Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Well then let's see if Wigan can swim without licensing to protect them?

 

OK - I reckon they will.  What do you reckon ?

 

What exactly is the point you're making ?  Is there one ?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

OK - I reckon they will.  What do you reckon ?

 

What exactly is the point you're making ?  Is there one ?

The point is, licensing doesn't protect teams that don't finish bottom, which London didn't.

 

In the last few years, it has protected Crusaders, Catalans, Widnes and Salford.

 

Although if you want to expand it to 2 teams relegated, then yes it has protected London, along with the above mentioned and Wakefield and Castleford, but either way it seems pointless to single them out on this basis

Check out upcoming international fixtures and highlights of past matches at http://rlfixtures.weebly.com

 

St Albans Centurions International Liaison Officer and former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.

Moderator of the International board

Link to comment
Share on other sites

London never came bottom, suggest we look at the facts.

 

If you look at the history Richard Lewis rescued London from being booted out of SL and had them re-instated alongside Les Catalans and he introduced a quasi-licence for Catalans protecting them from relegation. So Lewis was protectionist IMVHO.

 

Then when full licensing came in he could then ensure that London, Wales and France were protected in Superleague, so his expansion policy was protected and they could "grow". Protectionism again?

 

As it was Crusaders collapsed but still got a licence - protected or what??

 

Were London 2011 up to another 3 year licence?? Were crowds improving, results improving, the structures at London improving?? Not at all, they were protected because they were seen as "strategic" as the licensing panel said.

At what point after Crusaders collapsed were they granted a licence?

Edited by brooza

Check out upcoming international fixtures and highlights of past matches at http://rlfixtures.weebly.com

 

St Albans Centurions International Liaison Officer and former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.

Moderator of the International board

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that Les Catalans didn't vote in either vote then they must have wanted the status quo? Therefore everyone was for it so the Status Quo actually won unanimously?

I'm sure I read here that Guasch prefered the status quo of 14 clubs. Catalan not keen on 'R' word!

CEO Jouffret was present at both meetings; think Guasch may have made it to St Helens on Friday.

Edited by audois

"It involves matters much greater than drafting the new rules...the original and existing games have their own powerful appeal to their players and public and have the sentiments which history inspires"  - Harold 'Jersey' Flegg 1933

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."  - Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Si tu( Remi Casty) devais envoyer un fax au Président Guasch? " Un grand bravo pour ce que vous avez fait,et merci de m 'avoir embarqué dans cette aventure"

gallery_02-am31503_5b827265940b7_.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is, licensing doesn't protect teams that don't finish bottom, which London didn't.

 

Look at it this way.  If you wear a hard hat at work, you're still protected, even if no-one drops a hammer on it.

Edited by Griff

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that had the Swiss experiment been a roaring success you would have been one of the first to use it as an example!!!!

These things are progressive so i dare say at some point it was actually a success.  It is still irrelevant to RL in ENGLAND.  And if it does not work in RL it would be changed (thats how it goes).  The only way we will find out is to try! we will not find out by talking the ###### out of it on here!

VIVA THE FEVOLUTION

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do not need to draw anything................................ it is out of our control !!!  and its still irrelevant!

 

1. OK - it's the only experience on which the decision makers can draw as well.

 

2.  Why is it irrelevant ?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's virtually no money trickling down to the third tier so, from 2015 onwards, it's going to be blinkin' hard work for any team to come up from the third tier to the second and stay there.

 

There's very little money trickling down to half the clubs in the Championship as well... we are going to end up with a full time/part time split in that league, never mind Championship 1. So much for the whole game solution!

 

(Last post on the topic... can't be bothered anymore!)

Edited by GeordieSaint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure I read here that Guasch prefered the status quo of 14 clubs. Catalan not keen on 'R' word!

CEO Jouffret was present at both meetings; think Guasch may have made it to St Helens on Friday.

The Dragons abstained so it could be assumed he was there at St Helens otherwise would he have actually been able to lodge an abstention?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, this should get at least as long as licensing. The figures of merit are:

-attendances of all three divisions

-TV revenues and TV viewing figs

-fan contentment

-mobility (I hope to see at least one second div club get into SL per year)

-Increase in no. of UK pro player base

-closer scorelines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These things are progressive so i dare say at some point it was actually a success.  It is still irrelevant to RL in ENGLAND.  And if it does not work in RL it would be changed (thats how it goes).  The only way we will find out is to try! we will not find out by talking the ###### out of it on here!

 

 

Licensing doesn't work you cant compare Aus/USA comps as there is a heritage and culture to UK sports....

 

Oh hang an a second look at what the swiss are doing.......................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all have our thoughts. As it stands today London cannot survive in SL and Featherstone have Nahaboo lined up to bankroll the clubs losses in full. Massive difference.So London relegated. Featherstone stay where they are 2014??.......

 

Then Fev are in the top four 2015 whilst London may even have packed in by then.So there's a swap over with London the team going down down down and Fev going up up but no, I don't see them breaking the top eight.

 

Now if Nahaboo buys out Cas and Wakey and closes them down I can see it, otherwise it's a mid table Calder "derbyfest" year on year......

 

I also note Hudgell lined up with Pearson despite the latter trying to pinch his best players all the time. Hudge was the first to openly call for 12 clubs. Methinks IMVHO he hoped the saved SKY money would be divvied up amongst the 12, so I assume he's not happy despite fans of Fev saying he's seen the light!!

