some may be more strategically important than others. But all clubs are important. Thank god not everyone has your attitude towards the game.
No, you're right. I shouldn't have said not important. But they are way, way down they pecking order And we should not be making strategic decisions on the future of the sport based around them and clubs like them.
-
You could argue though that our clubs are the strongest development tools we have.
Would it be better to have a strong Leigh, or them to be really weak and have a development officer in that area? I'm genuinely not sure, but I suspect having a strong club there is more important.
Leigh Centurions are completely irrelevant to the future of Rugby League.
If they never again play in SL what would happen? People in Leigh would still play Rugby League at junior and community level. People in Leigh would still go and watch the Centurions. Other people in Leigh would still go and watch Wigan, like they do already. The best juniors produced in Leigh would still sign for Wigan and other SL clubs, like they currently do and always have.
On the flip side, Centurions playing in SL would not produce one single extra player than we currently see coming from the town. It would not produce any new investors in the game. It would not increase our corporate base. It would not increase our broadcast revenue. It would not increase the media attention our sport gets.
Leigh, as a town, is important to Rugby League. Leigh Centurions, as a club, are not. The same could be said of any number of towns in the north of England.
-
Well, that's a point. We're potentially taking money from the elite competition to subsidise second tier clubs in their attempt to become (unsustainable) full-time clubs. Wouldn't that money be better being diverted towards keeping at least some of the development officers?
Yep. Go and listen to the Wood interview on SLTV. He thinks the way to match the Aussies and Kiwis is to take money from the elite players at SL clubs and give it to part time players in the Championship. The man's a genius.
-
Well played sir
I've never been a boycotter, nor have I ever understood them. I just want what's best for the entire game. I think this is it, others don't. Although interestingly, the response on every other forum or facebook site I visit is much more positive than here. TRL is becoming the place where extremists hang out.
Glancing through the club forums on a certain other site I'd suggest most fans are opposed to these changes.
-
It does have P and R - but it also has minumum standards for a club. The default position is that the team that wins the championship (or whatever it is called) will replace the team at the bottom of the premiership. Provided that the stadium of the lower club is up to scratch (I think that is it - there might be something esle).
This is the approach I like best - is it not similar for entrance into the football league?
It's basically the system we had in place before licencing. And it was so successful that there was widespread agreement that it had to be changed. So, obviously, we're now going back to it.
-
You are missing the point completely. How did the NRL become the billion dollar competition that it is today? Did the NSWRL decide that preserving the first grade status of the North Sydney, Western Suburbs, Balmain, Newtown, Illawarra and St George was the best way of growing the game? Or did they look to expand the League into Newcastle, Queensland, New Zealand, Canberra and Victoria?
I think will all know the answer to that question. Teams from small, insignificant places that don't register with the general population is not box office, it never has been.
You're wasting your time arguing. The changes suit them and their worldview, simple as that.
-
Any pro RL club would be much bigger fish in a Northern RU Pond.
Thankfully such a last resort is not required now
So if Leigh switched to union, what league would they start in? And how many fans would go with them to watch union, given that they could just as easily pop down to Sale?
You're really plumbing the depths of ridiculous suggestions now. If in fact that is the sentiment at Leigh and other clubs then we'd all be better off if they did go to union. And right away.
-
Well this is a predictably appalling decision. The hard decisions about how rugby league can be turned into a viable professional sport have been dodged yet again to placate the interests of a few small town clubs that have proven time and again that they are incapable of supporting fully professional clubs.
Rugby League in Europe needed a closed elite competition of 10 or 12 clubs that concentrated the TV money, sponsorship and playing talent to create the highest standard competition possible. That elite competition should have admitted credible expansion clubs like Toulouse or whoever else who can put together a decent business plan.
A future European Super League should have looked like
Wigan
Warrington
St Helens
Salford
Leeds
Bradford
Huddersfield
Hull FC
Catalans
Toulouse
One of Castleford or Wakefield
One of Hull KR or Widnes
The brutal reality is that British Rugby League can only support one fully professional competition. Because the game can only support one fully professional competition you can't have direct promotion and relegation between a fully professional competition and the semi professional competitions below. It is the very reason why the NRL don't have promotion and relegation with the NSW Cup and Queensland Cup. The economics of it just don't work. People won't invest in the clubs if their financial returns are dependent on the bounce of a ball on the pitch.
Instead of concentrating its limited resources to create a premium product that can compete financially with the NRL and Union the RFL and clubs have decided to recreate the 1980s. Instead of raising standards they will be levelled downwards as the money is spread between 24 clubs.
They have made the completely wrong decision. The top 10 or so Super League clubs should break away and form their own elite competition. The RFL and the Championship clubs seem to be living in lah lah land. What a joke.
