Toby Chopra
-
Posts
2,653 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Toby Chopra
-
-
17 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:
I also think Catalan could do more in the UK. They are regular challengers for finals but do they have a UK supporters club? Are they interested in pushing for UK fans to get behind them? If they had something along those lines, I would sign up for it this week. I'm sure others might too. Catalan need to be recognising the opportunities.
Seriously? They're basically carrying the future of French rugby league on their shoulders, and you want them to do more to rescue the English game? If there's any international opportunity for them it would be in Catalunya.
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:
If there was another European club with a ~10k following and a ~10m turnover, I'd love to get them involved. Some SL chairmen wouldn't.
This is the key bit that always gets ignored when debating the financial merits of Catalans. Sure, in the short term they bring fewer away fans than another M62 club would, and there's a shortfall if they make a final which unfortunately isn't a negligible point for a sport with terrible commercial and TV deals.
But kick them out and you're jettisoning one of the financially strongest teams in the competition, that's built a business that generates so many millions that it can field teams good enough to get to finals.
Why should we care, ask some. That's just good for Catalans, surely?
No. Any potential English replacement wouldn't be able to do that, and wouldn't be a like-for-like replacement. You'd just end up with another cash-strapped bottom feeder, desperately trying to cling on, and one less team competing for the title. We'd have accelerated the decline of a competition that's already got the alarm bells ringing.
I'd hope that most SL chairman are business savvy enough to see the bigger context and understand, when other sports are seeing their clubs go bankrupt, Catalans are worth any short term hit.
-
9
-
1
-
-
No. Full time French teams in Superleague where the funding exists, but otherwise RL in France is part time.
The links should be international, including at age group level, and a sharing of coaching resources and training.
-
4
-
-
7 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:
I'd say Wakey are nailed on
Assuming they put together the strongest squad in the Championship and win it, and their crowds stay above 3000, then yes, they're in the box seat to replace whoever go up this year.
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, The Future is League said:
Now let me think. If i had the choice of living and working in the south of England and earning more money than if i lived and worked in Yorkshire, and coaching a club that goes from one crisis to another, Which one would i chose?
What job does he have in the south that pays more than a SL head coach? Is he some sort of assistant at a union club?
-
1
-
-
Me+1. Had to commit early for hotel+train, so going regardless, first GF for 6 years. Cats vs KR would be a good game, history in the making!
-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:
Invite as many foreign teams in as you want - but put them in SL.
SL are the only ones with decent CF to afford it.
Keep them out of L1 - Or fund L1 properly
15k isn't enough to help with travel around UK never mind overseas
Although I expect we're coming from very different viewpoints, for once I firmly agree with you.
No foreign team should be coming into the part-time UK structure, it doesn't do them, or the existing part-time teams any good.
If the funding can be found to put them into SL full-time then go for it. But no more mixing up of the two streams.
-
3
-
-
Bad call. If the on field ref didn't clearly see the ball grounded, it should have gone up no try, and then there would have been no compelling evidence of a try.
KR still well worth the lead though.
-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, gogledd said:
Would they be a great addition to League 1/ Championship or an even greater loss to the FFR Elite 1? Selfishly I'd love them to join, but I'm not sure what effect it would have on the French leagues.
Has Catalan and Toulouse joining the English system made French rugby league as a whole weaker? Hard to say it did as neither would be the clubs they are now if they'd stayed in the French system.
But on the upside the pathway for French players has been transformed. But that's because they're full time Superleague (or aspiring SL) clubs. So that would have to be the ultimate aim for Carcassonne too.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Griff said:
Exactly my point.
Then I'm not understanding your point. You said it was crazy to be forced to focus on those criteria, I think it's a good thing and think it's fair that Bradford get credit for them, whatever the other issues with Odsal.
-
57 minutes ago, Agbrigg said:
And the fact that it has a pitch which does not meet the laws of the game is irrelevant
That's nothing to do with IMG criteria, it's the RFL that have long allowed it.
-
31 minutes ago, Griff said:
There's the crazy thing about criteria. You just have to concentrate on the criteria.
The notion that Odsal is a ground in fine condition is absolutely ridiculous.
No-one's saying the whole ground is in "fine condition", but it does have 4000+ covered seats, hundreds of hospitality places, a directors area and a media zone. These are things that have been identified as important to grow the income of the sport.
As for the rest of the stadium, sure it would be great to get it refurbished or replaced entirely, but in the absence of the funds for that, as long as it's safe to open, which it is, then the rest of the ground is acceptable, and less of priority than the points above. And I agree with that.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, del capo said:
Have Skolars retained their RL membership rights ?
