The Parksider
-
Posts
13,830 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by The Parksider
-
-
I refer to those fans who have been steadily losing interest in the game, namely those in the Championship who have been disenfranchised, the very body of fans the RFL directly referenced when bringing in the 3x8. Those who don't care about P&R are still RL fans. My reference is purely and directly aimed at the RFL statement.
I had to hang back for this one!!
What's your anecdotal or logical evidence for this?
Fans come and go all the time. They die, they lose interest, they grow up and become RL fans, then they die, lose interest etc. I know this as I've sat with them for nigh on 50 years.
Fans who come into the game travel more nowadays, so they don't necessarily gravitate to the local club they may be attracted straight to starting supporting SL through an SL club in the next town.Fans decide to switch clubs and many fans may have watched Championship sides and now they choose to watch SL sides. They aren't lost to Rugby League. Nor are fans who decide rather than go down the local championship club I'll buy SKY sports instead. We still get the money
It looks like your only evidence is "because the RFL said so" but then they got it from KPMG and they won't back their research that supposedly shows the championship who averaged 2,047 fans when P & R was removed now averaging 1,020.
If they get those alleged disenfranchised fans back via P & R fine, but they should remember the fans they will lose by the relegation of Bradford Bulls. They used to attract as many fans as all the lost championship fans put together.........
-
Well at the risk of being into my own fantasy land a NRL Capital-City Europa league then running along side our SL... mind you needs big investment and hence NRL involvement.
Not really being serious but just taking forward your initial thoughts to warm my heart - a serious project for Dr K maybe...
Not into fantasy RL I spent 35 years following Hunslet to a locked door!! I think an Anglo French league with a big city spine is easy to organise from Manchester, Leeds and Hull through London to Perpignan and Toulouse. Instead they organised P&R. Sorry John that's it over my posts for the day quota.....
-
My contention is that any increase in attendances during Super League is more than likely offset to a significant degree by the loss of attendances from all cup competitions in existence prior to Super League, a loss which I'd estimate at between 300K and 400K when comparing seasons 1991/92 to 2012.
Those cup attendance losses were also walk-up attendances of which we'll probably never see the likes of again. They've been replaced by discounted season ticket holders who are averse to attending any other games where they actually have to pay.
Ackromans post saying attendances had gone down over the years prompted me to look at the aggregate figures for all competitions. Roughly speaking people went to as many games in 1991/2 as do today.
You are way off beam on the loss of attendances at cup games, it's less than that but a significant loss none the less. It's balance by a significant gain at league games and I do take your point to a point about some of the discounting taking place but again it doesn't really affect a general summation that we haven't lost out on fans going to games.
But it's a business. As you indicate what is the point in free/dirt cheap tickets (apart from the additional spends at the ground each attendee provided), but tried, generally failed and moved on?.
Your argument cannot logically stop there though because we need a comparison of the aggregate sponsors prize money in the old days of league, county, regal and challenge cups to be set against the value of sponsorship for the SKY Superleague and the Challenge cup today?
It would seem that Superleague has brought home a lot more bacon cups or not.
-
they have indeed,
What?
Potential to be big RL places? If they do then London, Paris, Barcelona and Rome have even bigger potential...... by gum lad Paris 17,000 crowd at the start, London 10,000 crowds at the start, 18,000 in Barcelona for Les Cats and Warrington, and Rome not a Rugby City? Check out the six nations.
I find it weird that so many people scoffed at the idea these faraway big city places could be big in RL, now propose a suburb in Manchester could be huge. That's cost me and you another post on our huge posts count. The writer should buy us a pint each for that.
-
RL attendances have been on the decline since the 1950's. In fact they mirrored pretty much exactly what has happened in football. People don't watch live sport in anything like the numbers.
These days only sponsorship can fill the void and exposure is what sells. In some respects individual clubs become irrelevant because it is the "competition" which sells unlike in the 1950's when it was the game on the day. It is in fact a lazy way of making your money which tells us much more about our society and where RL fits into the big picture.
Super League is designed to sell RL in this country.
P&R is for those of us left who care. The RFL have at least offered something back for the fans. That's how I see it anyway. There's no other logical reason to do it except for moving your deadwood out of the eyeline of sponsors.
I enjoyed your opening analysis although it put me off when you said it didn't matter who was in the sponsorship vehicle.
I think a rip roaring Leeds.v.Bradford rather than a struggling Salford.v.Widnes essentially does make a difference, we are in the business of selling the best product we can. If we were not then why bother going professional? Just take the extra money as profit.
