It's about time this great game got re united

[amm]

Oh the irony!

beat me to it, swine

[l'angelo mysterioso]

If it's only clubs trying to get promoted to the top division or trying to establish themselves in the top division who get in to huge debts then how come Man Utd are

Edited August 6, 2010 by l'angelo mysterioso

[Black Country Wire]

I am sick to death of the RFL and the way it has ruined the game I love. Why would I pay 15 Pounds to watch a series of Friendlies where the best team is never allowed to get promoted?

A series of friendlies? Strange, I was under the impression that there was a trophy and medals being handed out at the end of the season for "the best team".

Edited August 6, 2010 by Black Country Wire

[Padge]

A series of friendlies? Strange, I was under the impression that there was a trophy and medals being handed out at the end of the season for "the best team".

Considering they are friendlies there have been a lot of posts throughout the season about unfriendly acts by players on their friends.

Maybe the trophies are for who is most unfriendly to their friends.

[HaroldShand]

Those in favour of franchising often cite 'the number of clubs that have been promoted to the top flight only to be relegated immediately and suffer the doom of bankruptcy' as a reason for its existence, and the abolition of promotion and relegation.

Who are these clubs that they speak of? I certainly can't think of any

[JohnM]

A "traditionalist" putting an end to licencing.

And HaroldShand, why not try research rather than recall?

[Chris_T]

As a Batley fan I dont really have a problem with the lack of P&R, although we are entitled to apply for superleage we are realistic enough to know we are miles off the pace. If I were the RFL though I would be worried about the anger around the Champoionship, the precieved feeling of injustice. Although the numbers through the gates at the likes of Batley & Dewsbury are low there is a huge interest in the game in the area. Our recent challenge cup and NR cup runs showed this. I would imagine there are large numbers whom subscribe to Sky solely to watch RL. If the RLF alienate these fans and subscription falls then Sky money could be reduced. I feel a little better share of the wealth would help with the unrest. As far as im aware the Champoinship clubs get 100k to be spent on infustructure, another 100k to be spent solely on academy rugby would be a big long term benefit to the Championship clubs and the RFL as a whole, and taking 100k away from the current SL clubs may stop one mediocre Aussie import coming in. There are a number of very well run clubs in the Championship working on a tiny budget. With a little extra help from the RFL we could set an example to the SL of how a club should be run, close the gap a little and look to a 2 tier SL in the future. I am all for expansion but if its at the expense of the small heartland clubs then the game will suffer, its us that pay our sky subscriptions, its us that organise neutrals coach trips to Wembly, turn up at the Galpharm to Watch the Aussies let us win one to make it interesting. I think the jist of what im getting at, and I know it sounds pathetic, but We need to feel wanted, at the moment a lot feel we are just here to trial the RFLs wacky ideas, and to be told by SL fans that we are living in the past. SHARE THE WEALTH MAKE THE GAME STRONGER NOT SL STRONGER.

[deluded pom?]

beat me to it, swine

Congratulations PS. Two fish from one cast.

[Lobbygobbler]

As a Batley fan I dont really have a problem with the lack of P&R, although we are entitled to apply for superleage we are realistic enough to know we are miles off the pace. If I were the RFL though I would be worried about the anger around the Champoionship, the precieved feeling of injustice. Although the numbers through the gates at the likes of Batley & Dewsbury are low there is a huge interest in the game in the area. Our recent challenge cup and NR cup runs showed this. I would imagine there are large numbers whom subscribe to Sky solely to watch RL. If the RLF alienate these fans and subscription falls then Sky money could be reduced. I feel a little better share of the wealth would help with the unrest. As far as im aware the Champoinship clubs get 100k to be spent on infustructure, another 100k to be spent solely on academy rugby would be a big long term benefit to the Championship clubs and the RFL as a whole, and taking 100k away from the current SL clubs may stop one mediocre Aussie import coming in. There are a number of very well run clubs in the Championship working on a tiny budget. With a little extra help from the RFL we could set an example to the SL of how a club should be run, close the gap a little and look to a 2 tier SL in the future. I am all for expansion but if its at the expense of the small heartland clubs then the game will suffer, its us that pay our sky subscriptions, its us that organise neutrals coach trips to Wembly, turn up at the Galpharm to Watch the Aussies let us win one to make it interesting. I think the jist of what im getting at, and I know it sounds pathetic, but We need to feel wanted, at the moment a lot feel we are just here to trial the RFLs wacky ideas, and to be told by SL fans that we are living in the past. SHARE THE WEALTH MAKE THE GAME STRONGER NOT SL STRONGER.

Good call

As a Leigh fan, removal of P&R will slowly kill off RL in Leigh with soccer being the main beneficiary. I've even heard rumours that Sale have though of moving to the LSV. Imagine in future if there is no hope of promotion, yet top notch RU offered week in week out...........it is a worrying thought

I live in London, but if P&R is not brought back at some stage I will be cancelling my sky sports subscription forever. I will also give up watching Quins RL for good

So you see, the anger of Co-Op fans will impact the RFL and SL clubs

[Padge]

Those in favour of franchising often cite 'the number of clubs that have been promoted to the top flight only to be relegated immediately and suffer the doom of bankruptcy' as a reason for its existence, and the abolition of promotion and relegation.

