Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by NW10LDN

  1. 6 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

    I was on about rent, never been able to get a house, massive crime rates. A terrible place all in all.  Remember going to Enfield and getting a pint for 3 quid but that was at the ground . Sam Smiths if I am ever back in London.

    Don´t think bargain basement has much to do with it tbh, RL lacks internationals and problem is that RL is charging people premium prices for a sub standard facility, which is exactly how I´d describe London. Anyway, I wish Broncos well. 

    Good to see RL fans living up to their stereotype.

    • Like 1
  2. 16 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

    When you say Rugby League hasn’t worked, how do you explain these?

    CLUBS in London and South East


    It hasn't worked. You can find junior clubs in any sport in London. Basketball, hockey, ice hockey, ect. Overall, the sport hasn't broken through in the London and the south east. It doesn't come anywhere close to football, union, or cricket. It's on par with basketball and hockey or even Gaelic football.

  3. 1 hour ago, JT RL said:

    One final match = The Grand Final.

    Between the winner of the Challenge Cup v the winner the league.

    No play offs .. one match to determine the team of the year.

    Cup team v League team.

    Full house at Old Trafford guaranteed 

    No but it would be a good preseason match. Make it a charity event like the football. Super League winners v Challenge Cup winners or runner up. So St. Helens v Castleford. Stick it on Channel 4.

    • Like 1
  4. 44 minutes ago, headtackle said:

    Ah my mistake.  Not been following it that closely.  
    something pre season for them would help though.  Who knows might be easier for a French club to pop over

    They have no preseason friendlies planned and it's not in the interest of the French clubs to travel over and play a team which seems to largely consist of amateur union players.

    • Haha 1
  5. 7 hours ago, Eddie said:

    Four years isn’t enough imho, as we have no other meaningful international comps. In football they have the continental cups which are massive, Union has the six nations every year (and presumably a SH equivalent) and cricket seem to have about 10 world cups plus the ashes and all that. 

    Ideally I’d like to see either the WC every two years or still every four with something meaningful in the two years inbetween. 

    2 is too few. Europe have stated that they want a Euro competition every 2 years but the problem is that England are too strong for the others at the moment. So we'll have to field a second or third team to give it some integrity.

  6. 37 minutes ago, theswanmcr said:

    The main problem with the Grand Final deciding the final ‘winner’ is that we have too few clubs playing too many games to get there.

    NFL regular season has 32 teams playing just 17 rounds, followed by 14 teams in play-offs and final over 4 weeks. Max 21 games.

    We have 12 teams playing 27 regular rounds - a ridiculous amount - followed by play-offs and final. Plus the Challenge Cup and teams can play each other 5 or 6 times a season. Hence the low play-off crowds. Less is more people.

    Agree with that. Home and away plus Magic = 23 regular season fixtures plus the 3 play-off fixtures would be enough.

    • Like 1
  7. 3 hours ago, Chris22 said:

    If we did scrap the Grand Final, then the financial aspect would be my only concern. I wouldn't object to the old Premiership style trophy, giving another chance of silverware and retaining the play offs and Old Trafford Final. But not sure fans would back it.

    Where we fall down is not having a back up prize. The top 4 and Champions League places give meaningful competition to sides not competing for the Premier League title in football. Same for European Cup places in Union. We don't.

    My big concern about the play offs are the perception. For example, I watched the Wigan v Leeds game with a friend last year who doesn't follow the sport. He asked whether the match was important. When I said yes, he asked why it was half empty and I didn't have an answer.

    The Grand Final is another matter and is an impressive and atmospheric occasion but the question is whether the route to get to that one, great occasion is worth it. I'm not convinced it is in an on field sense, but probably is financially. A tricky one!

    Well I suppose you could just have the top 2 go into the Grand Final. Or have a preliminary final for the 2nd and 3rd placed clubs if they want to squeeze out another game in the season.

  8. 1 hour ago, DoubleD said:

    Sounds like it's time for David Hughes to step aside to someone who can reinvigorate the Broncos. Are there any suitors in the offing though?

    No. Broncos will die if Hughes goes. It's just not an attractive brand and they have limited assets. It's not like a football club who own their own stadium or have success on the field.

  9. 37 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

    Why is 4 your cut-off?

    It's been around the 50% mark since playoffs began. Make it too small and teams will have nothing to play for very quickly in the season.

