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

So the alleged SL commitment to expansion from the heartlands into big cities is just flim flam and window dressing then. When it actually might come to pass Sky will not sell any boxes and we should stick to playing in Castleford because the people there are interested in RL.

The people pushing a big city team SL expanding to new areas seem to be hypocritical when push comes to shove.

 

At some point you have to look at the facts and evaluate your progress.  I think Rugby League is the best sport in the world.  Others seem to think it's summat called "soccer".

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoever sets the standards can in effect stuff a club who wins promotion. Hardly giving clubs who beat everybody on the field of play a ""Chance"" is it??

 

The irony is that you fear a sub standard club may beat all other CC clubs and win promotion and yet be "not up to standard"?

 

One of the reasons behind the introduction of minimum standards was the practice of spending all your money on a team to win things and letting your ground fall apart.  So, actually, it's not unlikely that a successful-on-the-field team might not meet minimum standards.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you keep quoting licensing standards as an argument to keighley's conditional P&R? It was never suggested they'd be used.

L'ang, this is exactly what I mean. How many posts on this line now?

Sorry wellsy but it seems legitimate to me

They are actual standards 

Keighleys aren't and he/ she seems unwilling or unable to say strategy should be and how they should be monitored and enforced. This is what I mean about backing up what one says. Asking Keighley to do this and receiving no response isn't pushing him/ her into looking stupid...it's just trying to get an answer to a fair question and take the discussion forward.

 

I think it is vital that the elite competition should have growth at its heart. Growth has been an issue since 1895. There are those within the game who are actively opposed to this I find this debilitating to say the least.

Promotion and relegation in whatever form it takes limits growth and in fact militaries against it.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015

Keeping it local

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This from 'Keighley'

"All in all, if some thought was given to the standards required, a reasonable set should be able to be established that would make sure the promoted club are pretty sure making it in SL without being so onerous as to be totally prohibitive as to exclude most reasonably run and well prepared organisations.

 

With these standards being known in advance, the clubs would know that if they measured up to them, promotion would be guaranteed and that there would no anonymous vetoes by self interested SL organisations."

 

 

 

 

What are the standards you speak of?

 

What is the nature of this self interest?

Edited by l'angelo mysterioso

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015

Keeping it local

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have looked up the standard for finances. CC clubs need a £1,000,000 turnover. That may leave Leigh and Halifax out. The standard for the ground is 10,000 leaving Sheffield out.

Standards actually block all four clubs who want promotion, and the other thing about promotion is that there are clubs who would not accept it anyway like Batley.

The turnover at Leigh is no longer a problem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the reasons behind the introduction of minimum standards was the practice of spending all your money on a team to win things and letting your ground fall apart.  So, actually, it's not unlikely that a successful-on-the-field team might not meet minimum standards.

 

As was demonstrated at Bradford, Even though they had the most expensive ground in the game to keep up with, They still fell into the trap and are now paying the price,

On the flip side they produced some of the best games ever for the likes of SKY viewers like me , which in MO is what the game is all about, and they got very big crowds.

 

The one thing is obvious from this thread, Everyone wants the game to go forward , we all just see different ways of bringing that about. I know what it feels to be on the outside  (so to speak ) for decades. so i can understand people arguing what would seem to be best for their club, It's natural enough, I don't see it as being what's best for the game necessarily but we all have our ideas.

Dont expect anything from a pig but a grunt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This from 'Keighley'

"All in all, if some thought was given to the standards required, a reasonable set should be able to be established that would make sure the promoted club are pretty sure making it in SL without being so onerous as to be totally prohibitive as to exclude most reasonably run and well prepared organisations.

With these standards being known in advance, the clubs would know that if they measured up to them, promotion would be guaranteed and that there would no anonymous vetoes by self interested SL organisations."

What are the standards you speak of?

What is the nature of this self interest?

But that doesn't mean they are the same as the licensing ones, which a fair amount of current clubs don't face. You can't have standards that exclude some but not others. That's where fairness comes in.

Is it reasonable to expect a club to have 10,000 seats in a 12,000 capacity stadium yet allow London to move to a 5,000 capacity stadium? Or expect a club to have an average of 2,500 to gain promotion but allow London to stay in at the top with an average of 2,213?

If you're going to have standards, they must apply to all, not those just gaining promotion.

It's pointless putting words in his mouth and fighting strawmen with arguments about licensing standards in the absence of his version of standards when it is clear they aren't they standards he's referring to (otherwise he wouldn't be arguing against them).