As for dead wood, you and I know that Bradford still have up to 25,000 fans out there, still have a Superleague set up and now have a rich owner. Far from getting rid of "dead wood" it was as Martyn Sadler says the SL clubs who made them operate on half SKY money and effectively killed one of our golden geese.
Again thats another post clocked up countering these unfounded justifications for P & R (in my opinion anyway)
Now I know you vehemently disagree, but that aside, and inspired by a fine opening to your post I took a little look in my Rothmans for 1981/2 which shows that a total of 2,203,457 spectators attended domestic RL in this country that season.
I did a rough add up for last season and it's around the same figure (no point doing it accurately it only gets dismissed as "selectively suiting an argument). But thanks to Superleague we now have a massive TV audience in addition to just as many fans attending games?
-
The great Hull FC side of the eighties got their boost from an unbeaten season in the old 2nd division, As I said in my "another one bites the dust" thread, people pick out the statistics that suit their argument and rubbish any other evidence.
What evidence do you have that their division 2 campaign gave them the boost?
The M62 led to West Yorkshire by then and Hull used good old money to buy........
From Fev....Dave Busfield, Charlie Stone, Keith Bridges, Steve Evans, John Newlove. Vince Farrar
From Cas....Knocker Norton, Sammy Lloyd,Charlie Birdsall
From Wakey....Trevor Skerrett, David Topliss
That's how they made it to the top in reality, and this is the problem with RL in your area, it's a nursery for big clubs because none of you have the ambition to be one you can ever realise. and as for your dismissal of statistics then I know that even official stats you dismiss as made up. I disagree with you entirely and always have done (at the same time as keeping respect for you as a fine fellow of an RL fan), and this may help people understand why I've made over 16,000 posts on this subject, 10,000 may have been me disagreeing with 10,000 of yours.........
-
I feel pretty strongly that in the SL/championship m62 catchment zone there is limited scope for real growth.
What struck me about looking back at clubs attendance figures is that Wigan have failed to grow their crowds this last 25 years they are no greater than they were in 1989.
Wigan give the game strength though and other potential big clubs need to hit their potential ceilings though.
What also struck me is Leeds have lost support.
-
Bradford will be back, and the experience of the Championship will do them good, and London will be back if people want it, but the Championship needs to be stronger, with a higher profile and TV exposure to ensure that kids keep playing the game in these areas. The game outside Super League will keep on going backwards without hope of promotion. With regards to Salford, it remains to be seen whether success on the field, which Dr.Koukash promises, results in big gates, or whether he would have got more through the turnstiles at Halifax?
Really not sure about this myth that being relegated does a club good. Ask Halifax, Oldham and Workington. The game outside Superleague went backwards with promotion during 1996 to 2009. Many people had found out there was no hope of promotion like Dewsbury or hope of staying up without a rich man. Resurrecting Halifax as an SL club will only help to keep Bradford down as fans and juniors would head there and it would push Fartown downwards too,
At least in Salford/Manchester there is relatively new territory to conquer and Salford gives a top class product for RL fans in areas like Swinton, Oldham and Rochdale who stay at home to easily get to.
Championship clubs never inspired the kids to play in any number just as perennial second division clubs didn't either. The old Players annuals from the 1970's show that even in those days the second division clubs used to make their teams up out of first division cast offs.
-
That would be a very worthwhile exercise if all those revenue figures were widely known and available for comparative purposes. Unfortunately, all we have are attendance figures.
A massive point. they may have flogged the players into 45 games (Wigan) and 42 (Leeds) in 1994/5 but you cant do that now. It's a professional RL business and business is about profit - you can turn over all the fans and players you want but if there's a big financial loss at the end of it then what's the point?
Besides as Derwent may agree we don't have to chase small fry sponsors in sideshows now a well tailored Superleague can attract £200,000,000 all in one go.
-
You're in the top 5 for volume of posts on this thread. No prizes for guessing who's made the most though
So what crime has been committed/rule broken then? Pray tell?
As for the comparisons of the top 4 CC clubs and the bottom 4 SL clubs there's a year to go yet and I note your prediction that nobody may ever go up, but pressure is again on the SL clubs not to be cut adrift, and the top eight will be happy to raid the bottom four for players. Remove the whipping boys and someone ends up in their place. Is your prediction based on salary cap differentials??
-
I've changed my opinion. I used to think SL should be 10 teams, with a second division of 10 with 2 up 2 down.
This was based on historical "evidence" about P&R, which suggests to me that the divisional split was too low in the table. This caused a lot the problems many detractors of the system like to point out. Basically the elite league wasn't really elite and the clubs gaining promotion were too far off the pace.
