If we brought back licensing....

[Gerrumonside ref]

7 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I'm not in favour of mergers but that last point could be made exactly about having multiple clubs in the same area at the bottom of the Championship or in League 1. 

I don’t think that is true mate at all.

Look at the close proximity of the north west clubs in football.

If anything local rivalry is a plus point.

[Tommygilf]

16 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

I don’t think that is true mate at all.

Look at the close proximity of the north west clubs in football.

If anything local rivalry is a plus point.

I agree with you but football is vastly more popular and has much more in the way of finances. 

Lets be real here the average age of some RL teams support bases are not healthy for the clubs long term existence. Which is as you say, killing clubs and losing fans in the process.

[Gerrumonside ref]

7 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I agree with you but football is vastly more popular and has much more in the way of finances. 

Lets be real here the average age of some RL teams support bases are not healthy for the clubs long term existence. Which is as you say, killing clubs and losing fans in the process.

I agree rugby league has to reach out for a younger fanbase, but I’m not in agreement that mergers would be the way to do that.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

I agree rugby league has to reach out for a younger fanbase, but I’m not in agreement that mergers would be the way to do that.

I agree. But I also am willing to accept that will either mean all teams in a locale dropping down a level, or that 1 side will get lucky and outgrow its rivals. Whilst there may be little evidence for success of mergers there's quite a bit in RL for this.

 

[RP London]

3 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

Explain to me in detail how you are going to do mergers ‘right’?

 

 

I've mentioned it a few times already to be fair

It is about it being the only real option to move the area forward in terms of getting to the top table, expanding the clubs even just having a viable club going forward. Each case will be different. Its about where areas cannot sustain more than 1 strong club, areas that are actually damaging themselves by trying to spread a thin support base across too many options (and by support I also mean financial so sponsors and advertisers as well as actual bums on seats). 

It is a case of saying "you cannot get to this place without doing something different"

each case will be different so it is impossible to do as you ask, equally if i could i would be working for a sporting organisation earning a lot more money rather than sitting discussing this on an internet forum. 

There are successful mergers like Inverness Caladonian Thistle, Catalans, London Irish, Yorkshire Carnegie etc and you can start to try to extrapolate out why/how they have worked.. there are others at lower levels too that merge to try and grow, even if it is just relative and they work, some then go on to fail (birmingham solihull) but for reasons that are then like any other club, however, their ability to get to the height before the overspend would not have happened if they had not merged in the first place and they are still ahead of where both clubs would have been. 

There are questions to be asked at all points of the process too.. not necessarily just to the fans of the clubs involved either.. there may be little to no appetite amongst the dwindling aging fan base but there may be people who dont go who would start to turn up to an area specific club instead of small town club because it is seen as more glamorous etc (i am not saying this would be the case but it is an example of changes in mentality) If the "new supporters" outweigh the number of older supporters then the case starts to strengthen. As I say, each case will be different and for some the merger is wrong and evolution has to take place (calder being an example of where evolution is probably the only answer, Cumbria where arguably the merger is better, until Workington get a new stadium then maybe evolution but how much time has been lost and how many generations have been lost) but with the right research, with the right planning, thought out approach and managed expectations you can make it work (and this is why RL struggles with anything we do we dont ever do any of that!)

the point is that Mergers can work if done right, the fact that they do not always work just means they are not the 1 and only answer but they are a possible answer and to dismiss them out of hand IMHO is short sighted. 

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

I don't disagree with that.. however without looking wider than where we look now this is never going to change. Its the same thing we have been saying for years but it will.never change of we don't actually do somethimg about it. 

One of the key points I said was "at some level" I also said you don't need to scrap present clubs to get there... I used the example of the DOs in London..  this worked well and the amateur game was growing well with a junior set up expanding faster than anywhere else. Yet it was scrapped. 10 years down the line London is producing some kids, how many more and how much better if the investment in DOs had continued. 

A concerted amount of investment and, importantly, time can start all of this off. A top level team can come when the area is starting to produce better. 

The attitude of RL always seems to be that expansion is at the expense of he heartlands yet it can be done in conjunction with keeping the heartlands strong. But without looking further afield for the player pool the game is not going to grow and will probably wither and die. The new areas may be generations away but the only way (Not true of everywhere for sure) but if you don't start then they will always be that far away.

Yes fair comment, BUT I think that from what you write you recognise that there is something that needs addressing with the foundations of the game, without that underpinning it is folly to start putting extensions in place that will add weight to the situation i.e. new clubs in virgin areas who will only increase the load on the availabillity of players, simply we have not got the resources to spread out the available talent any further without those clubs having the ability to give back.

Is it truly "Expansion" of the game we are talking about or is it akin to a circus visiting the town and bringing its performers along for the locals to enjoy, to me "Expansion" means participation levels in numbers playing the sport for enjoyment for the masses and progression for the elite performers, starting with the kids, the area(s) will need lots of teams just for competition purposes, then there needs to be a structured pathway for the better ones to progress through, and further from that the elite level for the elite players, just stop and think about it for a moment, we have all these pathways in this country from all over RL land, from the numbers of participants how many elite players come to the fore each season? 

