Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

I think it is worth stating that at this point there isn't any extra money to share until the SL clubs have met next week and agreed to allow some of "their" money to be used this way.   This was the sticking point when 6 clubs walked out prior to the World Cup and that is still very much up in the air.

 

If the SL clubs don't agree then the Championship clubs will receive exactly what they got this year from central funds - £90k.

 

So the 3x8 may look a teensy weensy bit rigged then??

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not suggesting Denis Betts takes his pearls of wisdom from this forum but according to my lovely copy of LE he is quoted as saying after yesterday's game;

"How you police licensing, that is the problem. If you set out minimum criteria and then you don't stick to it then it's not licensing that failed, it's the way you work it".

Nuff said!

Very true as far as i'm concerned,i'm not sure who to blame though.

If Bradford & Wakefield had been relegated from the league when they went into admin,then we would still have a strong and confident licence system in place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in your expert view no promotion deemed feasible by any team not at this time plying their trade in SL, and if one does manage to escape the net and wriggle through to SL, then they will get hammered each and every week by at least 50+

 

As I questioned what are the supporters of the expected survival fighters afraid off. You quite clearly state it is a non-contest.

 

You end your post with a classic statement "I don't see the benefit for SL......other than there will be meaningful games......"  as I stated more meaningful games means more intensity means better competition, but it seems Sir this is completely left field to you, it is quite obvious you do not want to see a better standard league structure in SL as this may impact your teams survival.

 

Admit it and stop hiding behind what you have been saying for a few weeks now in respect of for the good of the game your real objective is SL or nothing for your club, incidentals like improving League Intensity just does not count. 

 

I agree that SL clubs have nothing to fear.......if a club does come up to the 12 it will be one that is relegated this season......also meaningful games doesn't mean the standard is raised, just that the outcome of the game has a meaning....I watched newcastle (soccer) needing to win to prevent relegation....they were awfull no fight....it was a meaningful game but awful as a spectacle....

 

In the CC, sheffield vs London, it wasnt SL quality game, the standard wasnt raised, London went through the motions and won comfortably...

 

As for my side....they played sheffield in 2011 CC, rested half the team and put over 50 on them!! So no worries there then!

 

Oh and the 50+ scores I was referring to was those games in the middle 8 that a current champ side would be competing in.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just answer it honestly: how do you feel about the system we're actually getting. Glad, sad, or something in between. It's not a question about which system you'd prefer. If you asked 100 people which league structure they'd prefer, you'd get 100 different answers, as this thread has illustrated. But 2x12, 3x8 is what we're getting, so the question is about that and that alone.

 

There's no obligation on anyone to vote in the poll at all. It's not binding on anything, as Peter Snow used to say on election night about his swingometer, it's just a bit of fun really.

 

Its a weighted question John, imo aimed at proving a belief held at your HQ. At present we await the level of funding to tier2 if it is that previously muted then we will have 6/7 full time clubs and that imo will provide a vibrant mid 8 comp after a tough league campaign.

Do you prefer a or b would have been better at this stage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the 3x8 may look a teensy weensy bit rigged then??

 

Slightly biased with teams receiving £1.3 million against teams getting £90k, I think!!!

I remember when .............................

"It is impossible not to feel a twinge of sympathy for Workington Town, the fall guys this season for the Super League's determination to retain it's European dimension, in the shape of Paris. While the French have had every assistance to survive, the importance of having a flagship in a heartland area like West Cumbria has been conveniently forgotten." - Dave Hadfield - Independent 25th August 1996.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a weighted question John, imo aimed at proving a belief held at your HQ. At present we await the level of funding to tier2 if it is that previously muted then we will have 6/7 full time clubs and that imo will provide a vibrant mid 8 comp after a tough league campaign.

Do you prefer a or b would have been better at this stage

I don't understand your problem with it.    It has been announced that this is the system we will have from 2015 and all the poll asks is whether you or me or anyone else is very happy or very unhappy or anywhere else on a scale between the two.    You seem to be unhappy about it so vote that way.  Simples.

I remember when .............................

"It is impossible not to feel a twinge of sympathy for Workington Town, the fall guys this season for the Super League's determination to retain it's European dimension, in the shape of Paris. While the French have had every assistance to survive, the importance of having a flagship in a heartland area like West Cumbria has been conveniently forgotten." - Dave Hadfield - Independent 25th August 1996.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true as far as i'm concerned,i'm not sure who to blame though.

If Bradford & Wakefield had been relegated from the league when they went into admin,then we would still have a strong and confident licence system in place

 

We couldn't have done because there were no clubs who met minimum standard to replace them. All four CC clubs didn't meet the fans criteria of 2,500, one club had a poor business plan, one club was in financial difficulties and another had £800,000 liabilities. Only two had fourth rate academies the RFL classed as "weak".

 

There cannot be a "strong licensing system" when only 4 clubs met the requirements in full. The reason clubs got away with being poor in Superleague was the replacements were even poorer. We seem to maintain the myth that the only reason clubs didn't improve themselves was that they were lazy and it just needed them to be "strongly managed".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is about as good a summary of why licencing didn't work as I can think of.  The lack of transparency and the woeful management of it.

 

But it's all fine now because the RFL have committed to lower standards and less monitoring.

 

What's not transparent ?

 

I don't subscribe to this idea that businesses should open their books to their nosy customers and nosy customers of rivals.  No other business does it - why should Rugby League clubs ?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can the RFL make the Championship clubs go full-time or can everyone (except maybe Featherstone and the 2 demoted SL clubs) just take the money, say "thanks very much" and keep going as per normal?