I then thought the 3 x 8 was a good development, again because of the historical evidence from the one divisional structure which showed clubs at this point in the table were more matched than a split in divisions would suggest. These same clubs would now have to earn the right to play the elite far more than when they earned direct P&R into a bulging top division.
So I like the 3x8 regardless of the money. RL has got 8 elite clubs, 8 clubs that could be and the rest that may be.
Actuals, Probables, and Possibles.
I really like this post, shame we can't do straight one up and one down between the eights. The 2 x 12's bit would probably retain the "off the pace" element.
-
Who are the main contenders for promotion to SL? In many ways the promotion campaign is already underway.
What will they bring to the competition in the short medium and long term? Which one(s) have the potential to become a power in the sport and take the competition forward and attractd 20,000+ attendances.
What are we likely to gain from whoever might replace them?
Bradford who will bring 20,000 attendances to Superleague again.
-
1980/81 1,226,428 average 5,110 16 clubs
1981/82 1,264,520 average 5,268 16 clubs
1989/90 1,173,815 average 6,450 14 clubs
1990/91 1,168,407 average 6,420 14 clubs
1991/92 1,185,117 average 6,511 14 clubs
1992/93 1,122,955 average 6,170 14 clubs
1993/94 1,364,056 average 5,683 16 clubs
1994/95 1,330,538 average 5,543 16 clubs
Here's the danger of reading stats without the fuller picture.
1991/2 looks like the game was at it's peak in the First Division at 6,511 a game and by 1995 it had slumped to 5,543 a game. As you can see the addition of two lesser supported clubs affected the average.
But 14 clubs is the order of the day today so maybe it's easy to set the 6,511 against Superleague:-
2007 9,833 12 clubs
2008 9,819 12 clubs
2009 8.730 14 clubs
2010 8,730 14 clubs
2011 8,879 14 clubs
2012 9,431 14 clubs
2013 8,473 14 clubs
No If's no But's,
the best season of the 1st.Division at 14 clubs was an average of 6,511 fans
the best season of Superleague at 14 clubs was an average of 9,431 fans
45% increase in gates, Corrections welcome.....
-
1994-5 was the last 'proper' winter season, running from August to April and the aggregate was 1,330,538, a slight decrease on 1993-4.
It was indeed a full season of 30 games apiece and was also saleable as the "Centenary" season. Rothmans recorded the aggregate attendances, but club for club wise the average was 5,543.
Interestingly by that time Wigan had become a big attractive outfit with Leeds hanging onto their coat tails, and these big clubs were turning in average crowds of 14,195 and 12,516 respectively but sadly outside this the other clubs averaged 4,427.
This was becoming an uncompetitive league in a game which clearly could draw the fans to the excitement of top class RL, but outside the top two it wasn't happening. The danger of tweaking anything was of course to risk the demise of Wigan and Leeds as powers, just to elevate someone else to have a turn at winning.
Superleague came in and in time salary capped the clubs and to be fair (and positive) Wigan maintained their crowds despite no longer being top dogs every year, after some money troubles and a blip accordingly Leeds regained their slumping crowds and grew them to 17,416 in 2007..
But the roaring success of Superleague was that other clubs grew into "big clubs". In 2006 Hull recorded a 14,553 average on the back of being able to compete for trophies.
By 2012 Saints had had their share of trophies and found a decent ground to maximise their crowds and they returned 14,113 average.
Bulls were the big crowd success, without the ground or the steadying influence of a rich owner a massive 15,259 trooped in to Odsal in 2003.
Warrington weren't a bad side 1994/5 they were runners up to inevitably Wigan in the Regal Trophy and averaged 5,380 that they now can compete better from a new stadium has seen that average grow and peak at 11,149 in recent seasons.
The trick for Superleague is of course to try to keep all clubs competitive and those wonderful crowds up there whilst growing some more big clubs. In recent times we have turned to France and Les Catalans have attained an average of 9,280 in 2012. Eyes then turned to the bigger city of Toulouse.
Poor stadia in the Calder area and lack of investment hold things back but Castleford's 7.490 in 2009 and Wakefields 8,172 in 2012 indicate that if one of them could find the ground and the money to keep players in that area then 10,000 gates would be realisable.
I've always thought that Superleague has done extremely well to rescue the game but could have done so much better, but that's another argument we've run for 17 years. Despite running into a bit of a dark period (but nowhere as near as black as 1994/5) we can still hope that further strides may in time be made.
-
A lot more than actually attend games these days.
And there's the rub - people don't want to lose their local team but don't really want the bother of actually supporting it.
That's the problem isn't it.
The members don't number enough to be representative of the potential support for Featherstone.
