EagleEyePie

Obviously I don't disagree that the lowest division is where the weakest teams are going to go, and that is where teams that 'fail' will probably end up, but when so many teams are newly created and go bust in that league without ever looking like progressing further and always seeming to struggle then I think it makes sense to look at the environment they are coming into and the unique challenges they face compared to the already established sides. If League One is not a suitable place for a new club to get up and running and make the strides necessary to grow then you're never going to get anything but failure. If the game genuinely wants to expand to new clubs that can grow beyond their early stages then something would have to change. You're right, we shouldn't catastrophise, but as someone who genuinely believes growing the geographic footprint of RL in the country is important for growth it's hard not to be frustrated by so many failed attempts.

If you're always failing, you're also probably doing something wrong. If we keep having clubs failing in League One I don't see how that's not going to devalue the competition and put people off from putting money into new clubs at that level. We need to support them and that's almost certainly going to need to be financially, otherwise every new club is going to fall by the wayside. League One is a set up for failure and it would be nice if the people who are willing to give these ventures a go (and those who put their time and effort into them, no doubt many of them unpaid) didn't end up with nothing to show for it at after a few years. It seems aside from Midlands Hurricanes the only relatively new clubs still around are those who are essentially offshoots of teams that were thrust into Super League, failed, then were reborn (North Wales and Newcastle Thunder). I'm not sure a litany of failures is actually a good thing. There's nothing stopping amateur clubs from starting up, but when it comes to the semi-professional game there needs to be an actual strategy. It can't be good for the players at Cornwall being in this situation and repeated failures shouldn't be treated with a shrug.

I think it's a fair point to question the costs to other teams in terms of travel and accomodation when it comes to Cornwall, given the central funding given to clubs in League One is so small. It's obviously an obstacle that Cornwall themselves had to face. @Bull Mania has a point saying it's awful economics. This is why at semi-professional and amateur level you often have regional divisions. Third tier rugby league is nowhere near financially viable enough to disregard things such as travel costs when it comes to deciding who does or doesn't compete in the league. It's not enough to say any team should be allowed in and all other teams just need to try harder. I'm pretty sure clubs in League One are trying damn hard to increase revenue but that doesn't make it possible. In terms of Cornwall being a waste, I guess that depends on whether something can be built from what is left over. I'm not sure what happened to the amateur team down there but if they can see some growth and we can keep people interested in the sport then at least rugby league has gained something. If everything just peters out then it probably been a waste. Maybe a waste of a small amount of money, but also the time and effort people put in to try to sustain semi-professional rugby league in Cornwall. One of the problems we always seem to have when it comes to trying to develop 'expansion' teams is a completely unsuitable structure to put them into. Toronto Wolfpack, for example, being placed into a system with promotion and relegation was daft because they were essentially a professional side in a league of teams barely above amateur status. Having part-time players travel over to Canada just seemed ridiculous. League One just doesn't seem attractive enough as a proposition to really see clubs outside the heartlands take off. It's just a tiny dot on the sporting landscape. You're putting new clubs into a situation where established clubs are struggling and then expecting them to thrive. Rugby league has always needed to expand its base in terms of geography but there needs to be serious consideration given when allowing new clubs to take part at professional or semi-professional level because the list of 'failed' expansion clubs must be starting to get off-putting for potential sponsors. There needs to be a clearly defined strategy. Maybe a system of support in place for the right clubs in their early years as a club. At the moment 'pick a place and have a go by yourself' in a struggling league doesn't seem particularly beneficial for the new clubs or the existing clubs.

Even if there was a strategy for sustainable national development I don't think that would include plonking a team in Cornwall. Just because a team can be created doesn't necessarily mean it's going to provide any benefit. There does need to be some kind of strategy when it comes to giving out licenses and awarding teams a place in League One. Or just any consideration as to whether it makes sense or could be sustainable because trying to maintain a team in Cornwall seems very far down the list of sensible options for growth.

Trying to create a club from nothing in a random location and then keep it going was always going to be difficult. When that random location is one with deep rooted economic issues, no real affinity for the game, no city/town with a significant population and no history of being able to maintain a half decent sports team then it just seems like madness.