 

Sure - they can make conditions if they wish.  But there's been no suggestion that they will.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a weighted question John, imo aimed at proving a belief held at your HQ. At present we await the level of funding to tier2 if it is that previously muted then we will have 6/7 full time clubs and that imo will provide a vibrant mid 8 comp after a tough league campaign.

Do you prefer a or b would have been better at this stage

 

Ok, I get it. I'll never get a job at YouGov or MORI or Gallup (other polling organisations are available). :help:

 

But in all sincerity, the poll isn't there to prove or disprove anything. I just made it up, off the top of my head, on my own initiative, this morning. No one at LE asked me to put a poll up, and it isn't in the paper. It was intended to be a bit of fun on the website, that's all. To me, that's all it still is or ever should be.

 

For what it's worth (nothing), I voted for option 5 (not bothered at all).

 

I just can't emotionally attach myself to league structures or dive into a trench to defend one variety over another. They come, they go. None of them are ever perfect. I hope the latest one achieves positive things for our sport and all involved in it. I always hope that, so we don't have to have another one later.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's not transparent ?

 

I don't subscribe to this idea that businesses should open their books to their nosy customers and nosy customers of rivals.  No other business does it - why should Rugby League clubs ?

 

If what is meant is opening up the books to see why the clubs hadn't properly staffed the academy, aren't marketing properly, haven't got the ground, are not spending the full cap etc then the answer is the patently obvious.....

 

That they didn't have the money to do these things. Unless any of them were syphoning the £hundreds of thousands standards needed off to Swiss bank accounts. Money is something constantly ignored at each twist and turn of the debate. It's the classic myth that the SL clubs were "badly managed" and top CC clubs are "well managed".

 

It's transparent the lot of them were/are skint I tell thee!!

Edited by The Parksider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's not transparent ?

 

I don't subscribe to this idea that businesses should open their books to their nosy customers and nosy customers of rivals.  No other business does it - why should Rugby League clubs ?

Specifically I was meaning the RFL decision making and governance side of licensing. I tend to agree with you about clubs and their books.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a free werld. Wy not take up jernolism youself?  :biggrin:  :biggrin:  :biggrin:  :biggrin:

 

Its a free werld. Wy not take up jernolism youself?  :biggrin:  :biggrin:  :biggrin:  :biggrin:

Tell you what instead of being a bore about my english skills, why do you not answer some of my points...............................  I have stated how fev have spent their cash and everyone has gone quiet.!

VIVA THE FEVOLUTION

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We couldn't have done because there were no clubs who met minimum standard to replace them. All four CC clubs didn't meet the fans criteria of 2,500, one club had a poor business plan, one club was in financial difficulties and another had £800,000 liabilities. Only two had fourth rate academies the RFL classed as "weak".

 

There cannot be a "strong licensing system" when only 4 clubs met the requirements in full. The reason clubs got away with being poor in Superleague was the replacements were even poorer. We seem to maintain the myth that the only reason clubs didn't improve themselves was that they were lazy and it just needed them to be "strongly managed".

If the powers that be deemed no club was good enough to replace Wakefield,then IMO, the league should have run with 13 clubs, when magic weekend came round, then Catalan should have been given two points,compensated, and told to stay in France.

It would have shown everyone that the league wont accept failure in a licenced league

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some interesting points from the Swiss regarding this league format...

From the 10th game the pressure began [to be involved in the top eight] and this pressure made the clubs really careless - signing players, changing the coach and taking financial risks. Apart from the few big clubs, it was not sustainable.

They intended to make the whole thing a little bit more interesting for the public. But in the end, the difference between the teams in the 'championship' league and the teams from the second division was too big, so it wasn't interesting at all.

Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change

Switzerland did not have the strength in depth to increase the size of their top flight to 16 or 18 teams. And while two leagues of 12 with an 8-8-8 split was viewed as a compromise, sponsors were not keen to be associated with the bottom 16 after the split.

“It was very complicated for television and sponsors who didn’t want to be associated with any meaningless matches. It is much easier to have two separate divisions.

“The second part of the season, with eight clubs playing for the title, was as successful as the current system. But fans were not turning up in the same numbers, especially at the start of the season or when the games didn’t matter as much."

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/swiss-football-chiefs-slam-scotlands-1524036

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313899

Totally irreverent water muddying,   It does not take into account: available talent pool, funding, distribution, and so on and so on and so on.   It suited them will enough for over a decade, things changes?

VIVA THE FEVOLUTION

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honest question. Are the third tier of 3x8 playing for any kind of trophy? If so, how would anyone have the cheek to celebrate it? If not, what are they playing for (other than the bottom 1/2 finishers)?

 

I can't remember it's exact title, but I think it was Championship Play Off Champions. So yes, I think they will.

 

They'll be playing for an increased disbursement too.  And of course they'll be needing to avoid relegation to C1.  Plenty to play for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a weighted question John, imo aimed at proving a belief held at your HQ. At present we await the level of funding to tier2 if it is that previously muted then we will have 6/7 full time clubs and that imo will provide a vibrant mid 8 comp after a tough league campaign.

Do you prefer a or b would have been better at this stage

 

What's weighted ?

 

Do you like it ?  Yes or no ?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Specifically I was meaning the RFL decision making and governance side of licensing. I tend to agree with you about clubs and their books.

 

With respect, I don't see why it should be transparent.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a weighted question John, imo aimed at proving a belief held at your HQ. At present we await the level of funding to tier2 if it is that previously muted then we will have 6/7 full time clubs and that imo will provide a vibrant mid 8 comp after a tough league campaign.

Do you prefer a or b would have been better at this stage

 

You are perfectly at liberty to set up your own poll. 

Four legs good - two legs bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...