The never-ending League Restructure debate (Many merged threads)

[Duff Duff]

You start of by mentioning Wakefield and Bradford.  If lets say Halifax got a licence by putting together a complete lie on there application and replaced Wakefield.  By doing this you put 3k on the gates at Fax and Wakefield lose 3k, then it appears Halifax can't afford what they put in the application and go into administration.  Would Wakefield be considered strong enough to replace Halifax in the next round of licences?  That's my problem there are clubs in the Championship just as big as some of the clubs in SL.  The only problem is that they have been starved of top flight RL because of no P&R so they can't get the crowds but SL clubs who commit financial ruin get a very small points deduction that means naff all when the League is a licence.

 

Lets then look at the National game.  Strange in 95 I did not think we were too far away from Australia and certainly a lot closer than we are now.

 

As for my glee sorry if you thinks it's sad but I have waited a long time for the I'm alright Jack folks to show there true colours as soon as changes effect there cosy little world of licencing.

 

If you only had a 12 or ideally a 10 team league their would be competition for licences/franchises. You are right. When Licensing was brought in by the RFL they fudged the issue by expanding the league to 14 and allowing in two sub standard clubs in Crusaders and Salford. The bidding needs to be competitive and independently audited. 

 

If one of the clubs failed to live up to their promises I would kick them out of the competition even if there weren't other clubs to replace them. There needs to be proper sanctions against those that break the rules. I would have thrown Wakefield and Bradford out of the competition until they got their houses in order. In case of Wakefield I don't think they are a viable Super League club. I would give Wakefield and Castleford the ultimatum that if they want to be in Super League need to merge their first team operations.

 

You are right. With clubs that shouldn't be Super League like Wakefield, Castleford, Hull KR and even Widnes the bigger Championship clubs rightly think they should have a piece of the Super League action too. To put it bluntly unless the non-viable Super League clubs merge they should all be excluded from the competition. This is precisely what happened in the NSWRL as it evolved into the NRL. The traditional clubs had to make sacrifices to grow the game.

 

Once they allowed the small town clubs to stay in Super League back in the mid 1990s the whole vision of an elite top competition was compromised. It was a massive mistake and we are still living with the consequences. 

[Duff Duff]

You also forget that there will also be a massive drop in sky viewers if there were only 10-12 clubs in a closed shop. And the likes of Wire, Saints etc are small fry. If it were really big city clubs like Liverpool, Manchester etc, then it may have worked - but then the game would be big enough to have p&r anyway

I got shut of sky and premier due to the lack of p&r. I will be renewing again thankfully now p&r returns

 

Again that is complete nonsense. There will still be a demand to see Super League on tv in areas where rugby league is popular, whether they have a Super League club or not. There will always be an appetite to watch the best clubs in the country with the best players in the country on TV. 

 

Rugby league towns will remain rugby league towns. The amateur sides won't die and the culture of playing the game won't die either. Cumbria has a thriving amateur scene and absolutely no prospect of a Super League club.

[Lobbygobbler]

Again that is complete nonsense. There will still be a demand to see Super League on tv in areas where rugby league is popular, whether they have a Super League club or not. There will always be an appetite to watch the best clubs in the country with the best players in the country on TV.

Rugby league towns will remain rugby league towns. The amateur sides won't die and the culture of playing the game won't die either. Cumbria has a thriving amateur scene and absolutely no prospect of a Super League club.

Utter toshack.

In time theyd die

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

 

You are right. With clubs that shouldn't be Super League like Wakefield, Castleford, Hull KR and even Widnes the bigger Championship clubs rightly think they should have a piece of the Super League action too. To put it bluntly unless the non-viable Super League clubs merge they should all be excluded from the competition. This is precisely what happened in the NSWRL as it evolved into the NRL. The traditional clubs had to make sacrifices to grow the game.

 

Once they allowed the small town clubs to stay in Super League back in the mid 1990s the whole vision of an elite top competition was compromised. It was a massive mistake and we are still living with the consequences. 

