Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 4.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

you counter yourself with this comment! You say to drop to ten strong clubs, then you through one in to make up the numbers!

Also why widnes you could add any club to make up the numbers!

If you had ten with p&r then this tenth spot would be the yoyo spot.....

FWIW salford would be in my ten instead of widnes......

The Yo-Yo spot is a great thought!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference is I would have P&R do that selection... rather that an individuals or group thinking based upon some criteria that would almost certainly include self interest/centered, prejudiced/bias thinking upon future factors that may well not be fully assessed and would certainly upset large pools of fans that it would be a such a negative impact as to accelerate a downward spiral rather than revitilize the sport.   (not saying you are being self interest/centered just that it would be hard for any selection group not to be)

Well I'd like the ten not to be reliant on rich men running up directors loan debts and coveting remaining assets, using this false income to paper over the cracks in their clubs.

P & R allows the richest owners who come and go to effectively "buy" a Superleague place. It's bad business for me?

Edited by The Parksider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'd like the ten not to be reliant on rich men running up directors loan debts and coveting remaining assets, using this false income to paper over the cracks in their clubs.

P & R allows the richest owners who come and go to effectively "buy" a Superleague place. It's bad business for me?

Didn't Warrington do that? They have gone on to be a strong well run club (looking in from the outside).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? Do you mean how the game should be structured?

Did we leave the point? What did I miss??

 

To be fair, this thread is now a huge amalgam of threads.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hull KR.

Hull is already well served by a club who were winning things and getting to the grand final, then HKR came along just at the same time Hull's crowds were getting up to 13,000 average.

The derby at the KC was a sell out and after that it was downhill from there for them both. This last season the Derby IIRC wasn't sold out and Hull are down to trying to use HKR for obtaining decent players.

We don't need clubs fighting for the same resources. It's a Padge staple that and I agree with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Warrington do that? They have gone on to be a strong well run club (looking in from the outside).

It's a decent example. IIRC Warrington were a sizeable club anyway, never been in the second division, then the new ground was a BIG catalyst for crowds growth. Mr. Moran's money was welcome in that he then built a trophy winning side.

I haven't time to list all the rich men whose money really had no effect other than to their own purpose.....Hughes, Samuels, Wilkinson, Richardson, Johnston, Fulton, etc.

I won't say Hudgell TBF we still need to see if his ground developments may pay off??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The failing team in any given season needs to be replaced by the best of the rest.

I asked you several pages ago if you would have applied that principle in 2012 when Widnes came bottom of SL and Sheffield were Grand Final winners of the CC. You ducked the question. Would you now like to answer me?

Edited by The Parksider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hull is already well served by a club who were winning things and getting to the grand final, then HKR came along just at the same time Hull's crowds were getting up to 13,000 average.

The derby at the KC was a sell out and after that it was downhill from there for them both. This last season the Derby IIRC wasn't sold out and Hull are down to trying to use HKR for obtaining decent players.

We don't need clubs fighting for the same resources. It's a Padge staple that and I agree with it.

Yeah, because the Cheshire and Merseyside areas aren't already served by two clubs that have won a lot more than Hull that get average crowds of over 10,000.

And Widnes don't sign players from the other hugely successful club slightly further up the road.

My word. You do an' 'alf contradict yourself!

Edited by Wellsy4HullFC
Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not happening Mr. B, but the removal of London is imminent. Bradford and Wakefield offer much much bigger fanbases than Leigh or Halifax, but my point all along has been to ensure "Everything has to be concentrated on the top level" by dropping SL to 10 clubs based on the ten strongest areas, Leeds, bradford/pennine. Wakefield/calder, Hull, St.helens/Liverpool, Wigan/Greater manchester, Widnes/halton, Warrington/Cheshire, The catalans region and France/Toulouse.

Then the target you quote has the best chance of happening with one club in each area.

I agree Superleague is a significant failure for sure on more that one level, but on what basis do you believe Leigh and Halifax are the solution. Again they can't produce professional players nor can they stop their crowds dropping??

On your main point of "Missing fans" two points.

1. This is a myth as far as Club RL goes. The number of fans we have now is thousands and thousands more that in 1995 b.s.(Before SL)

2. The world cup brought out thousands of missing fans for the spectacle of Elite International RL. These are the fans who are missing at games and it seems logical to me they want to see top class Rugby league.

So make a proper top class Superleague to attract them. Don't water it down to being something from the past that did not attract the number of fans we have today.

The fans were attracted to the world Cup for the spectacle of international RL both elite and not so elite. The massive attendances were for Australia, New Zealand and England games, the elite and the pretty damn good attendances were for the not so elite of Scotland, France, Cook Islands, Ireland,Wales, USA, Tonga and Samoa.