If so are they transferable - Hemel ultimately to Cornwall style ?
That podcast is very much Midlands based.
If it's anything like West Wales, they won't immediately lose their membership of the RFL, but any attempt to sell their membership or relocate the club would have to be approved by the RFL board. Unlike what some think, we don't have licences that can be freely traded, clubs are simply members of the RFL, and various rights and obligations flow from that.
If there is a viable new team, it's easy enough for the RFL to grant a new membership, while keeping the Skolars as members in the hope they may come back.
-
46 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:
Ah Castleford, literally looking to box tick to gain an extra point by 'investing in their ground' in a way that will make the spectator experience worse.....
I query that it will make the spectator experience worse, but it will certainly make the investor, sponsor and broadcaster experience better which is an absolute priority for a sport that's always asking itself why it's so skint and can't get the deals that other sports can.
And as I said above, it looks like it's only Cas that doesn't meet these standards already so less a choice for them and more a bare minimum if they want to keep a seat at the top table when the sport is hopefully going places.
-
11 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:
Fair enough. I don't know how feasible it is for all clubs to achieve all 9 criteria (eg is there enough space to achieve them all without having to reconstruct the stadium), but if as you say they are all easily achievable then fine.
As far as I can see it's in fact only Cas of the existing Superleague clubs that don't meet all nine of them already (once Wakey's new stand come on line). Which is why they're going to get it done to keep up.
Of the aspirants, Toulouse, London (at Wimbledon) and Bradford meet them, I'm not sure about Fev as I don't know the stadium well. Beyond that you're mostly looking at teams which, with the best will in the world, probably aren't going to be likely additions to SL any time soon under any system.
Given that, IMG could, I suppose, have just made the nine points minimum standards outside of the gradings. That would actually be tougher in that it's pass/fail and compulsory, but in reality it amounts to the same thing.
-
52 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:
This is true, but it also needs to be understood that the way that points are allocated in this area is in relative terms. If you manage to tick off all the boxes related to directors' box, sponsors' seats, corporate lounge, number of seats in press box etc, you get a whole point. That's the same difference in IMG points as between having, say, the 3rd-best record over the 3-year period and the 12th-best record.
So you could have a scenario where, say, Wigan have the 3rd-best performance record, and Wakefield the 11th best record, but if Wakefield have ticked all 9 boxes in the Stadium Facilities category whereas Wigan have only ticked 8 because they only have 35 seats in their director's box instead of 40, that one factor will outweigh their massively superior on-field performance over the last 3 years.
That's cherry-picking that scenario where a club falls short by a fraction in just one of nine factors. If you're that close, get it done, it's easy. In fact all the stadium criteria are easy to hit for a half-decent sports club, so it really shouldn't be an issue. Everyone with SL aspirations should be getting their 1.5 stadium points, it's a bare minimum of asks, and then move on to the harder stuff. The fact we even have to put it into the criteria is a reflection of what poor standards we've accepted up until now, and then we wonder why we have such little broadcasting interest or big money backers.
As I said above, if you focus on the margins between this or that sub-criteria it's always possible to construct a scenario of an issue for an individual club on the cusp, but that's missing the point. When you take it overall, the full criteria are exactly the things the sport needs, and with roughly the right weighting accorded to each. If clubs don't want it to come down the the fine margins on this or that criteria, start hitting more of the targets and you'll be fine.
-
43 minutes ago, Michael Bates said:
Yes it's a large chunk, but the difference between finishing fourth and not winning Super League, and finishing eighth and not winning Super League is negligible in terms of retaining your place in Super League, therefore, if you're not going to win it, why bother? Pocket the cash or spend it elsewhere.
Why bother now? Clubs always have and always will make decisions on how much to spend on the team as opposed to other areas of the club. That hasn't changed. It's just now we're asking clubs to seriously consider providing facilities that attract new investors and broadcasters into the sport. They don't have to, but it's rightly been identified as a priority for the sport, so clubs that don't do it will have to provide extra value elsewhere if they want to maintain a place in the elite tier. It's all about the balance of all factors, and overall I think it's about right.
-
36 minutes ago, Michael Bates said:
Castleford seem to have understood the grading and have acted appropriately. They've seen their current squad doesn't have a chance of winning the competition so might as well run their squad on a shoe string budget and focus on more important things like padded seats and roped off areas for their directors. Super League, as an on field product will be poorer as clubs realise on field performance means very little to IMG.
