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

[Bomballey]

Exactly. Surely The whole point of sport is competition and that includes both promotion and relegation or what's the point. We must look to strengthen the lower leagues so that when a team is relegated from the top tier the league below is appealing to fans and has a clear unrestricted pathway back to the top tier.

Yep. Cas are my team & would be as vulnerable as any club but there has to be something at stake for it to mean something

[The Parksider]

What do you make of the fact that from the start of SL championship clubs' aggregate attendances were growing in line with the SL clubs growth and the slump occurred, not with changes in P&R between the top and second tier and not when licensing was introduced, but when the decision was made to introduce a third division. The exact same slump can be seen in 91/92 and 95/96 and recovery is just as stark when the championship returns to one division.

 

Supporters of championship clubs are chasing the wrong bogey man.

 

My initial answer is to look at attendances either side of the 2002 (one division championship) and 2003 (championship one and championship two split)

 

Then compare like with like. Leigh, Rochdale, Oldham, Haven, Fev, Donny, Dewsbury HKR & Batley averaged 1,297 crowds in 2002 and in their own "elite" of 10 clubs 2003 averaged 1,365.

 

The sides cut adrift like Workington, Barrow, Keighley, Swinton and Hunslet were on an average of 836 in 2002 and relegation to effectively a third division saw them on 704 in 2003. There you have the initial effect of a third division.

 

I won't conclude anything other than divisions depress crowds in one way but improve them in other ways.

 

As I say a drop from 14 Superleague clubs to 12 superleague clubs will on paper see a rise in SL crowds of possibly 500 fans every match  as two clubs with poorer attendances go.

 

Being totally pragmatic here the financial collapse of the two relegated SL clubs (ref: Martyn Sadler)  may see the average attendance in the so called SL2 not rise on the addition of two bust clubs?

 

So pragmatically again two x 12 clubs may see the second tier's attendances still hover around just over the 1,000 mark. Leaving SL clubs ten times better supported. Add a sugar daddy and your "enormous gap" is revealed.

 

It's not a gap conducive to P & R working at all.

Edited July 14, 2013 by The Parksider

[sweaty craiq]

Crowd manipulation is easy, look at Man U as the classic example last year, its not turnstyle clicks but tickets sold. So lets say Featherstone provide 1000 free season tickets to schoolkids, that's 1000 tickets they cant sell for the game so they include the 1000 in every gate declared. Would they have done anything wrong - No. Would it look better having a 2600 average as opposed to 1600 - Yes.

[Griff]

Why bother ?

Just say you've got more than you have. It can help, say, meet a requirement to have an average crowd of 2500.

[Padge]

Crowd manipulation is easy, look at Man U as the classic example last year, its not turnstyle clicks but tickets sold. So lets say Featherstone provide 1000 free season tickets to schoolkids, that's 1000 tickets they cant sell for the game so they include the 1000 in every gate declared. Would they have done anything wrong - No. Would it look better having a 2600 average as opposed to 1600 - Yes.

The manipulation claimed though, is downwards for criminal tax evasion, not upwards as a marketing tool.

 

At any sports ground used for professional events with a capacity of over 5,000 it is a criminal offence to not know accurately how many people are in attendance and to not record that attendance figure.

 

Whether people pay or not is neither here nor there it is the attendance figure that is crucial.

[Padge]

Exactly. Surely The whole point of sport is competition and that includes both promotion and relegation or what's the point. 

 

So why is Australian RL so popular, surely without relegation and promotion the whole thing should have collapsed by now.

 

British RL had its highest attendances when it had no promotion and relegation, the game has had no promotion and relegation for 80% of the time it has existed. It was tried and failed in the sixties, it was one of the major causes of the split from union, the Senior Clubs didn't want automatic P&R when they first set up divisions in the 1880s.

[Padge]

I have just relegated this post 

Edited July 14, 2013 by Padge

[Bomballey]

So why is Australian RL so popular, surely without relegation and promotion the whole thing should have collapsed by now.

British RL had its highest attendances when it had no promotion and relegation, the game has had no promotion and relegation for 80% of the time it has existed. It was tried and failed in the sixties, it was one of the major causes of the split from union, the Senior Clubs didn't want automatic P&R when they first set up divisions in the 1880s.

That is such a great point. So why are the RL leadership team bringing it back?

Isn't this one of our key issues? Constantly tinkering with formats?

I guess one of the unpalatable truths is we have to dance to SKY's tune

[Padge]

That is such a great point. So why are the RL leadership team bringing it back?

Isn't this one of our key issues? Constantly tinkering with formats?

I guess one of the unpalatable truths is we have to dance to SKY's tune

If Sky want P&R then Sky should pay for it, they should increase funding so that the gap between SL and championship is manageable. If they aren't prepared to fund it then I don't see why we should risk all the gains we have made over the past years to give them something that may produce one interesting game every 10 years for them to televise.

[Griff]

The manipulation claimed though, is downwards for criminal tax evasion, not upwards as a marketing tool.

That's a very bold accusation. Any evidence of it ?

 

At any sports ground used for professional events with a capacity of over 5,000 it is a criminal offence to not know accurately how many people are in attendance and to not record that attendance figure.

 

Whether people pay or not is neither here nor there it is the attendance figure that is crucial.

This is all a bit of a myth. Yes - clubs need to know how many are in the ground. Yes - they need to record it. No - they've absolutely no legal obligation to announce the attendance to the public at large.

