Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum

redjonn

Coach
  • Content Count

    3,111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

859 Excellent

Member Profile

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4,586 profile views
  1. It is a name change, not a re-branding as far as I can see.
  2. yep, and no doubt we are all concerned. What I can not understand is how we achieve expansion without accelerating what we have in what would be called the heart lands. Both need investment in time and monies. Its a chicken and egg question that apart from having a dream of what it should look like, I ain't seen any semblance of how its achieved. I welcome Toronto. Never-the-less I think there are substantive questions that need to be asked and addressed. For example, if a number of other Toronto's come along taking existing players from the player pathways that have been invested in were does that leave the sport. As surely that impacts the current clubs that are investing in the player pathways such that it severely impacts the existing footprint. Lets say ultimately 4 or 5 super City or should say glamour city clubs created (as seems to be suggest like Barcelona from McDermott) then how long do we have them ride on the back of the investment by the existing non glamour clubs until their bringing in the new financial riches and producing player pathways into the sport. Is it just by those expansion of glamour city clubs that our brand increases almost overnight to bring in the monies to the sport to utilise. Of course its a manged process, but how is it done. all I read is the dream not the how too without losing the heartlands fanbase that currently keeps us alive as a sport. Its not being negative, just wanting to see if its a viable plan leading to a promised land or destruction of the game on these shores.
  3. The key to the game for me.. was the early unforced errors by Salford that enabled Saints to "pitch tent" in Salfords half/last 20. Zapping Salfords mental and physical energies that as in any RL game normally means they will lose the "energy battle" some way into the 2nd half. Normally ensuring that the other team totally dominant from that point on. If any negative spin for our preferred underdogs not winning it was those Salford errors and not being able to cope with the pressure early on. That's what happened for me... those errors early on lost the game more than any debatable ref decisions.... including ones that Saints could have been awarded but were not.
  4. It's been great seeing them doing so well, hope it continues...yep should be proud of the team and club
  5. Saints were overwhelming the better team. Salford made early crucial errors that helped Saints to pile on the pressure and keep play in Salfords half, helping to zap their mental and physical energies. That in itself as in most RL games meant Salford would struggle in later part of game. In the second half Saints sustained a stranglehold on Salford, keeping them pressed back. Salford really struggled against Saints tackling and defensive efforts. If we are having to talk ref he had no impact on Saints total dominance, although if I had to be critical I would say he allowed Salford often to move from the mark.... it made no difference to Saints suffocating tackling and defence and better attacking performance.. Why on earth we have to focus on individual ref decisions when one team were so dominant, so much stronger and so much better.
  6. Good to hear from all the players and coach at the end... and rather surprising reading some comments not one even hinted at ref decisions..... I though the ref had a good game, yep some decisions that could be debated, as always. Never-the-less I don't think any were as clear cut as some suggest, open to debate yep. Have we ever had a final/major game, here or in the NRL in which people bemoan the man in the middle. I sometimes wish the ref's would all jack it in... and let fans referee. If theirs one thing that switch's me off this sport its the constant carping about the ref. The better team and far superior team won handling the attempts by opposition to slow them..
  7. It seems to me we have to improve the RL brand, in order to attract the interest of sponsors, business or more rich beneficiaries that could provide the ability for the sport to re-calibrate - Whether that be the so called arrival of big glamour cities. BTW if asked the big glamour cities I would never of listed Toronto, no matter its a lovely place and a big city. Part of the stepping stone to whatever dream glamour existence one may have their has to be the growing of the sports awareness and brand to get their. Whether that be increasing existing crowds, growing the international game whilst existing clubs grow participation and player pathways. New clubs like a Toronto have to ride on the existing clubs by virtue of players to play and an existing sporting brand they want to be part of. The key is sustaining the existing whilst nurturing whatever new clubs in places that some seem to want them. The risk being you kill the existing. especially the fan-base, that keeps RL hanging by the thread it is. Now of course Toronto could help grow the brands/SL value and bring in the sort of financial benefits to the sport that enables it to think big. Time will tell.