On field performance is 25% of the total grading.
The works that Cas are looking at are worth a maximum 6%.
And that 6% is about driving more investors and broadcasters into the sport, which we desperately need.
We can quibble certain weightings, there are things I'd tweak, but the system overall is well balanced.
-
3 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:
That's incorrect. They're literally going to give maximum points on "Catchment Area" to teams like London, Newcastle, Cornwall etc based totally and unambiguously on potential, not what is real - the very opposite of what you are saying.
True, and I personally don't favour it, but it's worth a maximum of 1/20th of the whole grading and in most cases only 1/40th, so it's pretty minor in the grand scheme of things. What's more significant is that all the stadium and financial criteria, which are worth much more, are based on the here and now, not what might be.
-
2 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:
I find it strange that a very big city like Bradford can't help fund a decent multi use stadium in the mould of say the sports village in Leigh.....half a million people in Bradford is it? Is it one of those bankrupt councils?
No English council - whether basket case or well run - has the capital funds to build even an LSV size stadium anymore, the council funding model has changed totally from around 2010 onwards. I've tried to put that as neutrally as possible!
It's no surprise that all such developments were either signed off before then, unless they had an external windfall.
Bradford Council's Odsal plan was in theory viable, in that £50 mln of central govt funds were available in the Levelling Up Round 2, but they didn't win the award, probably because they couldn't convince the govt they had the other £50-70m lined up to match the award, unlike the successful bidders.
There's one more bidding round left before the election, but for smaller bids of up to 20m, so the question is do Bradford have a smaller plan B for Odsal that could win an award. As before, it'll come down to business case and ability to match funds.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:
Hull KR announced a season average of 8793 at the end of the Salford match on Saturday, our highest in 42 years. That's 12% growth on last year's 7788, and 25% greater than when we first got back into Super League.
We dwell on all the bad stuff happening in the sport, but I think this is something to be celebrated (although I know fans of some clubs will find that hard!)
Hull KR are on the verge of becoming a "big" club - perhaps they're already there. A self-sustaining financially strong club, that can afford a good team year after year - a virtuous circle.
Many of us have long said this is is what Superleague needs - more teams that can sustainably compete with the big clubs, improving the competition. Now we're getting there.
-
9
-
-
16 minutes ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:
I know, you're right, but you have to start with what we've got. Then work back to an acceptable level. Oldham only had 43 games because they were successful in all competitions. Given that there are no longer county cups and most second and third tier teams won't progress too far in the CC that would bring us down to 30 or so games. So, how do we divide the current 23 teams into a competition of 30 games. One division, not all teams play each other home and away and champions decided by play offs. I know it's not perfect as I don't know how they previously decided who played who. Or one division split into two conferences. Again how? Geography, that won't work because one conference may have ten better teams anly four get to the play offs. Or as is likely keep it as it is and the lower division has looped games and dies a slow death.
It's perfectly possible to work out an unsymmetrical schedule that balances strength and/or travel distances, plenty of other sports leagues do it. When you follow it with a playoff series it's fine, and I'd support it.
The only issue with re-merging L1 and the Championship is standards. My concern would be the bottom half of L1, which would probably include all the remaining non-heartland teams, would lose almost every game, badly. That wouldn't be good for anyone, so there's a decision to be made: keep a third tier and have loop games, or cut 3 or 4 teams loose from the professional structure.
No easy answers.
-
11 minutes ago, Damien said:
No, Wales do development the correct way.
The Ireland u16s that has played so far certainly is heritage with all the coaches based in England too. Many Irish lads who went to trials in Ireland have packed in and become disillusioned with the whole setup. For most of the trials in Ireland the current u16s coach didn't even attend and selection couldn't have been done by anything other than the experience that was put in a registration form. There have even been more trials in England than Ireland. It's a joke.
Right, gotcha. What a pointless thing for Ireland to do. But well done Wales.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Damien said:
To be fair I'd have expected Wales to win convincingly. Even Ireland drew at this level with a team made up almost exclusively of English amateur heritage lads (something that totally summed up the attitude of Ireland Rugby League and its complete failure to try and grow the game in Ireland).
Is the Wales under 16s a heritage team? I'd figured at this level it was all about location, like in football.
What do SL execs think about Catalan making OT
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
It is what it is, but we're so cash strapped that it does seem that some clubs have already factored in that extra cash distribution, however small. We need to make sure clubs view any such distribution as an extra, rather than a given, as it really does depend on who makes finals, as this year's CCF (with two English teams) also shows.