wiganermike
-
Posts
662 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by wiganermike
-
-
1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:
The link doesn't seem to be working.
-
11 hours ago, yipyee said:
You do your breakdown for Bradford and we can compare notes
I doubt that they would score anywhere near Kirmond's pouch's jokey 1.7 points comment but if a club in the position that Bradford are (and have been for almost a decade now) were anywhere close to scoring 17 out of 20 then it would be time to tear up the criteria lists and start again when designing the grading system.
I would expect a score in the 9-12 points range for Bradford.
-
15 minutes ago, Jughead said:
No, sorry, it’s a five team competition. My mistake. Even so, pointless nonsense cup.
I would say you are looking at it the wrong way around. IMHO what we (and the RFL) refer to as the early rounds of the Challenge Cup (those before the SL clubs take part) are in reality the early rounds of the 1895 Cup which is for everyone below SL. The Challenge Cup is now a de facto 16 club competition for the 12 SL clubs plus four qualifiers (currently the qualifiers will be the four clubs that reach the 1895 SFs).
-
2
-
-
30 minutes ago, Anita Bath said:
Interesting…..most of my rugby watching years I have focussed on the bottom, not the top….it comes with being born in Rochdale!
If your ratings were to be correct then Hornets creep into second tier while unbeaten Dewsbury, Oldham, Hunslet, Workington (all teams we have yet to beat) miss out.
Seems to be no point in putting together a winning team or building up crowds. Just keep doing whatever it is that got you in the Grade B rating.
Will we be spending hours of TV time and pages of newspapers discussing the things that would help avoid ‘relegation’? What would that be …because it sure aint winning rugby games.
Although the grading scores will determine the 12 clubs in SL from 2025 it has been stated throughout that traditional P&R will continue to happen at the end of each season between Championship and League 1. As such I would consider that the grading scores (whether they are similar to Mick Gledhill's estimates or not) below the 12 highest rated clubs would be merely indicative of how much and where each club needs to improve to be capable of reaching SL rather than determining which league they play in. Performance on the pitch (and not a given club's grading score) would determine whether a club is in Championship or League 1 based on what we have been told.
If Doncaster for example were graded as one of the top 12 clubs going into 2025 they would be elevated to SL. If not they would stay in the league that their league performance had determined.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Waynebennettswinger said:
I think they’ve strengthened really well there.
The Leeming signing is interesting, on the transfer thread there are a few nagative comments, I’ve always liked him and (from the matches I saw) he was often Leeds’ best IMHO.
I don’t think Brenko Lee would be a great addition but plenty have come unheralded from the NRL and settled well. Are King and Wardle not there next year? I remember one being on loan but is there not a view to making that permanent?
King is on loan and the move had initially been expected to become permanent. However following the recent changes to the marquee player rules the expectation seems to be that Warrington will now want to take him back rather than offload him.
I would rather we didn't sign Brenko Lee either, he has only managed around 90 games over 10 years due to injury issues and we have been burned enough times with signing players with poor injury records/current injuries. I would rather we didn't risk another one. Particularly not when that player would use an overseas quota spot.
-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, The 4 of Us said:
And hopefully Wigan - HKR at Headingley.
I would expect it will be paired with the Leeds v Wigan womens SF (as they are doing a mens and womens as a double header) and that as a result it would shift to Huddersfield to remain fully neutral.
-
9 minutes ago, Eddie said:
Still no semi final venue announced as far as I’m aware. It seems remarkably tin pot not to know where the games will be played, particularly as the quarter finals have already been played. The RFL get slated unfairly at times imho but this seems strange.
There will be two semi final venues as it has been announced that each will be a mens SF and a womens SF as a double header on consecutive days. As Wigan and Saints are both in separate SFs in each competition I expect they will pair the two Wigan games and the two Saints games. I would expect Hull KR v Wigan and Leeds v Wigan (womens) to be played in Yorkshire, probably at Huddersfield (to avoid Leeds women being given a home SF), and Leigh v Saints and Saints v York Valkyrie to be played at Wigan or the HJ. They will only have been able to confirm them since about 7pm yesterday so it isn't as if the RFL have been sitting on their hands waiting for days.
