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

[Griff]

 Dissent is healthy. Decisions should always be questioned and challenged.

 

Tell that to the referees!!

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

With over 204 pages and counting of this thread, has anyone mentioned Nazis yet?

[John Drake]

With over 204 pages and counting of this thread, has anyone mentioned Nazis yet?

 

No, it's just you!

[John Drake]

Tell that to the referees!!

 

Fair point!

 

Though of course referees are never, ever wrong!

[GaryO]

Has anyone opposed to the new format talked about boycotts, or the death of the game, or any of that other nonsense? No. You've won the argument, in the short term anyway, so how about simply enjoying it? 

 

I'm not sure what's worse, moaning northerners or gloating ones.

 

Think I denoted a touch of the Fletcher Christians in the post below

 

Thats how i see it as well. I think as a last resort ( so to speak )  Sl could run itself, I believe it to be a business, as well as a sport, and they have top business people now.   Without SL the RFL would be in nowhere land

[Father Ted]

I hope some of these clubs have done their crowd estimates and financial consequencies of what they've voted for.

The clubs at the bottom end of SL have voted for immediate relegation this season then the following season dumping two fixtures against SL clubs and bringing in three games against Championship clubs.

We all know what happens to crowds when SL clubs play Championship clubs in the C Cup. The SL club only opens two stands instead of four because the crowds will be so poor.

These clubs at the bottom end of SL are the ones already in financial trouble. Swapping two SL fixtures for matches against Championship clubs is a real financial risk!

Have they really done their maths on this?

[JohnM]

It's not the role of a journalist to 'sell' the party line, whatever that may be at the time. Dissent is healthy. Decisions should always be questioned and challenged. The good ones will stand the test of time regardless. The bad ones can only be improved by a bit of scrutiny. Rugby League is strong enough to cope with a few opinions flying around.

 

Journalists  and their organs cannot be cheerleaders for the game, as you quite rightly point out.  Facts, opinions, analysis, controversy, debate and discussion are all good.  At issue is the question of  attitude. Of course, it is very easy to tweet first and think later, something you might expect from us animated amateurs. But Irvine is supposed to be a professional. He should not in my view be using the medium to engage in cheap sniping. That is my job.

[a.n Other]

We all know what happens to crowds when SL clubs play Championship clubs in the C Cup. The SL club only opens two stands instead of four because the crowds will be so poor.

These clubs at the bottom end of SL are the ones already in financial trouble. Swapping two SL fixtures for matches against Championship clubs is a real financial risk!

Have they really done their maths on this?

Which would draw a bigger crowd Bradford v Salford in a end of season SL fixture or Bradford v Fax where promotion / Relegation is at stake?

[John Drake]

I agree. However, I can't remember licensing or the giving of grading etc being scrutinised in much detail by the RL press though. I could be wrong.

 

I think licensing has been scrutinised constantly in many quarters, including the press, ever since (and well before) it was introduced. Hard to ignore a topic that is/was so divisive. I know, as a former editor of Rugby League World myself, that we ran plenty of articles and editorials about it in the magazine. And I'd receive an equal amount of criticism from those who said we should shut up about it and focus on 'the game' and from those who said we should do more to expose its faultlines, which led me to believe we'd pitched the balance about right.

[Griff]

 

.......... then the following season dumping two fixtures against SL clubs and bringing in three games against Championship clubs.

Have they really done their maths on this?

 

Those three extra games won't be against Championship clubs.  It'll be a mixture of $uperleague and Championship clubs.

[thundergaz]

I hope some of these clubs have done their crowd estimates and financial consequencies of what they've voted for.

The clubs at the bottom end of SL have voted for immediate relegation this season then the following season dumping two fixtures against SL clubs and bringing in three games against Championship clubs.

We all know what happens to crowds when SL clubs play Championship clubs in the C Cup. The SL club only opens two stands instead of four because the crowds will be so poor.

These clubs at the bottom end of SL are the ones already in financial trouble. Swapping two SL fixtures for matches against Championship clubs is a real financial risk!

Have they really done their maths on this?

Of course they have the money they will lose on crowds will be made back by not spending as much as they currently do on their salary cap. These so called poor SL clubs can now spend less on their cap if they get relegated. Also I'm sure most of them voted for this for that reason as they can't afford top flight rugby anymore. The so called poor SL clubs can now also spend less on their cap if they stay in the big 12 as I can't see wakey , bulls and London etc breaking into the top 8 anytime soon so they can spend say a mil on the cap and hope they can still fight off the top champ clubs its a win win for the poorer SL clubs IMO.