Who are these clubs that they speak of? I certainly can't think of any

Huddersfield Swinton up 74/75 down 75/76

Barrow Rochdale Leigh all up 75/76 down 76/77

Dewsbury Bramley Hunslet all up 76/77 all down 77/78

Barrow Rochdale Huddersfield all up 77/78 all down 78/79

Hunslet York Blackpool all up 79/80 all down 80/81

York Fulham Whitehaven all up 80/81 all down 81/82

Carlisle Workington Halifax all up 81/82 all down 82/83

Fulham Wakefield Salford Whitehaven all up 82/83 all down 83/84

Need I go on, this pattern has been repeated over and over again

Take a look carefully at those clubs and think about which teams have had financial troubles over the years.

Edited August 7, 2010 by Padge

[Padge]

Good call

As a Leigh fan, removal of P&R will slowly kill off RL in Leigh with soccer being the main beneficiary. I've even heard rumours that Sale have though of moving to the LSV. Imagine in future if there is no hope of promotion, yet top notch RU offered week in week out...........it is a worrying thought

I live in London, but if P&R is not brought back at some stage I will be cancelling my sky sports subscription forever. I will also give up watching Quins RL for good

So you see, the anger of Co-Op fans will impact the RFL and SL clubs

I know two blokes who have started to watch Leigh this season and aren't arsed about promotion, a 2:1 ratio seems good to me, don't let the door hit your ###### on the way out.

[Derwent]

Hull, HKR, Huddersfield, Castleford, Wakefield.........

They all seem to have coped with the effects of P&R fairly well.

[Padge]

Hull, HKR, Huddersfield, Castleford, Wakefield.........

They all seem to have coped with the effects of P&R fairly well.

Hull bust had to merge with Gateshead.

For Huddersfield see Hull.

Wakefield are a great model of financial stability

A few clubs, those who have a long standing history of good levels of support can survive dipping a toe into relegation, the vast majority though cannot.

[Derwent]

A few clubs, those who have a long standing history of good levels of support can survive dipping a toe into relegation, the vast majority though cannot.

Sorry but I don't agree with that nowadays.

It may have been true in the past but these days clubs are given automatic indemnity from their biggest financial liability in that when/if they go out of SL the players contracts become null and void.

What did for Workington (and Oldham to an extent) was dropping down and still having SL contract obligations without any SL income. Town's biggest creditors were the pool of players who's contracts they couldn't pay. Some of them had 2-3 years left on their contracts on SL-sized wages, the club simply didn't have the income to pay them after losing it's SL status. That risk has been removed from clubs these days.

[l'angelo mysterioso]

Hull, HKR, Huddersfield, Castleford, Wakefield.........

They all seem to have coped with the effects of P&R fairly well.

aye, cas and wakefield are well set up

[l'angelo mysterioso]

What did for Workington (and Oldham to an extent) was dropping down and still having SL contract obligations without any SL income.

and that in a nutshell is a major argument against P & R

and was also the case pre SL and what did for the 'yo yo' clubs. Would you say workington fell into that category pre SL?

[goldcard]

I seem to recall a team going into admin as soon as they lost a GF and therefore failing to be promoted.

Let's look where P&R does still apply.

I'll mention Gateshead, Keighley, Doncaster and Blackpool for starters.

[Padge]

Sorry but I don't agree with that nowadays.

It may have been true in the past but these days clubs are given automatic indemnity from their biggest financial liability in that when/if they go out of SL the players contracts become null and void.

What did for Workington (and Oldham to an extent) was dropping down and still having SL contract obligations without any SL income. Town's biggest creditors were the pool of players who's contracts they couldn't pay. Some of them had 2-3 years left on their contracts on SL-sized wages, the club simply didn't have the income to pay them after losing it's SL status. That risk has been removed from clubs these days.

It isn't the drop the causes the financial problem its the debt incurred to gain promotion and then to try and avoid relegation, usually that debt is beyond the means of the club. Demotion then makes the debt completely unservicable for a club with poor support to start with and then is reduced further when they drop.

Relegation doesn't damage clubs buying promotion followed by trying to buy survival does when clubs cannot afford it.

On Radio Manchester on thursday Chris Hamilton chairman of Oldham was talking about teams being promoted and was asked about a Yorkshire club who it was suggested would be promoted from Championship 1 to the Championship but it was pointed out had very poor crowds compared to other clubs. His reply showed how stupid some people within the game think. His reply was that, they think they'll be alright because they will get a lot more away supporters. That is no way to run a professional rugby club.