 

Will both clubs end up outside the "8" as they have done before. Hull's start at Bradford was poor HKR have lost Dobson. I don't like the idea of an 8 clubs Superleague with nobody from Hull or Calder in it but hey ho....

 

 

Just 1 flaw to your logic good sir.....

 

you are presuming london will survive the drop this year......and then be dreadful next...

 

If London go down this year and continue (lets say wakey as well)

 

then fev would be looking to replace widnes, cas, bradford, and hull KR in the 12 team SL?

 

if bradford go down then your model looks good (london to stay up, then go bad) but we are forgetting that wakey and bradford (in this example) would also be battling fev to replace London, I would back the 2 former any day of the week to do this!

Edited by yipyee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just 1 flaw to your logic good sir.....

 

you are presuming london will survive the drop this year......and then be dreadful next...

 

If London go down this year and continue (lets say wakey as well)

 

then fev would be looking to replace widnes, cas, bradford, and hull KR in the 12 team SL?

 

if bradford go down then your model looks good (london to stay up, then go bad) but we are forgetting that wakey and bradford (in this example) would also be battling fev to replace London, I would back the 2 former any day of the week to do this!

 

To be fair, you can't know this - or even make a proper judgment.  Feisal's money is the great unknown factor in the equation.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just 1 flaw to your logic good sir.....

 

you are presuming london will survive the drop this year......and then be dreadful next...

 

Thanks for the reply. No I am not assuming London will survive the drop. As it stands they hardly have a team, and have some loan kids in the 1st. X111.

 

On that I can safely say it will take a miracle for them to avoid relegation.

 

On Nahaboos pledge to spend the same salary cap as the eight Superleague clubs I can surmise he will outspend all the other clubs in the middle 8.

 

So I see those two clubs "changing places" as it stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. OK - it's the only experience on which the decision makers can draw as well.

 

2.  Why is it irrelevant ?

So the Swedish drew on no experience ?   They did not need to, it is a business structure as much as a League structure and what the RFL will have looked at was what type of system would give the overall business the most strength, they probably were not even aware of the Swedish system.  They just devised what they thought would be the best business and sporting structure for the game AT THIS TIME.   I think you are all looking into it way to deep.  The process has been a matter of looking at the problems over the whole and coming up with A (not necessary the best) structure to address some of these.

So I think overall it is irrelevant.

VIVA THE FEVOLUTION

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the Swedish drew on no experience ?   They did not need to, it is a business structure as much as a League structure and what the RFL will have looked at was what type of system would give the overall business the most strength, they probably were not even aware of the Swedish system.  They just devised what they thought would be the best business and sporting structure for the game AT THIS TIME.   I think you are all looking into it way to deep.  The process has been a matter of looking at the problems over the whole and coming up with A (not necessary the best) structure to address some of these.

So I think overall it is irrelevant.

 

The RFL and Chairman also have to actually make decisions they can not spend forever going over and over the pros and cons like we do on here, or  nothing would get done.  Some times its just a case of giving something a go!

VIVA THE FEVOLUTION

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the Swedish drew on no experience ?   They did not need to, it is a business structure as much as a League structure and what the RFL will have looked at was what type of system would give the overall business the most strength, they probably were not even aware of the Swedish system.  They just devised what they thought would be the best business and sporting structure for the game AT THIS TIME.   I think you are all looking into it way to deep.  The process has been a matter of looking at the problems over the whole and coming up with A (not necessary the best) structure to address some of these.

So I think overall it is irrelevant.

 

Swedish ?  What have they got to do with it ?

 

You don't think it's a bit of a coincidence that they came up with it just after the Scottish Soccer Leagues had rejected a similar system ?  It certainly stretches my imagination.

 

I don't see your point really.  Some other organisation's experience is obviously relevant.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Swedish ?  What have they got to do with it ?

 

You don't think it's a bit of a coincidence that they came up with it just after the Scottish Soccer Leagues had rejected a similar system ?  It certainly stretches my imagination.

 

I don't see your point really.  Some other organisation's experience is obviously relevant.

 

KPMG came up with it having been asked to identify league systems that promised jeopardy.

 

Given that they copied almost everything about this system whether it worked or not in the richest country in the world playing the world's most popular sport is probably a teensy bit relevant.

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

KPMG came up with it having been asked to identify league systems that promised jeopardy.

 

Given that they copied almost everything about this system whether it worked or not in the richest country in the world playing the world's most popular sport is probably a teensy bit relevant.

Did KPMG come up with this suggestion?

 

My experience of consultants isn't that they will give you a firm proposed solution. Didn't they evaluate the feasibility of a solution that was put to them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did KPMG come up with this suggestion?

 

My experience of consultants isn't that they will give you a firm proposed solution. Didn't they evaluate the feasibility of a solution that was put to them?

They were asked to provide league systems with jeopardy to replace the tired, drab world of Super League.

3x8 was one of three proposals.

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

Did KPMG come up with this suggestion?My experience of consultants isn't that they will give you a firm proposed solution. Didn't they evaluate the feasibility of a solution that was put to them?

 

Either way it was said the proposals would create meaningful, exciting matches and boost crowds.

 

Why they never said?

 

Do you know why Dave??

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...