In 1995 nobody wanted to vote for anything but what they had.
Rovers members indeed voted to stay as they were.
Then when what they had voted for at Fev went down the pan 3,683 fans melted away to 800 ten years later.........
-
No Parky it wasn't just a "sit in" by a few fans.
Featherstone Rovers held an official ballot on the matter amongst the people who owned the club at the time i.e. the club members.
The result was in favour of going it alone.
Come on then Jimmy, how many "members" was it?
Let's have the number??
Griff - do you have the number??
-
I know you have problems with Huddersfield but surely even you can see it's harsh to lump one club who have doubled their attendance with a club that has halved theirs and another that has collapsed totally and then claim they are all the same!
I've no problems.
The problems are entirely with the three clubs in your area. None of them have been able to make a fist of being a top Superleague club. One collapsed and never came back, another has to have £Millions pumped in due to public apathy and the third is now collapsing big style.
My problem is we know the area has the resources to build a club to rival or better the Leeds and Wigans of this world.
The clubs attracted 14,000 fans as semi pro entities in 1995, just like the steady demise of the Calder clubs if Bradford's crowds fall then your area will end up with less interest in Superleague than there was for the semi pro game.
Not my problem at all Steve.
-
For years one group of people have said xxx should merge to form one club, whilst fans of said clubs have just said no thanks,
The fans have never ever been consulted.
SOME fans down Fev Ponte and Cas way took it upon themselves to have a "vote" of sorts with a sit in on the pitch.
At that time under semi pro league there were 12,200 fans watching at Wakey, Cas and Fev.
The few hundred got their way. Fourteen years later under professional Superleague the three clubs returned a total attendance this week of 11,700.
The junior playerbase is reducing in Cas, Featherstone have one junior club, and Wakefield don't turn out any great quality of young players.
The new structure is supposed to revitalise them?? Isn't this tragedy something worth talking about??
-
I dont completely disagree with you but how do you get Salford to call themselves Manchester,how do you get Widnes to call themselves halton so that the whole borough feels involved,how do you get bradford,huddersfied & halifax to all disappear to form one club,the same goes for the Wakefield area?
Until acceptable answers are found then there really isnt much point in keeping talking about this
It's a bit dangerous this appearance of self styled moderators saying what we should and should not talk about. No disrespect but let's allow people to discuss things and allow those who don't want to to not bother.
Whenever acceptable solutions aren't found to a problem then naturally people will keep the pot boiling.
The point is that we are finding out that our traditional clubs have no real future and the year upon year of wishful thinking is proving to be just that. Pie in the sky jam tomorrow stuff.
The speed at which the "World cup" effect has dissipated is alarming, and the early indications that the interest in the relegation fight just isn't there are massive alarm bells.
Enough people on here take the opinion the latest moves are doomed, so the debate will go on. The idea we are stuck with it is nonsense as Mr. Lenegan battles for power. All fascinating stuff for me, and naturally if 12 doesn't work, the next topic of conversation is 10.
Let me know when crowds start booming and clubs start growing their fan and player bases and then we can stop talking about solutions.
-
If we did ringfence these top 10 teams who would they be?I,m assuming you are including the likes of Huddersfield who only managed 7000 yesterday -and I would imagine a significant away support.
If we had 10 Wigan and Leeds,s out there OK-but its not going to happen.
Your still thinking inside the box.
Which 10 of the 37 professional clubs we have today should be ring fenced for a real Superleague??
I can safely suggest Hull, Leeds St.Helens and Wigan.
After that I'm stuck. After that the clubs either play out of dumps, don't produce professional players in any number beyond a few or don't attract enough fans. or are handicapped by any combination of these things.
Warrington perhaps? Les Catalans?? Toulouse??? Is Salford/Manchester too great a risk without long term commitment from D. K? would any clubs merge rather than carry on declining? Crowds well down at Fev, Cas and wakey this week??
How about Bradford/Fartown/Fax? All three in SL in 2003 when they interested 24,000 paying fans, today over ten years on they interest 16,000 paying fans.
Maybe the NRL can give us some inspiration?
.
-
Sorry for being a dinosaur Parky. When I played all the best youngsters this side of the Pennines came from Fev, Cas, Hunslet and Shaw Cross, and that's where the likes of Leeds, Bradford and the Hull clubs recruited from. As far as Fev and Cas goes, soccer was rarely played in local schools and kids grew up steeped in the game. You couldn't walk around town or up Station Lane without bumbing into half a dozen RL internationals.
Of course, those were the bad old days when GB last won the world cup!