[gingerjon]

Of course they have the money they will lose on crowds will be made back by not spending as much as they currently do on their salary cap. These so called poor SL clubs can now spend less on their cap if they get relegated. Also I'm sure most of them voted for this for that reason as they can't afford top flight rugby anymore. The so called poor SL clubs can now also spend less on their cap if they stay in the big 12 as I can't see wakey , bulls and London etc breaking into the top 8 anytime soon so they can spend say a mil on the cap and hope they can still fight off the top champ clubs its a win win for the poorer SL clubs IMO.

 

And thus the mediocrity spreads.

 

Get ready for the middle 8 rather than aim for the top.

[John Drake]

Journalists  and their organs cannot be cheerleaders for the game, as you quite rightly point out.  Facts, opinions, analysis, controversy, debate and discussion are all good.  At issue is the question of  attitude. Of course, it is very easy to tweet first and think later, something you might expect from us animated amateurs. But Irvine is supposed to be a professional. He should not in my view be using the medium to engage in cheap sniping. That is my job.

 

Journalists are not a universal breed. Thank goodness! There are lots of different attitudes, opinions and styles of writing. You pays yer money, you makes yer choice. No one's forced to read anyone's output on any media channel, whether it be print, online or social media. If someone annoys you on twitter, whoever it may be, just unfollow them.

 

But why do any of us follow people we may disagree with on twitter, or read their opinions in other media? Because, in my view, it's healthy to have your own views challenged from time to time. Sure, it can be annoying, but it does make you think about your own position on things, even if it only makes you more certain that they are wrong and you are right.

 

It would be incredibly dull if no one ever challenged anything for the fear of causing annoyance, and for a journalist, it would be worse than that, an abdication of responsibility.

[thundergaz]

And thus the mediocrity spreads.

Get ready for the middle 8 rather than aim for the top.

My thoughts exactly jon. I'm all for P&R but this system will make the stronger teams stronger and the weaker teams weaker and let them live within their means.

[gingerjon]

Journalists are not a universal breed. Thank goodness! There are lots of different attitudes, opinions and styles of writing. You pays yer money, you makes yer choice. No one's forced to read anyone's output on any media channel, whether it be print, online or social media. If someone annoys you on twitter, whoever it may be, just unfollow them.

 

But why do any of us follow people we may disagree with on twitter, or read their opinions in other media? Because, in my view, it's healthy to have your own views challenged from time to time. Sure, it can be annoying, but it does make you think about your own position on things, even if it only makes you more certain that they are wrong and you are right.

 

It would be incredibly dull if no one ever challenged anything for the fear of causing annoyance, and for a journalist, it would be worse than that, an abdication of responsibility.

 

The issue I think we all have is that some RL journalists seem to find it remarkably hard to say anything at all positive about anything to do with the game ever.  In fact, almost seem to go out of their way to negatively spin anything and everything to do with the game.

 

We don't have many outlets in the wider media so to have the only visible line always be the negative one is frustrating.

[Just Browny]

It's not a promotion play off.

 

It's a million pound sudden death match.

 

My God, that's embarrassing and desperate.

[Scubby]

Does a 204-page thread on this show that we truly care about this subject? Or that we are all a bunch of argumentative sods who want the last word?

[JohnM]

Journalists are not a universal breed. Thank goodness! There are lots of different attitudes, opinions and styles of writing. You pays yer money, you makes yer choice. No one's forced to read anyone's output on any media channel, whether it be print, online or social media. If someone annoys you on twitter, whoever it may be, just unfollow them.

 

But why do any of us follow people we may disagree with on twitter, or read their opinions in other media? Because, in my view, it's healthy to have your own views challenged from time to time. Sure, it can be annoying, but it does make you think about your own position on things, even if it only makes you more certain that they are wrong and you are right.

 

It would be incredibly dull if no one ever challenged anything for the fear of causing annoyance, and for a journalist, it would be worse than that, an abdication of responsibility.

 

I probably didn't express myself properly. What I meant to say is that in my opinion Irvine never passes up an opportunity to take cheap and snide shots at the game. That's not journalism, that's arrogance and abuse of position. He has over 5,000 followers on Twitter and I am not one. I now will recommend that they all unfollow him.