-
3
-
-
Just now, GeordieSaint said:
Still 14-6?
Leigh just gone in front 16-14.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:
If York win this who goes back in to the 1895 cup?
York have been drawn to play Batley in the 1895. If they do beat Leigh it was said on Radio York that they will play the CC semi v Saints first. If they beat Saints then Batley get a bye to the 1895 final,if not they will play Batley as planned in the 1895 semi.
-
2
-
-
53 minutes ago, sam4731 said:
You can't just "pick" a venue with about 4 weeks notice. Things need to be booked in advance.
As the RFL haven't been selling tickets for a double header already then it seems likely we will have two standalone semi finals as we used to. In that case then some of the venues likely to play host to a semi final (given the venues that were used in the recent past) are the home venues of teams that are still competing in the cup (St Helens, Warrington, Salford, Leigh, York, Hull KR). If the RFL announced for example holding two semi finals at Craven Park and Totally Wicked Stadium and then saw a Hull KR v Saints semi final eventuate they are stuck with a late change in plans anyway to get a neutral venue. Or if they announced two venues in Yorkshire but end up with Salford, Leigh and Saints plus Wigan/Warrington then they are looking at poorer attendances as fewer fans will travel.
The semi final venues were always chosen (or confirmed at least) once the competing teams were known to avoid such issues. It is possible that potential venues have been sounded out already to create a shortlist of options but there is no need for a public confirmation until it is known which teams will be in the semi finals.
-
2
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:
Great to get back to winning ways in our cup final again. I had a feeling we would win comfortably just not that comfortably, I didn't think Bradford were much in the last game and even though we played so bad we were still in with a shout come the end of the game so even a slight improvement that and a pretty dry track (pure coincidence that we played better on a dry ground though
) and I were pretty confident before the game.
There were gaps all over the field as we moved the ball about and Bradford looked to be lacking in fitness so the only disappointment is we didn't score more as we bombed a couple of chances but to nil them was nice.
Any top SL team or Wakey at home in the next round would be nice and in the 1895 cup I'd really like a shot at Widnes again to try and make up for that game.Widnes aren't in the 1895 Cup as they were knocked out of the Challenge Cup by Dewsbury in round 4. It will be York and Halifax plus the winners of Batley v Keighley and London v Dewsbury that will be in the 1895 Cup.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Cheadle Leyther said:
Wasn’t in the IMG report the ultimate aim was to get 14 clubs with A licences giving us 26 matches with the much preferred 13 home fixtures. But what if we get to 16 A’s. That gives 30 fixtures. Do we then have the opposite problem of loop fixtures?!!
As we use a playoff system to determine which team is the champion and such a scenario would not involve relegation there would be no necessity for every club to play every other twice. If the decided upon ideal figure was 26 league fixtures then we just stay with that. Each team would play 11 teams twice and the other four teams once. The use of playoffs compensates for differing fixture schedules causing teams (perceptively) to finish higher or lower due to easier or harder fixture lists.
-
52 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:
Google… pfft.
I searched “World Cup Fixtures” and it came up with Qatar v Ecuador.
Surely it has gathered enough info on me to realise I was interested in the RLWC
You don’t know me Google. You don’t know anything about me!
As well as our three World Cups there is the FIFA WC, RU Women's WC and ICC Cricket WC happening over the next couple of months. As Yakstorm suggests search for Rugby League World Cup if you want any of the RL tournaments.
-
1 hour ago, Chris22 said:
Did anything ever get announced about Ottawa not joining, or was it just forgotten about?
Following Covid and what happened with Toronto the investors in Canada decided it wasn't feasible to enter a Canadian team in the RFL/SL system and withdrew from the project. With no financial backing anymore the Ottawa idea was shelved and Eric Perez sought new investors in areas of the UK with no existing club. He found some in Cornwall and what would have been Ottawa became Cornwall RLFC instead.