Ill agree with you that he's not yet answered what the standards he refers to are, but I do find it ironic that someone like Parksider would be accusing someone of ignoring questions and needing to admit they are wrong when that's all he's done regarding the big questions in the Hull debate!

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

I like that. Well said. I think we saw some sense when the SL clubs asked members not to poach Bradford's players, and when SL were prepared to buy the Bradford club. The principle of clubs being dependent on each other for a strong game overall is a great one.

 

So maybe it's time for Hull/HKR, Cas/Fev/Wakey, Bradford/Hudds/Halifax to get together and stop trying to weaken each other as competitors for Superleague places. All join together because they all need each other as you say.

 

Pleased you have seen the light, have a great new year.....

Michael Palin was guest editor of "Today" on Monday.  He's a Sheffielder and he floated the idea of a merger between United and Wednesday with some fans of both clubs.  He'd have got a better reaction if he'd sworn in church.  They don't want it.  And neither do the fans of Fev, Cas, Wakey, Hull KR, Hull FC, Bradford, Huddersfield or Halifax.  That's what I mean about rational business logic not applying in sport.  The whole Rugby League breakaway doesn't make sense any more.  There's no reason for Rugby League to exist any more, Union is professional and better financed, so let's have the ultimate merger, one between the codes. I'm sure that'll go down a storm on here!

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is vital that the elite competition should have growth at its heart. Growth has been an issue since 1895. There are those within the game who are actively opposed to this I find this debilitating to say the least.

Promotion and relegation in whatever form it takes limits growth and in fact militaries against it.

I agree that there are some fans that actively don't want the game to expand, but I don't believe that's the case on this thread.

I agree that in some ways P&R limits growth. In some other ways it helps it. Organic growth. Long term growth.

However, I don't believe a European competition can have European growth by having P&R to a British league, and I can see your concerns in that department as I share them as well, which is why I suggested what I suggested.

I believe licensing hinders growth in this country. That's the conflict I have.

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

Expansion in the playing numbers and a true elite will not be achieved by protectionism of the heartlands

We need Toulouse in ASAP, we need a strong London and we need two FT tens to create a platform to meet our goals

I would love the day the elite contained 4 French clubs 2 welsh and 6 English with a full time second tier pushing to move up, we must not let the protectionist flat clappers hold us back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Palin was guest editor of "Today" on Monday.  He's a Sheffielder and he floated the idea of a merger between United and Wednesday with some fans of both clubs.  He'd have got a better reaction if he'd sworn in church.  They don't want it.  And neither do the fans of Fev, Cas, Wakey, Hull KR, Hull FC, Bradford, Huddersfield or Halifax.  That's what I mean about rational business logic not applying in sport.  The whole Rugby League breakaway doesn't make sense any more.  There's no reason for Rugby League to exist any more, Union is professional and better financed, so let's have the ultimate merger, one between the codes. I'm sure that'll go down a storm on here!

 

 

That is what may ultimately happen, The ironic thing about it is the Fans of all these clubs you have mentioned, who refuse point blank to watch another Rugby League club , even merged , Will then be faced with either watching Union or going fishing ( or whatever ).

 

The other thing is that down the line when this takes place, it will only happen because there are big successful clubs like Wigan Leeds etc to make it worth their while, otherwise they would just grind us away.

Dont expect anything from a pig but a grunt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Palin was guest editor of "Today" on Monday.  He's a Sheffielder and he floated the idea of a merger between United and Wednesday with some fans of both clubs.  He'd have got a better reaction if he'd sworn in church.  They don't want it.  And neither do the fans of Fev, Cas, Wakey, Hull KR, Hull FC, Bradford, Huddersfield or Halifax.  That's what I mean about rational business logic not applying in sport.

 

I do take the point Tro, wholeheartedly, but it does leave the big question how do we get growth when such as Bradford/Fax/Fartown, Cas/Wakey/Fev or Hull/HKR all want to stay separate, and compete with each other for their share of the local resources, effectively keeping each other down, because nobody has yet told me how such as Hull and HKR benefit each other.

 

A planned superleague would only accept one club per area and force all the resources over time into the one club. P & R obviously allows clubs to make a comeback to spoil the party. I look forward to seeing how a Featherstone with money may dominate Cas and Wakey 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed it's a discussion/debate, all ideas welcome, but any ideas are up for scrutiny and question. The  simple question is the idea that allowing administrators to choose minimum standards before allowing the Championship play off winners to be promoted is unfair.

 

Under licensing we don't seem to want faceless administrators blocking clubs but somehow it's OK for faceless administrators to block clubs under P & R.