These attendances were at such places as Workington, twice, Leigh, Rochdale, Halifax and Bristol. That would seem to indicate go me that maybe there is a market for elite teams at any of these locations. Now it is up to the RL to re introduce p and r and we will see if any of those missing and new supporters would flock to these areas if the Championship teams there can develop and get promoted to the top tier.,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is - what are criteria for "winning the right" ?

 

The teams currently in $uperleague have "won the right" by winning in the franchise process.

They didn't win anything. they were awarded a licence by a committee. The results of those choices have been multiple bankruptcies. We could have achieved the same results by sticking with p and r. Oh, hang on, we did better than that. Huddersfield, Hull KR and Castleford were all promoted and are all still alive and kicking in SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hull is already well served by a club who were winning things and getting to the grand final, then HKR came along just at the same time Hull's crowds were getting up to 13,000 average.

The derby at the KC was a sell out and after that it was downhill from there for them both. This last season the Derby IIRC wasn't sold out and Hull are down to trying to use HKR for obtaining decent players.

We don't need clubs fighting for the same resources. It's a Padge staple that and I agree with it.

And the difference between that scenario and the Widnes/ Warrington scenario is what ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked you several pages ago if you would have applied that principle in 2012 when Widnes came bottom of SL and Sheffield were Grand Final winners of the CC. You ducked the question. Would you now like to answer me?

I don't think I did duck it. I said that Sheffield were your dream of a big city team but you poo pooed that referencing Sheff wed and Sheff U.

I said that if Sheffield met the standards that I would have in place for grand final winners, especially as regards finance, I would have them in SL.

You then went on a tangent about the standards demanding chapter and verse and I countered that an independent body without votes for SL clubs should decide that but adequate finances would be a big part of it.

You then went on another tangent about there being no rich men willing to support CC clubs even though there are at least two now and have been two others in the past.

I have no beef with Widnes. I think if they are in SL and don't finish in a relegation spot, more power to them. I don;'t think they should merge with Warrington like you Lyndsay disciples do. I don't think Sheffield should merge with Huddersfield either as one of the clubs ceases to exist but that's another story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its quite clear that anyone who champions P&R clearly have no conception of modern sport!

Comparing RL to promotion in soccer is laughable!

Some people need to take the blinkers off!

So are you saying that Premier league soccer is not a successful, modern sport ? Are you saying that top tier RU is not a modern sport despite in the past having neither leagues or p and r but now they think that's the way to go.?

So despite such teams as Bradford City, Barnsley, Blackpool, QPR, Wigan, Charlton, Portsmouth and Hull City being allowed elevation to the premier League via p and r without the Premier League World ending, that we can't do that in RL because it's laughable.

I'll tell what's laughable, the thought that if Everton went bankrupt twice in three years with plunging crowds and playing in their old outdated stadium, that they wouldn't have been demoted by the governing body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are you saying that Premier league soccer is not a successful, modern sport ? Are you saying that top tier RU is not a modern sport despite in the past having neither leagues or p and r but now they think that's the way to go.?

So despite such teams as Bradford City, Barnsley, Blackpool, QPR, Wigan, Charlton, Portsmouth and Hull City being allowed elevation to the premier League via p and r without the Premier League World ending, that we can't do that in RL because it's laughable.

I'll tell what's laughable, the thought that if Everton went bankrupt twice in three years with plunging crowds and playing in their old outdated stadium, that they wouldn't have been demoted by the governing body.

sorry I should have pointed out P&R between pros and amateur set ups....

why pick everton? Several clubs have got bankrupt and you have listed a fair few!! Portsmouth didnt get demoted just a points deduction and early tv payments, leeds got a points deduction etc......

Soccer promotes a multi million pound club in place of another, its laughable that in RL you want to replace a multi million pound club with a club that cant even turn over 1 million! Its painful you are embarrassing yourself pretending this isnt the case after much evidence to support otherwise!

What has RU got to do with it?

Edited by yipyee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Widnes/Warrington scenario is the same as the Keighley/Bradford scanario.

You set that out quite well. Don't fall over yourself to disagree with me.

You are scrambling now. Are you of the opinion that Keighley, a lower CC team affect Bradford's attendances and take players that would be better off at Odsal.

I wish it were so. Even at the height of Cougarmania the club was no threat to Bradford except in Caisley's mind.

Plus Keighley and Bradford are not neighbours in the same way as the Hulls and the Cheshire duo are. There has been a whole thread on that with chapter and verse as to why not.

But the question was " What is the difference between the HULL/Hull KR scenario and the Widnes/ Warrington scenario and how can you champion one solution for the one and the opposite solution for the other"?

You either live by the merger argument or you don't. you want it both ways and when questioned introduce a third scenario which is not relevant. So irrelevant, in fact, that even the Lord God Lindsay, the high priest of mergers, didn't suggest it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.