Despite the warm weather we are not in Australia.  Like usual blame it all on traditional clubs, well I'll tell you something without the mentioned clubs we would well and trully be in the brown stuff.  People like you amaze me how you have this vision of people turning up in there thousands to watch a new merged club.  London would get more fans than a merged Fev, Cas & Wakey team.  

[l'angelo mysterioso]

Despite the warm weather we are not in Australia.  Like usual blame it all on traditional clubs, well I'll tell you something without the mentioned clubs we would well and trully be in the brown stuff.  People like you amaze me how you have this vision of people turning up in there thousands to watch a new merged club.  London would get more fans than a merged Fev, Cas & Wakey team.  

what on earth is a traditional club?

[Duff Duff]

Utter toshack.

In time theyd die

 

It won't. The amateur sides would carry on as before and the supporters will migrate to the larger clubs. Leigh is ringed by Wigan, St Helens and Warrington all within  20 minute drive. Leigh should be directing its resources into community work and player development.

Edited July 12, 2013 by Duff Duff

[Lobbygobbler]

It won't. The amateur sides would carry on as before and the supporters will migrate to the larger clubs. Leigh is ringed by Wigan, St Helens and Warrington all within 20 minute drive. Leigh should be directing its resources into community work and player development.

Why not jusr merge Wigan, Saints Wire and Leigh

[Duff Duff]

Despite the warm weather we are not in Australia.  Like usual blame it all on traditional clubs, well I'll tell you something without the mentioned clubs we would well and trully be in the brown stuff.  People like you amaze me how you have this vision of people turning up in there thousands to watch a new merged club.  London would get more fans than a merged Fev, Cas & Wakey team.  

 

St George IIawarra and West Tigers both have average attendances of 19,000. That is double what the separate clubs in 1998 averaged. If the people of Wakefield and Castleford don't want to get behind a merged side then neither of them should be in Super League. That would concentrate their minds. If feeling are so strong then they might decide it would better to be stand alone outfits outside the competition. So be it. That is what North Sydney did in the end.

 

Merged club or no Super League. It is a shame the Super League and the RFL didn't stand firm in the mid 1990s. 

[Duff Duff]

Why not jusr merge Wigan, Saints Wire and Leigh

 

Because Wigan, St Helens and Warrington came get 10,000 through the gate week in and week out and are economically viable. That is why Easts, and after a circuitous route, Souths didn't have to merge in the NSWRL. They both proved they could pay their way and were viable. The Roosters and the Rabbits are now two of the best supported teams in the competition.  

 

Engage your brain. 

 

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/2013.html

Edited July 12, 2013 by Duff Duff

[Dave T]

Because Wigan, St Helens and Warrington came get 10,000 through the gate week in and week out and are economically viable. That is why Easts, and after a circuitous route, Souths didn't have to merge in the NSWRL. They both proved they could pay their way and were viable. The Roosters and the Rabbits are now two of the best supported teams in the competition.  

 

Engage your brain. 

 

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/2013.html

A few years back, Wire were poorly supported, yet now we are strong enough. A few years back, Souths were so weak, they were kicked out.

 

Things change, cutting clubs off and telling them to just worry about youth development would appear harsh, especially when the standard at the bottom end of SL is so poor. Like I said earlier, if the SL clubs were all out of sight of the top Championship clubs, fair enough, but quite simply they aren't.

[Padge]

Except that they werent relative to Wire, Leeds, Saints for most of the late 70s to the early 90s

We even won the league dontcha know?

I also recall us staying up for almost 10 years

Or am I imagining all this?

 

One Division 72-73 13th

 

D1 73-74 15th Relegated

D2 74-75  10th

D2 75-76 4th Promoted

D1 76-77 14th Relegated

D2 77-78 1st Promoted

D1 78-79 11th

D1 79-80 6th

D1 80-81 9th

D1 81-82 1st

D1 82-83 10th

D1 83-64 11th

D1 84-85 14th Relegated

D2 85-86 1st Promoted

D1 86-87 10th

D1 87-88 12th Relegated

D2 88-89 1st Promoted

D1 89-90 12th Relegated

D2 90-91 5th

D2 91-92 2nd Promoted

D1 92-93 11th

D1 93-94 16th Relegated

D2 94-95 11th

[Duff Duff]

A few years back, Wire were poorly supported, yet now we are strong enough. A few years back, Souths were so weak, they were kicked out.