[the phoenix]

Wood confirmed that the two teams who finish bottom of Super League this year will be relegated, ruling out any preferential treatment for outpost clubs London Broncos or Catalan Dragons.

The 14 Super League clubs were thought to have voted 7-6 in favour of the new format at their meeting in St Helens last Friday, with the Catalans abstaining, but will still need to give their backing to the planned changes in central funding.

In the RFL's policy review proposals, the Championship clubs were in line to receive as much as £650,000 a year, compared to around £90,000 at present, to enable them to compete on a more level playing field with the existing Super League clubs, who receive in excess of £1m.

"We had an obligation to provide a structure for well-run clubs to succeed while at the same time providing a safe and sensible way for clubs to come out of the top division which doesn't lead to insolvency," Wood said.


interesting points , i had feared that the 12 could be subject to invitation as opposed to bottom 2 going down , also great news about the proposed funding 

[yipyee]

 

 

 

Those three extra games won't be against Championship clubs.  It'll be a mixture of $uperleague and Championship clubs.

 

NO NO NO........

 

4 extra at present....2 home games against SL clubs,

 

7 extra games four against championship clubs...................two at home against Championship clubs!

[Cherry and White]

andy wilsons take.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2014/jan/21/super-league-shake-up-tv-love-affair-rugby?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[GeordieSaint]

Of course they have the money they will lose on crowds will be made back by not spending as much as they currently do on their salary cap.

 

Every single club in SL in 2015 will spend as much money as they possibly can on wages in order to ensure there isn't the slightest chance they'll get beaten by the Championship clubs. If they don't, they lose out on a minimum of £600k from centralised funds the next season AND the valuable added income of travelling support from the likes of Wigan, St Helens, Leeds et al. I think it is very naive on the RFL's and supporters behalf to think this won't happen, especially when two clubs with real financial difficulties disappear at the end of this season.

[Scubby]

My God, that's embarrassing and desperate.

 

Absolutely - terrible. It is a 4th v 5th play off between two teams that may have lost 90% of SL games (1) and maybe only half of the 2x8 games. Under this system the Championship trophy (remember that one? The one for success) is now binned.

 

Say for example it is Wakefield in 2015 who have played 23 regular rounds and lost 20 of them in SL. They then go into the lower division and loose 4 of 7 fixtures against weaker or similar opposition. That would give them a profile of P30 W6 L24. In this scenario:

 

A: What would Wakefield's base crowds have dropped to after losing pretty much all their games for 7 months?

B: Exactly many of these missing supporters would want to turn-up for a one-off game with Leigh to return to SL in 2016 and get hammered all over again?

 

Fans are not stupid. They know when they are being taken for a ride.

Edited January 21, 2014 by Scubby

[thundergaz]

Every single club in SL in 2015 will spend as much money as they possibly can on wages in order to ensure there isn't the slightest chance they'll get beaten by the Championship clubs. If they don't, they lose out on a minimum of £600k from centralised funds the next season AND the valuable added income of travelling support from the likes of Wigan, St Helens, Leeds et al. I think it is very naive on the RFL's and supporters behalf to think this won't happen, especially when two clubs with real financial difficulties disappear at the end of this season.

What I was getting at is the poorer SL clubs can now live within their means with this system. For example say the champ clubs get a 700k cap and SL clubs stay at the 1.8m cap a team like wakey say can spend 1mil on their cap and still be 300k in front of any rival champ club. This allowing them to live within their means and they should easily fight off any champ club challenge with that extra 300k salary cap spend. Lets just say Leigh go for Kevin sinfield and they have 40k cap left and they offer it to sinfield and he as no other offers but say wakey have only spent a mil on their cap. Their chairman would then turn round and say we will give sinfield 50k to fight off the competion or threat from the champ club. What I'm getting at is the Poorer SL clubs can spend less on their cap and live within their means but if they see a threat from the champ clubs they can quickly swat it.

[Griff]

NO NO NO........

 

4 extra at present....2 home games against SL clubs,

 

7 extra games four against championship clubs...................two at home against Championship clubs!

 

Yeah - but he was talking about the home games. The ones they get the gate money from.

 

Well - I took it to be that, anyway.

Edited January 21, 2014 by Griff