If it's too awkward a question I pose to my good friend Mr. Keighley who avoids answering it then I won't ask him it again.

 

Where the "standard" is set is IMVHO a "grey area". I believe the "standard" for CC clubs is 2,500 fans for promotion. Featherstone only got 2,400 so they should be refused promotion had P & R been in now which would certainly be unfair. "Ludicrous" is not an answer.

You didn't see minimum attendances as a standard supported by me. 2,400 in the Championship would almost certainly rise in SL. London will be very lucky to average 2,400 this upcoming season and no one is proposing denying them their SL place based on that.

As for faceless administrators. SL clubs should have no part of that process. They are too self interested in the buddy buddy system. The admisnistrators should be appointed by the league and should be independent. The standards should be thrashed out well in advance and every club in the Championships would know where they stand from the get go. The administrators would not be faceless and there would be no goal post moving as has happened in the past when p and r was suddenly abolished mid season and grounds standards were introduced half way through a campaign. There would be no Lindsay, Caisley and others huddling in back rooms playing god. The required levels that clubs must achieve before their qualifying for promotion by winning the grand final would be plain and clear and the clubs would know that if they met them they would be up.

the bottom SL club would be down. No more this licence application is better than that one to save them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You didn't see minimum attendances as a standard supported by me. London will be very lucky to average 2,400 this upcoming season and no one is proposing denying them their SL place based on that.

 

The administrators should be appointed by the league and should be independent. The standards should be thrashed out well in advance and every club in the Championships would know where they stand from the get go.

 

Good day Mr. K.

 

No the attendance minimum standard was a nonsense as obviously it's what crowds you may get in SL that count. Same for grounds, why set 10,000 when apparently Leigh can survive on 5,500? Same for turnover, obviously any promoted club would add £1.2M to their turnover instantly.

 

I take the point about London as well and so the "standards" look very much like they were designed/used to help keep clubs out whose face didn't fit.

 

You don't say what standards you think should apply instead of attendances, ground capacity and turnover though? I've had a think about it and can't think of any standards to apply. After all if a multi-millionaire wanted to set up a Superleague club in West Cumbria why would we want to apply "standards".

 

The success of clubs has always IMVHO been down to money. Clubs won't be winning promotion on the field without it so let them be promoted as you say, and let them succeed or fail on their own efforts. Give them a season in the sun. Can you think of any "standards" for to apply for P & R under annual P & R??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good day Mr. K.

No the attendance minimum standard was a nonsense as obviously it's what crowds you may get in SL that count. Same for grounds, why set 10,000 when apparently Leigh can survive on 5,500? Same for turnover, obviously any promoted club would add £1.2M to their turnover instantly.

I take the point about London as well and so the "standards" look very much like they were designed/used to help keep clubs out whose face didn't fit.

You don't say what standards you think should apply instead of attendances, ground capacity and turnover though? I've had a think about it and can't think of any standards to apply. After all if a multi-millionaire wanted to set up a Superleague club in West Cumbria why would we want to apply "standards".

The success of clubs has always IMVHO been down to money. Clubs won't be winning promotion on the field without it so let them be promoted as you say, and let them succeed or fail on their own efforts. Give them a season in the sun. Can you think of any "standards" for to apply for P & R under annual P & R??

Leigh will run at full cap on 5500 parky not survive but each clubs costs and income will be different. No point having £2m of non playing income but £2.2m of associated costs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...because nobody has yet told me how such as Hull and HKR benefit each other.

L'ang, see what I mean about the irony of asking someone to admit they're wrong and ignoring parts of posts!

Keighley, what are your standards proposed? I can only defend you so much but you haven't actually specifically answered this one so put it to bed.

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

That is what may ultimately happen, The ironic thing about it is the Fans of all these clubs you have mentioned, who refuse point blank to watch another Rugby League club , even merged , Will then be faced with either watching Union or going fishing ( or whatever ).

 

The other thing is that down the line when this takes place, it will only happen because there are big successful clubs like Wigan Leeds etc to make it worth their while, otherwise they would just grind us away.

But it's not a serious suggestion.  It's not what I want to happen any more than I wanted Calder to happen.  But that's the argument put forward on here by those who favour  mergers, it makes just as much sense.

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

L'ang, see what I mean about the irony of asking someone to admit they're wrong and ignoring parts of posts!

Keighley, what are your standards proposed? I can only defend you so much but you haven't actually specifically answered this one so put it to bed.