 

Things change, cutting clubs off and telling them to just worry about youth development would appear harsh, especially when the standard at the bottom end of SL is so poor. Like I said earlier, if the SL clubs were all out of sight of the top Championship clubs, fair enough, but quite simply they aren't.

 

Yes but that is my point. Souths only sorted themselves out once they had been kicked out of the competition. If they had been taken over by Crowe then they would have been forced out of the competition too. Clubs wouldn't be excluded from Super League in perpetuity. If a club like Halifax or Leigh could put together a proper bid for a franchise or licence and prove that they can be viable then could be admitted to Super League. 

 

You are right about the standard of the smaller Super League clubs. They aren't up to it. That is why ideally the competition needs to be reduced to 10 teams with the scope to increase to 11, 12 or 13 clubs as and when the sport can afford it.

 

Having franchising or licensing doesn't cut the Championship clubs off it just changes to the rules of entry to the Super League. If a club can get their act together like Warrington then they would have every chance of being admitted.

[Duff Duff]

In NRL terms only 7 Super League clubs would be viewed as being viable. 

 

Wigan

St Helens

Warrington

Bradford

Leeds

Hull FC 

Catalans

 

Huddersfield would be getting put under all sorts of pressure to increase their support and Salford would be given a timeframe to sort themselves out as quickly as possible. The rest of the clubs would be viewed as marginal and compelled to merge or be kicked out of the competition. 

 

Look at the comparative attendances

 

http://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_10175-wigan-top-average-attendance-table.html

 

http://stats.rleague...rowds/2013.html

Edited July 12, 2013 by Duff Duff

[Dave T]

Yes but that is my point. Souths only sorted themselves out once they had been kicked out of the competition. If they had been taken over by Crowe then they would have been forced out of the competition too. Clubs wouldn't be excluded from Super League in perpetuity. If a club like Halifax or Leigh could put together a proper bid for a franchise or licence and prove that they can be viable then could be admitted to Super League. 

 

You are right about the standard of the smaller Super League clubs. They aren't up to it. That is why ideally the competition needs to be reduced to 10 teams with the scope to increase to 11, 12 or 13 clubs as and when the sport can afford it.

 

Having franchising or licensing doesn't cut the Championship clubs off it just changes to the rules of entry to the Super League. If a club can get their act together like Warrington then they would have every chance of being admitted.

And what has been decided so far is that we are heading down to 12 teams. That is positive IMHO. 

 

I'd really like to see quite strict P&R criteria with clubs knowing at the start of the season whether they would be eligible. If a poor club had a good run or got lucky in the playoffs they shouldn't be in. There does need to be criteria.

[Mumby Magic]

Has anyone actually got the stats that Championship attendances have gone down? Is it not taken into considerartion the promotion of relatively well supported Cas and Widnes in recent years?

Edited July 12, 2013 by Mumby Magic

[Padge]

Has anyone actually got the stats that Championship attendances have gone down? Is it not taken into considerartion the promotion of relatively well supported Cas and Widnes in recent years?

[l'angelo mysterioso]

yes but that's just information. It tells us nothing.

[Padge]

yes but that's just information. It tells us nothing.

I appreciate that, but I feel this stuff should be in the public domain, no matter how uncomfortable the facts are.

[Dave T]

I appreciate that, but I feel this stuff should be in the public domain, no matter how uncomfortable the facts are.

The only challenge with those stats is not comparing like for like. Some of those Championship seasons have Hull and other well supported teams in.

 

I know it's pretty difficult (or time-consuming) to compare like for like.

[Ackydave]

Spot on. None of the CC teams are worth having in the top flight. They are small-town 'park football' teams. It would be like the NRL saying the winner of group 9 Country RL can be promoted to the NRL the following season because they won the grand final.

 

Or The English Premier League offering promotion to the winning Blue Square Premier team straight to the EPL.