-
10 hours ago, GUBRATS said:
PNG , with ' King ' Edwin scoring the winning try from 50 years out
I know some players aren't as quick as others but that would be some run up.
-
2
-
-
Unfortunately the primary conduit for Welsh players into the sport is two League 1 clubs (one of which barely functions) so this standard of squad is about as much as we could expect at the moment. They have been declining for a few years as the players that emerged during (Celtic) Crusaders time in the SL have got older with the system that brought them through gone so no new blood of a similar standard has appeared. The only one of note who appeared in the last few years (Grace) has now been lost to RU.
The Welsh clubs we have will take years to grow sufficiently (if they ever do) to produce sufficient numbers of top level players. Development Officers and a centrally run youth system in Wales to feed into the pro teams at large could be a possible avenue. The problems of how to fund such a scheme and whether it would and could be run competently though would still make the success of such a project doubtful.
Another possibility could be for clubs to be allowed cap dispensation for 2 Welsh players under the age of 21 and for them to be encouraged to scout and bring such players into their youth development systems.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, redjonn said:
Taken in isolation yes - "So what every rugby league fan should therefore want is a better top level league that gets more money for its TV contract."
To take an extreme just to make a point - The monies and hence investment may well be needed but surely not by no investments into other leagues and helping to destroy the other clubs below.
The point is either one thinks we can just have a top division or alternatively we need both a top division and reasonable championship type leagues below.
The source of division of opinion comes with what people would consider constitutes a reasonable championship type league. This comes down to the level of funds they believe clubs should be given to function with. Whatever level of funding that is personally I think the most important factor is that it should be the same figure for all clubs within a division. During the period of licensing and before the Championship was a very competitive competition with a fairly low salary cap level (c.£300k IIRC) where clubs were part time operations.
Whether you support(ed) them or not the introduction of the 3x8s structure was the start of the current inequality in the Championship. The need for Championship top 4 to have at least near parity in the middle 8 phase led to the vastly uneven funding distribution we now see at Championship level and the raising of the cap at that level to a point where very few have the funds to spend it. This was exacerbated when first Toulouse returned and then Toronto joined League 1 as the cap was raised further to allow them to use their spending power to reach SL.
Toronto are no more and Toulouse are likely to return to SL for 2024 (and are considered likely to stay there under the proposed system of grading). However the Championship will still be left with the legacy of the changes made due to the 3x8s and those two expansion clubs. That is a model of inequality in funding distribution that is no longer necessary and an inflated cap level that will no longer be necessary as success on the pitch will no longer be the sole arbiter for reaching the top division.
The unequal distribution model for whatever funds are available should definitely be the first thing to go from 2024. The salary cap level should also be lowered so that the Championship can return to being a more competitive league for (at least predominantly) part time clubs. This will allow clubs to use some of whatever funding does eventuate on the establishing and improving of the club infrastructure that will go towards improving their club grade rather than trying to keep up with one or two clubs that are splashing the cash.
The bone of contention will always be the level of funding that is given to the individual clubs at Championship (and League 1) level. Some clubs (and their supporters) that have been at the top end of the Championship for a few years will have become accustomed to operating with the higher levels of funding and may want a continued level of funding that allows them to run (if they choose to) a full time team. Some people will think that enough funding to run a part time club and team will be sufficient. IMO though the level of funding is important to the clubs the level of the permitted salary cap within the competition is more important, as lowering it will make it more likely that some portion of funding at least will go towards the building of infrastructure which the proposed system appears to want to encourage.
-
4
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Rlsouthyorks said:
re brand it as the European Challenge Cup invite more French teams in along with other European nation. Have all super league team come in at the last 64 teams . So last 64 would consist of 12 super league teams, 14 championships teams, 11 league one teams. That leaves 27 places open for Foreign teams and our own amateur teams .I am sure that would create more interest and more stories.