I thank you for your defence. I thought I had already stated that financial soundness was the most important. If a club has enough financing, whether from gate receipts, TV income, sponsorship income or investor income, or a combination thereof, then that's 80% of the standards met. I thought everybody was in agreement that money is key.

A decent ground is a must and standards could be set for that. For instance I don't think Oldham's ground is up to scratch and the three Cumbrian teams are teetering on the edge of acceptable but this is much less of a problem than it used to be. The most likely promotion contenders have more than adequate grounds, with the exception of Sheffield and they have a new ground proposed or could share with either soccer club.

I think some level of junior development is important and this could be amplified and enlarged and budgeted for once in SL if the constraints of running junior teams at Championship level has impeded progress in this area.

I can't think of much more and this constant harping that I put up or shut up is nuts. These are my suggestions. The actual agreement on standards would be thrashed out by the RFL, preferably for me by being outsourced to an independent tribunal or committee who could seek input and proposals from whomsoever they wished including the Championship and SL but their conclusions should be independent and not dictated by self serving SL teams interested in strengthening the fence and pulling up the drawbridge.

That's my take on it. That's the way I see standards being defined and implemented. What the RFL actually do is not up to me. They might go for auto p and r without standards. They might have a luddite moment and not go to any form of p and r. I am not in a position to set levels of financing and the nuts and bolts of standards. That is up to those with all the information at their fingertips and the power to implement them to decide.

Anyone would think that I had been given a mandate and am expected to formulate exact standards by next month the way the minutiae of standards are being demanded from me. I have only general ideas and proposals in mind to prevent the collapse of promoted teams and I think sufficient financing is the main and most important of these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is what may ultimately happen, The ironic thing about it is the Fans of all these clubs you have mentioned, who refuse point blank to watch another Rugby League club , even merged , Will then be faced with either watching Union or going fishing.........

 

But the fans have no say in the matter. They pay their admission money, watch the games and that's that.

 

The fans don't want mergers, the fans also don't want second tier RL either, in 1996 the combined Hull/HKR audience was a mere 4,707.

 

It remains to be seen how the fans will react to the 3x8=2x12 if it goes through but if they find it "second rate" crowds could drop.

 

It's worth noting how the bigger clubs in SL are to carry on with academies, whilst the lesser SL clubs may not. I don't know what other costs they will jettison or "standards" they will drop.

 

The RFL and KPMG tell us with no real evidence crowds will grow in the second tier eight, but they could easily start dropping then something else may have to give, like the drawbridge going up on a ten club SL.

 

If that happens it could then be no "Calder" club remains in SL. will the 5,000 fans left then still say no to merger? Probably, but it isn't their choice.

Edited by The Parksider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leigh will run at full cap on 5500 parky not survive but each clubs costs and income will be different. No point having £2m of non playing income but £2.2m of associated costs

 

Full cap on 5500 ?  :lol:  

 

How much will season tickets be ?  Couple of grand each ?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the fans have no say in the matter. They pay their admission money, watch the games and that's that.

 

The fans don't want mergers, the fans also don't want second tier RL either, in 1996 the combined Hull/HKR audience was a mere 4,707.

 

It remains to be seen how the fans will react to the 3x8=2x12 if it goes through but if they find it "second rate" crowds could drop.

 

It's worth noting how the bigger clubs in SL are to carry on with academies, whilst the lesser SL clubs may not. I don't know what other costs they will jettison or "standards" they will drop.

 

The RFL and KPMG tell us with no real evidence crowds will grow in the second tier eight, but they could easily start dropping then something else may have to give, like the drawbridge going up on a ten club SL.

 

If that happens it could then be no "Calder" club remains in SL. will the 5,000 fans left then still say no to merger? Probably, but it isn't their choice.

Mergers in Welsh Union are almost killing their game.  There is very little interest in the merged district sides.  Many of their best players are playing elsewhere.  Since Cardiff City and Swansea entered the Premierships crowds are down dramatically.  That's what mergers did in Oz and that's what they'll do to in Lancashire and Yorkshire.  As for sides anywhere else, it doesn't take a genius to work out that for whatever reason there is very little interest in RL outside the so-called "heartlands."  Interest stops short at the Wakefield border with South Yorks, at the Wigan and Keighley borders with Lancashire, at the St Helens/Widnes borders with Liverpool, at the Humber, at the Manchester City boundary. No amount of promotion or push seems to be able to spread the game out of the heartlands.  The merger programme will probably kill it within the heartlands and then there'll be no more arguments because there'll be no more game.

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

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...