[Derwent]

It isn't the drop the causes the financial problem its the debt incurred to gain promotion and then to try and avoid relegation, usually that debt is beyond the means of the club. Demotion then makes the debt completely unservicable for a club with poor support to start with and then is reduced further when they drop.

Relegation doesn't damage clubs buying promotion followed by trying to buy survival does when clubs cannot afford it.

On Radio Manchester on thursday Chris Hamilton chairman of Oldham was talking about teams being promoted and was asked about a Yorkshire club who it was suggested would be promoted from Championship 1 to the Championship but it was pointed out had very poor crowds compared to other clubs. His reply showed how stupid some people within the game think. His reply was that, they think they'll be alright because they will get a lot more away supporters. That is no way to run a professional rugby club.

Maybe so, I'm not sure I wholly agree, but do you not think some Championship clubs are not building up the same debts in the pursuit of box ticking instead ?

Do you not think some current SL clubs are building up piles of debt just to stand still and remain in SL ?

There are some current SL clubs for whom, from a business perspective, dropping down would do them good in order to get a grip on their finances. It works both ways.

BTW, I'm not an advocate of automatic P&R but I do think there has to be a better model than a 3 year moratorium.

[Derwent]

and that in a nutshell is a major argument against P & R

and was also the case pre SL and what did for the 'yo yo' clubs. Would you say workington fell into that category pre SL?

How is it a major argument against P&R when it doesn't exist anymore ?

[Padge]

Maybe so, I'm not sure I wholly agree, but do you not think some Championship clubs are not building up the same debts in the pursuit of box ticking instead ?

Do you not think some current SL clubs are building up piles of debt just to stand still and remain in SL ?

There are some current SL clubs for whom, from a business perspective, dropping down would do them good in order to get a grip on their finances. It works both ways.

BTW, I'm not an advocate of automatic P&R but I do think there has to be a better model than a 3 year moratorium.

In the past the money spent went straight into the pockets of players and straight out of the game, the RFL are trying to keep money within the game as much as possible, the money spent on box ticking for a new stadium isn't money lost to the game but an investment in it. Money spent on developing young players is an investment in the games future. The P&R policy meant clubs spent everything they could on players wages, resulting an almost total lack of young talent coming through, this lack of talent meant clubs would look overseas for ready made players.

The current policies will not turn the game around within one round of licenses it will take years to repair the damage done to the game through lack of inward investment. Things are getting their club facilities are improving, we are getting more good quality young players coming through, players are being developed in areas of the country it was never dreamt that could supply young RL players.

The alternative to the 3 year moratorium, is to put the licenses up to the highest 14 bidders and then shut the door.

[Northern Exposure]

The current fiasco with Widnes being touted as a SL club despite appauling results on the field makes a mockery of licensing.

That aside, i'd certainly love to see P&R return. The drama of Wigan being close to facing the drop a few years back, and the fairy story promotions are something that IMHO are sorely missed.

We'd have had Barrow and now Fev up if we'd have kept P&R.

The charm of Rugby League is somewhat lost with licensing - its all about the money, which it shouldn't be and never was.

[Maximus Decimus]

The current fiasco with Widnes being touted as a SL club despite appauling results on the field makes a mockery of licensing.

That aside, i'd certainly love to see P&R return. The drama of Wigan being close to facing the drop a few years back, and the fairy story promotions are something that IMHO are sorely missed.

We'd have had Barrow and now Fev up if we'd have kept P&R.

The charm of Rugby League is somewhat lost with licensing - its all about the money, which it shouldn't be and never was.

Wow, you've only come to this realisation now after what 3 seasons without P & R?

Fev would probably not be promoted as they still had minimum criteria.

I'll repeat what I said on the other thread, if you had a tiny bit of intelligence you'd see that Widnes' priorities would have been very different if we'd still have had promotion and relegation. You'd also see that doing well on with a salary cap of 300k indicates nothing as to how well you will do with a salary cap of

[Northern Exposure]

Also Widnes' atrocious on the field results include a biggest defeat this year of 20 points. Something Leeds have managed twice this year.

lol.

In what league is that sorry?

[Derwent]

(1) In the past the money spent went straight into the pockets of players and straight out of the game, the RFL are trying to keep money within the game as much as possible, the money spent on box ticking for a new stadium isn't money lost to the game but an investment in it.

(2) Money spent on developing young players is an investment in the games future.

(3)The P&R policy meant clubs spent everything they could on players wages, resulting an almost total lack of young talent coming through, this lack of talent meant clubs would look overseas for ready made players.

1. Spending on facilities is obviously a positive improvement, but ultimately clubs are still taking a gamble. The only difference being that hopefully they'll have something tangible to show for it if their pursuit of SL fails.

2. It is, yet is completely at odds with the RFL's latest position. Watch out in the next few weeks for a dictat coming from the RFL that is going to forbid Championship and Championship 1 clubs from running scholarship schemes !

3. Some clubs still do. Barrow spring to mind. It's not restricted to Championship clubs either.