I think what you describe has always been the case when describing geographic location as larger areas are more well known. I don't think I've ever met someone from Wigan or Leigh who actually says they are from Manchester, bar someone from Atherton with delusions of grandeur thinking an M postcode makes them as Mancunian as the Gallagher brothers. The same with people from St Helens sayiny they are from Liverpool. 'Near to' of course, but not actually from there. The satellite towns are still fairly distinct for the moment. There's geographic separation. Less so with Salford as it sees more and more development to serve those working in Manchester. I don't think Salford could ever represent a larger area of Greater Manchester though. The same obviously goes for Swinton who have flirted with the idea. It's not the same as Everton being named after a small area of Liverpool or West Ham as you said. I think that only works with clubs that have already established themselves as big teams decades ago. Mancunians don't relate to Salford. It's only the other way around. West Ham can represent London because they are one of many large London football clubs. They are more well known than the area they represent. For Salford to represent Manchester from where they are now would seem pretty much impossible without the kind of success that has gained Leeds, Saints and Wigan casual fans from outside the local area. I agree about the generational and cultural gap. It's been one of the issues the sport has faced for a long time. Leeds probably struggle with this too. The university and city status attracts plenty of younger people but for a city the size of Leeds, which is pretty much the same population as Manchester in terms of the city itself, the attendances aren't that spectacular. They are lower than Wigan and even the Wigan Borough population (shared with Leigh) isn't close to that of Leeds. There could be so much potential for Leeds and Salford but I think it's the sport as a whole that isn't quite appealing enough to young professionals. It's the old fashioned and long standing working class perception problem.

I think this is a really good point. It's hard for rugby league in general to break through the wall that is football but when you're on the doorstep of what is arguably the modern day stronghold of English football it must be so hard to get any sort of attention. I've also found Salford to have a bit of an identity crisis too. Most of the people I know who were born in Salford say they are from Manchester. They also support the Manchester football clubs. That hometown pride is actually directed towards Manchester rather than the town they were born in. They are all aged 30 or below too, which is probably another issue given clubs are always desperate to attract younger fans. Salford might be going through a period of redevelopment and it's almost certainly a much bigger draw for young people than most other rugby league towns in the local area, but it feels a bit like Salford is split in two. 'Old' Salford as the traditional working class areas, skewing a bit older, less affluent but more likely to be rugby league fans. 'New' Salford is essentially just an extension of Manchester. More affluent and younger but pretty much always looking east rather than west. Places like Wigan and Leigh might also be mostly football obsessed but your local sports team is Wigan Athletic, Wigan Warriors or Leigh Leopards. The big sporting events in your local area are mostly going to be rugby league games. For Salford it's always going to be a Man Utd game. I also think the lack of a proper derby has hindered Salford too. Big games, the 'us vs them' games, have always been a good way to get people hooked on rugby league. I know so many people whose first taste of rugby league was the derby with St Helens. Warrington games have a similar pull and also now the derby with Leigh. When I worked in Wigan no one I worked with was interested in rugby league but everyone knew when it was a Wigan v Saints game. Most knew if it was Wigan v Warrington. Salford just don't seem to have that so there's no really big rivalry where you can drag along non-fans to experience the big game.

I don't know if the video ref sees a slightly bigger image that what gets broadcast, but there was definitely a point where the ball was completely lost from view as it approached the height of the kick. It seemed weird that it was given as unsuccessful rather than inconclusive.

Tomkins had a cracking game tonight but he completely forgot about the strength of the wind at the end. Any kick in that situation was going to have to be along the floor

Without hyperbole, this is some of the worst defending I've ever seen

I thought any contact to the head with the shoulder was a red card these days, even if it's secondary contact? Mind you I think refs just go with the flow these days. Outcomes seem to differ massively from incident to incident

More of a pong

Made by Castore aren't they? Their football kits were notorious for design issues and getting torn easily

Sounds like Fred Elliott

That's poor from a winger in the modern game. Briscoe should be doing better than that