Unfortunately the only type of stories that would result would be of 100+ point winning margins and community/european club players having periods off work after coming off worse from trying to tackle/be tackled by the likes of Alex Walmsley. The SL clubs do enter the cup at too late a stage IMO but we already have a team in League 1 that ships 100 points against other League 1 teams. It would be unfair and potentially damaging to have SL teams come up against community clubs or european clubs (many of which are of a poorer standard than our community clubs' teams).
Bringing the SL clubs in at the last 32 stage of the Challenge Cup as it exists now would be workable when likely the weakest teams left in the cup will be the top teams in League 1.
-
1
-
-
On 23/08/2022 at 11:52, johnh1 said:
Have any Scottish players ever been to Scotland?
Matty Russell was born in Scotland. Dave Scott was born and raised in Scotland (he played in the Championship and for Scotland for a few years after Hull KR signed him from a Scottish community club. He played for Midlands Hurricanes this year I think).
-
3 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:
So a Grade B club could finish 2-3 places from bottom of SL and then gets relegated on a subjective comparison against another Grade B club?
Devil's advocate here, if both Grade B clubs , Featherstone are in SL finish 10th, Leigh in the Championship and spend a lot of money on club and team and finish top, a committee decide that Leigh are a "better" Grade B so Leigh get promoted and Featherstone relegated?
Or if there's only 14 Grade A clubs and they are in SL, there's no promotion or relegation before the season starts?
**Clubs chosen just to illustrate the point.
These aren't unrealistic scenarios, this is no different to licensing proposal in 20+ years ago.
On the face of it yes that would be how it would be expected to work as the initial proposal suggests B grade clubs will exchange places should one in the Championship be graded as stronger than one in SL. In practice you would expect that your hypothetical Featherstone would have been warned at their most recent review (and possibly the one before that) that they were in danger of not meeting required standards/being surpassed by a Championship club and so were at risk of demotion. It is very unlikely that clubs will be demoted/ promoted based on the events of a single season.
It is also possible that some amendment could be made before the proposals are adopted that will allow for expansion of SL by admitting additional strong B grade clubs rather than 1 up meaning 1 must go down (rather than only expanding by adding new A grade clubs). What we will likely see is some negotiation on specifics before the structure is finalised. Using your hypothetical it would be unfair to punish Featherstone if they had continued to meet the standards they had in previous seasons in SL simply because Leigh had also achieved what was asked of them to be elevated to SL.
In a scenario where every club in SL has an A grade the proposals put forward state that any club outside would need to attain an A grade to enter SL. As I said though I wouldn't be surprised to see that slightly amended as an A grade may be too difficult in practice to attain in the Championship (though the clubs won't know that until they are given details of what constitutes the minimum standards for each grade).
-
1 minute ago, Wakefield Ram said:
So just to clarify. If there is only one Grade B club in SL, they will be guaranteed relegation irrespective of results?
No, but if during the annual assessments a grade B club in the Championship was judged to be better suited for the SL place than the one in SL then they would exchange places.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:
Ok read it now. If you did a job application under one criteria, aced it and then the criteria was changed so it perfectly matches soneone but you,you’d be furious. Second you can go for another job but Keighley arent going to start playing union are they so it doesn’t work?
If it's proper for other clubs to come out publicly with their stance then it’s just as legitimate for Keighley to come out with theirs. They haven’t done to well under p and r because all their support melted away when people knew it didn’t matter what they did they were barred from the top. Imagine the frustration just as you got everything in place again you are going to get shafted...again
Next season they will probably pull in more than Fev and perhaps more than Bulls, so we should want them to believe in the process as the game needs a strong team in Bradford postcode and it probably can’t ever be the Bulls at the dump.
They have still publicly had a rant about the organisations that will be making the decisions on grading in the future and have probably done more harm than good to their own cause because of it. If they are sceptical about the proposals due to their own experiences they are entitled to that opinion but a measured diplomatic response would be better than a public rant. Even if only for the public image of the Keighley club.