 

It will all end in disaster and the death of British RL. The only people happy about this are fans of CC clubs, because of their own self-interest.

Don't you dare lecture the likes of Featherstone Rovers about "Self interest". When SL began Rovers and others (i do believe Widnes) Stepped aside to allow the SL structure to take place - despite not being the bottom team. The decision was taken for the good of the game - so where was the self interest in that? After years of being shafted by those at the top table is it any wonder we want a chance in the so called elite game. It's so bloody elite that it can't afford to run its junior development properly and wouldn't know a decent marketing scheme if it grabbed them by the throat.

[Padge]

The only challenge with those stats is not comparing like for like. Some of those Championship seasons have Hull and other well supported teams in.

 

I know it's pretty difficult (or time-consuming) to compare like for like.

 

 

Influences include, clubs involved, unemployment rates, weather patterns and more localised factors such as having a local superstar playing for GB/England.

 

The figures may be simplistic but they are by far better than the figures offered by those arguing the opposite. The outside influences will be small compared to the general trends.

Edited July 12, 2013 by Padge

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

St George IIawarra and West Tigers both have average attendances of 19,000. That is double what the separate clubs in 1998 averaged. If the people of Wakefield and Castleford don't want to get behind a merged side then neither of them should be in Super League. That would concentrate their minds. If feeling are so strong then they might decide it would better to be stand alone outfits outside the competition. So be it. That is what North Sydney did in the end.

 

Merged club or no Super League. It is a shame the Super League and the RFL didn't stand firm in the mid 1990s.

Again this not about Australia.

While you are bringing crowds into it would London Broncos have to be told to play lower down due to their embarrassing attendances?

[robinson2]

When the NSWRL expanded into Canberra, they ensured that the Raiders would have a winning team. The presence of Mal Meninga helped of course. Newtown just had to go.

Admittedly, they were found to be in breach of the salary cap but as far as I'm aware, it didn't lead to them being stripped of their dual Premierships. Maybe someone else can shed light on it but the basic point still stands.

England is not Australia but as a fan from outside the heartlands with no self-interest in whatever structure is adopted, I always thought it was wise to follow best practice.

On a final point, surely someone goes to watch rugby league because they're a fan of a) their chosen club and the sport in general - surely (finances permitting) it shouldn't be support so fickle as to depend on an opinion formed on the structure of the competition? Easy for me to say but I wish we had professional sport (Ulster rugby aside) where I lived!

[Dave T]

 

 

 

Influences include, clubs involved, unemployment rates, weather patterns and more localised factors such as having a local superstar playing for GB/England.

 

The figures may be simplistic but they are by far better than the figures offered by those arguing the opposite. The outside influences will be small compared to the general trends.

 

Absolutely and I do enjoy readying the stats you put up, it does read as though the average gate at 2nd tier clubs has dropped since licensing was introduced, but still nowhere near as low as some would suggest.

[l'angelo mysterioso]

Don't you dare lecture the likes of Featherstone Rovers about "Self interest". When SL began Rovers and others (i do believe Widnes) Stepped aside to allow the SL structure to take place - despite not being the bottom team. The decision was taken for the good of the game - so where was the self interest in that? After years of being shafted by those at the top table is it any wonder we want a chance in the so called elite game. It's so bloody elite that it can't afford to run its junior development properly and wouldn't know a decent marketing scheme if it grabbed them by the throat.

 

Don't you dare lecture the likes of Featherstone Rovers about "Self interest". When SL began Rovers and others (i do believe Widnes) Stepped aside to allow the SL structure to take place - despite not being the bottom team. The decision was taken for the good of the game - so where was the self interest in that? After years of being shafted by those at the top table is it any wonder we want a chance in the so called elite game. It's so bloody elite that it can't afford to run its junior development properly and wouldn't know a decent marketing scheme if it grabbed them by the throat.

no they didn't

they had no choice

 

although they did vote for the new system

 

FFS not shafted again.

 

the victim cul;ture seems to have a life of its own.

Edited July 12, 2013 by l'angelo mysterioso