I'd suggest finding a place for London if, and only if, there was a proper plan and finance in place for the club. The rest of it is spot on. I'm amazed that the likes of Lenagan, Hetherington and Pearson put up with the nonsense coming from the RFL. As I remember it SLE is still a separate body, if I was involved I'd be looking to re-assert that status.
-
There is potentially more teams that will be moving to a full time environment as a result of the changes. Isn't that growth?
It's growth in the number of clubs paying out full-time wages. But it's not growth of the sport as a whole. It's not growth in the number of elite players, or elite infrastructure, or investors, or fans, or corporate support, or broadcast and media interest.
It's simply trying to re-create the sporting landscape of the past in the 21st Century.
-
Exciting and popular parochial, backwater, inter-village sports competition here we come!
And that's the truth of it. You don't care what the state of the game is overall, just as long as you get to see your team play in the top tier. Even if that top tier is a fragment of what it could be.
-
That's not what i said.......If our elite players are so good that they are worth more than SL can afford to pay them then we should let them go..........i'm saying that i don't think they are that good............and we shouldn't reduce our game to a handful of teams funded to a point where they can afford to keep these players.
Parochial, backwater, inter-village sports competition here we come!
-
It's already going that way. That's why they are making the changes. The new proposals won't help us keep the best players but they will make the game more interesting. Maybe down the line that will help us grow and be more commercially successful.
The changes will make it more interesting for the small number of fans at a handful of clubs who dream of seeing their team get spanked by WIgan or Leeds once every two or three seasons. Well done, you've re-created the past. In the real world, however, sport is changing.
Hmm, play in a watered down, inter-village, provincial RL competition? Or play in the glamourous NRL or union internationals? What a choice! The current trickle will become a flood.
-
If the TV money is to be distributed as proposed, essentially SL clubs get no change to their cut with the extra money going in parachute payments and to the Championship clubs, then how does that help retain players? Union's salary caps are going up, in England it's now £4.5m with a free marquee player and up to £240,000 cap credits for players coming through the youth squad, in France it's now £8.6m with youth players under £43k exempt from the cap. Even the Welsh RU caps are £3.5m with a free marquee player.
I know that we'll never be able to win a financial willy-waggling contest but at least give the clubs some chance of retaining talent. I had hoped that if there were a reduction of clubs at the top table then that extra money would be fed directly into the top table clubs.
Don't be ridiculos. Why would we be interested in what's happening out in the rest of the sporting landscape? Or even look back at our own history to learn from our previous mistakes?
Everything will be fine. There's is absolutely no chance whatsoever of these proposals leading to RL in this country becoming a small, parochial, provincial training ground for the NRL and rugby union. No chance of it.
-
To be fair, the rights for the lower tiers were always tied in with the SL contract, so the RFL werent allowed to give them away. Sky did start showing the lower tier games just before licensing came in but they then lost interest after licensing hence why it was given away. The good thing now is that the CC and CC1 is not part of the SL contract, so it is up to everyone to try and get sone decent tv rights. I will certainly be renewing both sky sports and premier once P&R returns.
That is absolutely not true in any way, shape or form.
When the original SL contract with Sky was re-negotiated in around about 1998, the NFP clubs demanded not to be included. They received a pay off from the RFL and were then able to find their own sponsors, TV deals, etc. This was when they moved back to a Christmas start date. Guess what? No-one was interested, apart from a couple of years when Yorkshire TV covered the play offs.
A few years later, the NFP clubs came back under the RFL's leadership, but still had their own TV deal. And guess what? They still couldn't find anyone to show it.
When it became known that the RFL were negotiating with Eurosport - a deal that would have seen the RFL pay for the coverage! - Sky decided to start broadcasting Championship games. They paid the costs but not a single penny for the rights. Which, as usually, led to much anger from the mouthy supporters of certain Championship clubs.
What on earth makes you think things will be any different this time?
-
The FAQ's are here;
http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/about_the_rfl/policyreviewfaqs
Main points are;
- RFL to decide who will make up the top 12 initially.
- Relegated teams to lower divisions will receive parachute payments
- Toulouse more than likely will be in if they bring a broadcaster to the table
- The end of season split will most likely happen - i.e. 3x8, with SL clubs getting a bye into the CC 5th round
- Super league clubs will get no more tv money than they do now
- Significant increase in the amount of money given to the Championship clubs through TV income
- Number of matches increases to minimal of 30
- Final playoffs a quick 1st vs 4th and 2nd vs 3rd, then final
So instead of focussing our finite resources on a genuinely elite competition (which would bring other benefits re internationals, etc) we're going to dilute them further by paying money into the second tier? Genius.
The never-ending League Restructure debate (Many merged threads)
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
And yet, we've had Fev fans on here admitting that they're only interested in seeing their club in the top flight, getting an opportunity to play Wakefield and Cas on a regular basis, even if that means the game as a whole has regressed to a semi-pro competition and playing standards fallen.