Something like " we have viewed and listened to these early proposals by IMG for the future of Rugby League and have some concerns over the ways in which these proposals could be implemented and the clarity and transparency of the process involved. We will liaise with both IMG and the RFL to raise and address these concerns before deciding whether to lend our Club's support to these proposals or otherwise."
In the Cougarmania years they did grow considerably and especially given the ongoing travails of the Bulls there is the opportunity for a well run Keighley to grow again. There is the possibility for any club that can achieve sufficient growth to find itself elevated to the top tier under the IMG proposals. The only limit to how high a club like Keighley can climb should be determined by how much the club (business) can grow.
They seem to have assumed that the experience will be the same as in 1996 already. Lots has changed since then, the decision makers that changed the rules and relegated 6 clubs and denied Keighley (and Batley) promotion are all gone. In 1996 both Bradford and Halifax were top 6 clubs in the top tier with the Bulls about to become one of the pre-eminent clubs of the next decade, in 2022 Halifax have been outside the top flight for almost 20 years and Bradford are a pale shadow of what they were. Keighley are in the same division as both next year and have an opportunity to build to get ahead of both. If IMG are looking for a club in that area to elevate then Keighley are in a position where it can be achievable to be the best available option.
They may hold a position of scepticism and mistrust but the tone of their club statement was ill judged at best. The bits about expansion being a particularly poor choice.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:
Mate need to paragraph this a bit more.
Done. I have split up the large opening paragraph in my post above. Should be easier to read now.
-
1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:
But they clearly dont believe if they do all those things they will be let in. Will they be allowed an academy? Will their geographical position be held against them? Does IMG want people to vote on accepting categories without seeing the criteria on which they are based and who gets to judge?
The immediate announcement of we want to grow CC but then here’s two legs for SL teams but only four teams outside will get to play them and it guarantees there will be no upsets , just to benefit the chosen 12 is a classic example of say one thing,do another.
Keighley clearly dont believe this will be fair and why should they?
On your first paragraph, those could be valid concerns that Keighley or any club currently have given the rules around allocation of elite academies now and the poor way in which the Licensing process was run. However there is already a publicly announced follow up meeting for the clubs in the calendar prior to the requirement to vote. That is the time and place that already exists for concerned parties to raise those and other issues they have and to have them addressed.
What Keighley have done is had a public rant criticising the way things have been done in the past in their opinion, despite one complaint 'creating a celebrity and glamour that was not authentic' being pretty much what the Keighley club did when they launched Cougarmania. They may not think they would have much chance of growing the club to be granted a top flight place under the proposed system (they haven't managed that too well under P&R either though barring one season immediately prior to SL being founded. Batley finished second behind Keighley that season but you never hear them complaining about it).
If I applied for a job I didn't think I quite qualified for I would still have to put the same effort in as for any other to try to overcome that. I might well still not get it anyway but I'd have some chance, however if I stated in my application or at interview that those making the decision were creating a false image for the organisation and were prejudiced towards me as employing me wouldn't tick a box for diversity I'd be pretty sure I had shot myself in the foot application wise. That is pretty much what Keighley have done with their statement.
On the second paragraph, yes that is a nonsense idea and if adopted it would last one season at the most. It won't be adopted though as it is nonsense. It most likely is put forward to make another proposal such as (hypothetically) SL clubs entering the cup a round earlier look better by comparison to make that more sensible proposal more likely to be adopted.
On the final sentence Keighley's issues are clearly not all around this proposed structure alone but as mentioned previously there are much better avenues open to them in which they can raise their issues. If memory serves didn't they want to have the expansion clubs in League 1 kicked out a few years ago? Whatever their concerns they have not done their club any favours reacting in the way they have.
-
1
-
Sat 22 July : Betfred RL Challenge Cup Semi Final : St Helens v Leigh Leopards KO 14:30 BBC1
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
Congratulations to Leigh. Great defensive effort from them.