[JohnM]

If Sky want P&R then Sky should pay for it, they should increase funding so that the gap between SL and championship is manageable. If they aren't prepared to fund it then I don't see why we should risk all the gains we have made over the past years to give them something that may produce one interesting game every 10 years for them to televise.

If Lobby wants p and r, he should pay for it.

[JohnM]

That is such a great point. So why are the RL leadership team bringing it back?

Isn't this one of our key issues? Constantly tinkering with formats?

I guess one of the unpalatable truths is we have to dance to SKY's tune

But are they bringing p and r back?

[JohnM]

The manipulation claimed though, is downwards for criminal tax evasion, not upwards as a marketing tool.

At any sports ground used for professional events with a capacity of over 5,000 it is a criminal offence to not know accurately how many people are in attendance and to not record that attendance figure.

Whether people pay or not is neither here nor there it is the attendance figure that is crucial.

5000? That'll let Fev off the hook for the forseeable future.

[Padge]

That's a very bold accusation. Any evidence of it ?

 

This is all a bit of a myth. Yes - clubs need to know how many are in the ground. Yes - they need to record it. No - they've absolutely no legal obligation to announce the attendance to the public at large.

On point one I didn't make the claim. I have said that its a ridiculous claim but people keep making it.

 

Point two, they have no legal obligation to make the figure public, correct, However it wouldn't be long before a disgruntled employee produced figures to show that published figures where lies. Strange that nobody at any club EVER has blown the whistle, and there must be a hell of a lot of disgruntled ex RL employees out there who have access.

 

I just don't buy this every club is falsifying the figures for every game. Its an utter nonsense.

[The Parksider]

That is such a great point. So why are the RL leadership team bringing it back?

Isn't this one of our key issues? Constantly tinkering with formats?

I guess one of the unpalatable truths is we have to dance to SKY's tune

 

They aren't bringing it back because it's effective and exciting.

 

They are bringing it back in the wake of clubs going backwards at the bottom end of Superleague and their chairmen refusing to invest any more money.

 

IMHO it has now become the lesser of two evils.

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

But are they bringing p and r back?

Unfortunately for you yes

[Padge]

Unfortunately for you yes

 

I don't think it will cause John any major problems,

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

So why is Australian RL so popular, surely without relegation and promotion the whole thing should have collapsed by now.

 

We are not in Australia. Different nationalities have different cultures, in Britain P and R is the sporting way and its on its way back.

[Padge]

We are not in Australia. Different nationalities have different cultures, in Britain P and R is the sporting way and its on its way back.

It hasn't been the way in RL for 80% of its existance, check your history.

 

We have no culture of P&R at all.

[Guest]

So why is Australian RL so popular, surely without relegation and promotion the whole thing should have collapsed by now.

 

British RL had its highest attendances when it had no promotion and relegation, the game has had no promotion and relegation for 80% of the time it has existed. It was tried and failed in the sixties, it was one of the major causes of the split from union, the Senior Clubs didn't want automatic P&R when they first set up divisions in the 1880s.

I could be wrong but there's never been promotion and relegation in australian rugby league so its not part of their sporting culture. I could swing it round and ask why premier league football which has P&R is the most popular sport in the UK with some of the biggest crowds in world football if not the biggest and is regarded as the best league in the world?

[Guest]

So why is Australian RL so popular, surely without relegation and promotion the whole thing should have collapsed by now.

 

British RL had its highest attendances when it had no promotion and relegation, the game has had no promotion and relegation for 80% of the time it has existed. It was tried and failed in the sixties, it was one of the major causes of the split from union, the Senior Clubs didn't want automatic P&R when they first set up divisions in the 1880s.

I could be wrong but there's never been promotion and relegation in australian rugby league so its not part of their sporting culture. I could swing it round and ask why premier league football which has P&R is the most popular sport in the UK with some of the biggest crowds in world football if not the biggest and is regarded as the best league in the world?

[ChrisGS]

Promotion and relegation, like much of football, is a joke. The sooner British league fans stop believing that English football has a blueprint we should be following the better. English football does well in spite of its idiotic and archaic nature.

 

The Americans have shown the world how to run professional sport in the 21st century. Let's stop with this delusional (sporting) nationalism. P & R isn't going to work no matter how much you like the idea, or how British you think it is.

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

It hasn't been the way in RL for 80% of its existance, check your history.

 

We have no culture of P&R at all.

Yes we do and have I told you that its back because it's needed to sort out the mess left by licensing. Without P and R Super League was always going to be snooze fest for games towards the bottom of the league. I know you don't like being wrong but read the press release 1 more time, P and R is back because licensing failed, end of.

[Padge]

I could be wrong but there's never been promotion and relegation in australian rugby league so its not part of their sporting culture. I could swing it round and ask why premier league football which has P&R is the most popular sport in the UK with some of the biggest crowds in world football if not the biggest and is regarded as the best league in the world?

I presume your comment about soccer is a joke.

 

RL never had P&R when it was at its most popular and competed with soccer as far as crowds went.

 

This game has not had a culture of P&R, it has been tried three times and failed three times, why should it work by trying it again.

 

County cricket introduced divisions and P&R thinking it would drag people in, it hasn't it has failed completely in its intentions. The counties still wouldn't survive without central funding from the money generated by the international game.

.

[Padge]

Yes we do and have I told you that its back because it's needed to sort out the mess left by licensing. Without P and R Super League was always going to be snooze fest for games towards the bottom of the league. I know you don't like being wrong but read the press release 1 more time, P and R is back because licensing failed, end of.

The game has a culture of one division and play-offs, that is the culture of the game, you can claim whatever you want, history will tell you that you are wrong not me.