    Top 4 plus relegation means every clubs has something to play for. 

  10. 28 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

    You've essentially just said what we currently have except you've given an extra team (3rd) a bye to the semis.

    Isn't the McIntyre system based on second chances? This one has none. It's just a straight knockout format with a bye for top seeds.

    I did like the McIntyre systems, I thought they were very creative, but unfortunately your average punter over here doesn't get it and it's proven quite a turn-off on the terraces. A straight knockout with byes for top seeds is far easier to explain. Drop all the ridiculous round names ("elimination playoff" and "qualifying playoff" are completely unnecessary overcomplications).

    Quarter final, semi final and final.


    If we ever go to 14 teams, do top 7 and only give the league leaders a bye. Exactly the same as top 6 except 2nd plays 7th instead of getting a bye. Easy adjustment.

    50% of the teams advancing is a turn off as well. It should be no more than 4.

  11. 24 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

    The Grand Final does get good figures generally as something major is decided: the champions.

    I think the trouble with the play off system personally is the regular season is so long with many repeat fixtures that the playoffs exacerbate that issue.

    This is an old chestnut that has long been debated as not everybody sees repeat fixtures as an issue.

    Added to this is that in the U.K., we are wedded to the idea that a league is the fairest way to produce a champion sports team.

    But administrators also look enviously at the NFL Super Bowl and therefore an attempt is made to have playoffs and a final to generate more revenue.

    These traditions clash and the fallout is that the Final gets supported, but not always the playoffs.

    Then there’s very real considerations around cost and time commitments.



    I think this is it. NFL has a 18 week season so an extended play-off system works for them. There's no football for half a year. Union only has 4 go into the play-offs. Home advantage for the top 2.

    • Like 1
  12. 38 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

    Yes - it weakens both clubs.

    If there were such a thing as a 'London Strategy', this wouldn't be it. Not sure how this gets resolved.

    I'd say the London strategy needs a complete reset. The junior clubs have been successful and continue to grow. Wests Warriors and London Chargers are solid amatuer outfits. I think a professional club could be successful in London but not sure it will come in the form of the Broncos.

  13. 27 minutes ago, Chris22 said:

    All systems we have tried are imperfect.

    The top 5 usually sees the top 2 in the league play each other twice in three weeks and, potentially, the top ranked side having maybe too long between matches.

    The 2002-2008 style top 6 has the same issue with repetitive matches and there is little difference between finishing first and second.

    The NRL-style top 8 that we had from 2009-2014 was farcical. Club call didn't help, but the opening week between 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 seemed pointless in its own right anyway. As did having a side in the bottom half with a chance of becoming champions.

    The straight semi finals from 2015-2018 did not adequately reward the top sides. There was little difference regardless of your rank.

    I do think the 2021 and 2021 style play off top 6 is about the best we've had. Keeps the top 2 apart until the final, gives a reward for the top 2, not too big gaps / too many weeks off. Only disadvantage is that the top 2 only get 1 shot.

    I wouldn't mind a different structure to decide the champions. Each side plays home and away and the side that finishes top of the league are the champions. Bit out there I know.

    Benefit of the current system is that it's easy to understand for new fans. No qualifying finals or preliminary finals. As you say, no repeat pairings as well.

    • Like 1
  14. 1 hour ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

    While they lost both Ireland’s Galway Tribesmen and Scotland’s Edinburgh Eagles Challenge Cup games had very respectable scorelines against established heartland amateur clubs. They are clearly a reasonable standard. 

    Eagles compete in North East so they would be closer to the standard. This would be Galway's first game against an established amateur club though.

    • Like 2
  15. 9 minutes ago, LlanWests said:

    The problem is is that there aren't enough full-time RL teams. I do like the top 6 played over three weekends. But I'd only have 21 SL matches per season. 10 home, 10 away and MW of course. I'd like to see the CC Final in April too. Only SL teams are gonna win the C Cup, so I'd make it the top 10 from SL from the previous year. Have a preliminary round of 7 v 10 and 8 v 9 at the beginning of March. The QF at the end of March etc. Like to see the SL GF on the second Saturday of September with a 4.15pm start as well.   

    11 home, 11 away plus Magic would be 23 SL matches per season. Are you saying that the top 10 should advance because that would kill the whole point of a league.