Your not a dinosaur Steve. We need a club to capture all the best talent from Fev and Cas (and Wakey) to take on Leeds who now attract the best Hunslet lads along with the best at Leeds.
The best Dewsbury lads end up at Bradford or Leeds and again a strong Bradford matching Leeds and a strong Wakey area club competing for the very best in West Yorkshire would be great for the game.
There's no logic to the idea that if RL in west yorkshire had three top pro clubs and nobody else, that somehow the game would wither.
Three top clubs scrapping to be top dogs in all the areas you quote would easily attract an average 15,000 people to their derby games. In turn those sort of attendances would inspire the growth of junior RL and provide the funds to pay the areas best 75 players to be career RL professionals.
What's not to like?
What's your point??
-
Pretty much all sports have an elite few who can win the title. The rest are also rans. The fact is though that these clubs have a right to compete with each other, not be segregated arbitrarily. In many, many examples, clubs focus on being the best at where they are at. At least with P&R this allows for limited ambitions to be realised. Just because the same club cannot win the title does not make it less worthy a cause to invest in or achieve.
Not sure I understand what your saying? I'm too busy looking at the ring fenced 16 club NRL Premiership.
16 clubs there to do a job and doing a blooming brilliant one at that.
Not sure the ambitions of Newtown Jets are relevant. Not sure if they have any? OK a couple of their fans may have "high hopes" and post them on forums, but I don't think IMVHO with respect that the tip of the tail should wag tie dog to repeat an embellished Padge quote.
-
If you ring fence the "also-rans" of Super League you condemn the rest to a lifetime of obscurity, and areas that have been famous for producing talent will have fewer youngsters playing the game. We need to find a way of bringing more through the gates at all clubs, not just at the top.
That way, the player pool will grow.
Your right IMVHO to warn against ring fencing failures.
But perhaps we should look at your "areas that have been famous for producing talent".......
Leeds
Calder
Bradhuddersfax
Hull
Wigan
Widnes
Manchester/Salford
St.Helens
Warrington
South of France
Why not ring fence a club for each of those areas then we will ensure that places that produce players and attract fans through the turnstiles are not "condemned to a lifetime of obscurity".
Totally logical stuff, but those who want to preserve all the small clubs of yesteryear, clubs who put off people attending their games, clubs who don't produce players but feed off clubs who do, will baulk at this and find an argument for preserving the status quo, i.e. throwing money at preserving the past rather than investing in the future.
-
P+R and Licensing both have the same problem.
Not enough clubs are up to the required mark.
Changing the structure of the game won't alter that.
That's as good a simple analysis as I've ever had.
If changing the structure of the game won't alter the clubs then isn't it obvious that the solution is to change the structure of the clubs?
All our clubs are continually trying to be what they were in 1995 only full time professional outfits.
As they stand so many can't get a crowd to sustain this (4,000 at Wakey, 5,000 at Cas, 5,000 at Widnes) so many can't develop players (couple of Wakey lads playing in SL as first picks, handful of Warrington and Salford/Manchester lads equally playing as first picks).
So what did Uncle Maurice propose???
Here we go again around and around..................
The never-ending League Restructure debate (Many merged threads)
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted · Edited by The Parksider
People really cannot have it both ways.
We've got Trojan trying to convince us Bradford are dead and gone and are no longer a big club yet they still play out of home ground Odsal, they still count support at 6,000. they still run an academy that produces players and they now have the missing ingredient, that of a rich owner.
Remember as soon as Featherstone got that rich owner in Nahaboo there was post after post about how the club would be going places, buying up all the best players and reaching for the stars.
OK I accept we are in the here and now and it's not 2001 and Bradford have not just crushed Wigan in the SL final, but by 'eck Brdford are still three times the club Featherstone or Leigh are.
Now we get the myth of how marvelously run Sheffield Eagles are.
The club was so well run it collapsed out of existence, then when it came back it was so well run that it couldn't manage to develop a player production system. Compare and contrast the London academy with the Sheffield academy, which one produced the results?
Then Sheffield brought in the right players to win the Championship and how well did the crowds go? They went nowhere despite the successes.
But again people can't have it both ways and declare that in the here and now Bradford or London are shot, when in the here and now "well managed" Sheffield are well down the Championship and playing before falling crowds out of a bigger dump than Odsal.
That a non RL city can pinch the Championship twice from under the nose of Halifax Featherstone and Leigh, may say more about the standard of RL in the championship and the gulf between that and Superleague, than it does about the readiness or the ability of CC clubs to be up to P & R.
You look at the tables in the here and now and if the CC clubs have to go to places like Hull and star studded Salford next year there could be immediate problems with this "brand new" exciting system.