  8. Fairytale, they are certainly not favorites or are the underdogs.... I just can't see the description as fairy tale, especially to the general public. They are in SL, thats is not in a lower league. They are 3rd in the league standing, whilst have had lesser league standing, like Leeds, Warrington, and other teams in recent years. Those that follow the game will understand their lack of monies, and general difficult financial situation... but unless you know that back ground why would they see it as a fairy tale.
  9. As has already been mentioned... the issue was not the decision by the ref - he had no choice when it happened. It's having "trainers" on the field unnecessarily. Its now beyond a joke how long the trainer or "water-boy" or tie carrier is on the pitch. I still remember NZ few years ago and the trainer/water boy was clearly directing play for long periods... a bit like Briers for Warrington use to do but not as blatant as NZ did then.
  10. Problem I have is how you get from current clubs and their geographical or Town locations to the promised land of enrichment through big City clubs. That is getting their without losing the clubs and fans that currently keeps RL hanging by its precarious thread. I haven't heard how McDermott or any others articulate the more difficult questions of how its achieved, whilst sustaining the base we have. For example: keeps RL no worse in this country and by default sustaining the current player pathways that any new big city club here or in another country would need whilst establishing its own pathways and community game.
  11. Really pleased to see Salford make the final, even more so as its a so called lesser club with less resources than other clubs. As for Wigan, two weeks ago they had a close play-off game with Salford, competed and won a tough tussle. Yet tonight totally outplayed and nowhere near a close game. What made the big difference? self belief, confidence, tactics or just Salford wanted it much much more. ????
  12. If SL was a closed shop and threat of relegation a non issue I could see strong rational for differing financial and non financial regulations being flexible. That is in order to provide maximum support to grow the sport in the chosen selected expansion area's. As distinct from an ad-hoc entity suddenly appearing in what may not of been a priority expansion area. It may be that the selected area was France to increase clubs in SL their or in London or where-ever, if we had a strategic plan for growing the sport in other area's within the sports administration locality. As it is not the above I don't see why rules should be different, with the possible exception of taking account of local wage issues like a London weighting. Then again one could imagine that say a place like Leeds which has relative good local economy than against say Wakefield (not wishing to denigrate but just comparing for example to make a point) - should we then adjust for that.
  13. Of course I would like any RL club to be successful and sustainable, including Toronto - I fancy the trip over myself. Never-the less it still feels an ad-hoc happening as distinct from some strategic thought through plan/pathway for the sport in the UK. Is SL aiming to be a Anglo/French and NA league or is Toronto the one and only exception. Their are lots of questions that need to be addressed if the former and whilst I see lots of comments cheering Toronto acceptance I see no worthwhile discussion on the plan going forward and consequences. I just mainly see comments deriding anyone whom may have questions or concerns.
  14. that would AOK... although some get concerned that extra weeks off will impact their performance. Unless it was just top 3... league leaders straight to final... 2nd v 3rd for other final position. Unless massive points difference in which case scrap the 2nd v 3rd and 2nd goes straight to final. Of course being a little tongue in cheek regards replaying the final - but seems as daft as given teams a 2nd bite in a short round of play-offs and be consistent in giving all the same. As in this case the league leaders through even more success (being more successful in play-offs) don't get the 2nd bite like the lower finished and less successful teams in the play-offs.. in this case Wigan/Salford.
  15. Maybe we should have a system that gives the lead leaders a 2nd bite if they lose in the "first final". Sorry.... but if Wigan win against Salford and then go on to win... what was the point of this game... or if Salford win after having lost to Wigan... what was the point of their first play-off game. Great performance by Saints... but it wasn't essential do or die as both teams had 2nd chance... except now Saints as if they lose a game in the play-offs, in this the final, they are out/no 2nd chance... whereas the winners would have had a 2nd chance. For me its a joke... sorry
×
×
  • Create New...