  16. I think any system should have the top ranked club getting a bye so back to the McIntyre system for me. Maybe get rid of the qualifying final but I don't think it is necessary.

    So elimination final would be 4 v 5. Semi Finals would be 1 v 4/5 and 2 v 3.


  17. 2 hours ago, Bearman said:

    Your not planning to help them with your brilliant idea then?

    I am sure they would  be delighted if you are offering to stump up the £250,000 bond and the minimum £100,000 pa? ( that's to play not complete).

    The offer of helping you to get involved with them still stands.



    That's just a pathetic response.

    • Haha 1
  18. 16 minutes ago, Bearman said:

    That Coventry rebrand won't work out.

    The Midlands is a big place....THATS THE POINT

    They also seem to be playing at a small rugby union club pitch with a possible move to a larger system. ....ITS AN ITERIM MOVE AS THE BPA WAS NOT AN OPTION. AN ALTERNATIVE HAD TO BE FOUND FOR 2022.  THE PLAN FOR 2023 IS FOR A NEW LOCATION WITH TOP CLASS FACILITIES A CHANCE TO GENERATE SOME INCOME. 

    I would say it is better for the likes of Nottingham or Sherwood to link up with one of the big Super League or Championship clubs instead of the Hurricanes. .....HOW WOULD IT BE BETTER IF NEITHER NOTTINGHAM OR SHERWOOD HAVE NOT SHOWN ANY INTEREST IN STEPPING UP OR "LINKING" WITH ANY SUPERLEAGUE CLUB.


    Of course they may be interesting in your idea especially if you tell them that you are prepared to find the finance and to do the work. I know the people involved at the two clubs, would you like me to tell them that  you are prepared to do so?



    Hit a nerve there. The Midlands is too big for one club to represent it. So your planning on moving to a new stadium but no confirmation yet. Nothing I said was wrong then. It's better for those clubs to align with a SL club which is in a much better position to help out. 

  19. 4 hours ago, Jughead said:

    I’ve always thought that each division that houses a select group of expansion clubs, to me Toulouse, maybe London Broncos but certainly Newcastle, London Skolars, Midlands and West Wales (less so Catalans who are now successful) should have a certain amount of the distribution money for that division ringfenced with it being distributed to those clubs but that’s another discussion for another day and I don’t want to derail this into that direction.  

    As for Skolars, they’ve had it hard (not that anyone has had it easy) the last few years. There was a partnership between themselves and Toronto Wolfpack that was to include a financial package but like almost everything associated to Toronto, that money never materialised and they missed out on that windfall. The previous chairmen left Skolars too and they’ve also had some investment from fans and other parties according to the internet, I don’t know how much that’s helped and any investment is vital but they seem to have regressed, even prior to Coleman and a handful of players leaving to go to Broncos and with Broncos going part-time, too, I can’t imagine that helps much either. I hope for their sake that when it’s a week where the Broncos are playing an Academy game and not a reserve game that Skolars have access to players on dual registration. 

    As for West Wales, it sounds crazy saying it when you look at their results but under Kim Williams, they looked to have instilled some professionalism and looked to be putting some building blocks in place, slowly. He then left and Woods come in but the expectations were bonkers. To expect to go from one win to a place in the play-offs was beyond unrealistic and their season ended farcically with too few players for the Barrow game. To not even announce a first team coach or the assistants working as a collective, especially this late does seems strange. 

    Coventry appear to be the best of the bunch at the minute. They were proactive to impending changes, not reactive and have rebranded. Whether that works remains to be seen but the links with satellite clubs will help. 

    Change is coming in the next few years. These clubs (as do plenty of clubs in Yorkshire, Cumbria and Lancashire) need(ed) to do something to survive. 

    That Coventry rebrand won't work out. The Midlands is a big place. They also seem to be playing at a small rugby union club pitch with a possible move to a larger system. I would say it is better for the likes of Nottingham or Sherwood to link up with one of the big Super League or Championship clubs instead of the Hurricanes.

  20. 1 hour ago, Pie tries said:

    At last.

    Plenty of Brits will make the journey. This will boost our credibility no end, to say nothing of the massive massive boost for the game across the channel.

    Now lets get France - and all other European nations - playing regularly in some sort of structured 'ladder'

    ERL wants that. England are set to field the second team. There should be a European comp every 2 years. There's a cap on heritage players so that should help countries with a domestic set up.

    • Like 1
  • Create New...