I believe that Mr Perez's intentions are good in spreading the game (note not expanding) but he is doing no more than being the Circus Ring Master, apart from his initial we have hundreds of ready made for RL athletes available, and that failed miserably, what is his blueprint for "expanding" the game participation wise?

I agree with you unless you initiate day 1 then we will never have day 1 and the process will never get of the ground, but please lets see some form of intent to grow the game, not just spread the decreasing number of available players around.

 

[Smudger06]

20 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Because i found the idea that sky bought the rights to the championship to stop anyone else getting them, but don't show them because next time they would have to pay more to stop someone else getting them, funny .

Ok, but he said broadcast it.......that would cost them money in the 1st instance, you correctly stated early that sky had a multi billion sport content rights and broadcasting budget...but you know virtually all of that is tied to football, mainly the Premier League but also the overseas football and lower tier football......

If broadcast, that's exposure for the greatest game.....thats generating a viewership......as stated there's a not insignificant cost to broadcast unless someone hands them content ready for tv on a plate...(toronto) and then....3, 5 or 8 years later that's a larger cost to regain the rights......

[Smudger06]

16 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Right , lets get this straight , THE only succssesful ' MERGER ' that I know of in british based sport is the Catalan Dragons , BUT they had never played in the British competition before , they had never competed against any of the clubs they would then be playing against , they entered for them a cpmpletely new competition against completely new clubs

so if you want me [ and the 100,000 other fans of proffessional RL in the UK ] to start following new merged clubs , set up a brand new competition with brand new clubs

London North west

London South East

Birmingham

Bristol

South Wales

North wales

Liverpool

Manchester

West Yorkshire

South Yorkshire

Glasgow

Northumbria

These all to play at non current RL venues outside of the season that the existing clubs play in a completely new compatition , and I'll decide if I want to follow one of them as well as or instead of Leigh , problem solved

Why not add East Yorkshire, Dublin, Occitanie and Solent City thus creating the big 16. 

[RP London]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes fair comment, BUT I think that from what you write you recognise that there is something that needs addressing with the foundations of the game, without that underpinning it is folly to start putting extensions in place that will add weight to the situation i.e. new clubs in virgin areas who will only increase the load on the availabillity of players, simply we have not got the resources to spread out the available talent any further without those clubs having the ability to give back.

Is it truly "Expansion" of the game we are talking about or is it akin to a circus visiting the town and bringing its performers along for the locals to enjoy, to me "Expansion" means participation levels in numbers playing the sport for enjoyment for the masses and progression for the elite performers, starting with the kids, the area(s) will need lots of teams just for competition purposes, then there needs to be a structured pathway for the better ones to progress through, and further from that the elite level for the elite players, just stop and think about it for a moment, we have all these pathways in this country from all over RL land, from the numbers of participants how many elite players come to the fore each season? 

I believe that Mr Perez's intentions are good in spreading the game (note not expanding) but he is doing no more than being the Circus Ring Master, apart from his initial we have hundreds of ready made for RL athletes available, and that failed miserably, what is his blueprint for "expanding" the game participation wise?

I agree with you unless you initiate day 1 then we will never have day 1 and the process will never get of the ground, but please lets see some form of intent to grow the game, not just spread the decreasing number of available players around.

 

Each area is different.. some you can work on the grass roots without a pathway but some you need to show the game at the highest level to then be able to expand the base. How you do that though I would debate too, does it have to be a team or does a concerted effort from the top division to take a few games a season there do the job (eg NFL London) etc.. 

You yourself though say earlier that without Dewsbury there would be no players playing amateur games there etc (paraphrasing) I dont disagree but then that argument serves to expansion so do you need clubs to form a pathway or dont you?

IMHO its a bit of both.. some areas will need it some will not.. and I would say that to the heartlands too. Equally some can be done at different levels for example Leeds playing 2 games in a new area and also giving opportunities to developing schools etc.

Without writing an essay, or book, the basic thing is no 2 expansions are the same, no 2 survivals in the heartlands will be the same. However, we HAVE to have commitment from both the RFL and Super League that whatever we do we do it at 100% and really put the effort into it. The only way to get more & better players is to cast the net wider, be that increasing the number of schools in the hearltand areas (Jon Wilkin pointing out on the BBC RL podcast that the school St Helens trains at doesnt play RL for example) or expanding using DOs and on the road games (and new clubs if need be) but we have to cast the net wider. 

With regards the "circus" sometimes you need the circus to show you how great it is to then inspire people to build below it. As you say Perez is spreading the game (and I dont disagree with your definition) and that is a good thing (there are arguably other ways to do this other than teams based there as I say, but the appetite to do that seems limited) but arguably by spreading that interest he is building the momentum to build the rest below it. If he just turned up without building that momentum would any grass roots expansion happen at all... expansion is a long process no matter how it is done his may be the right way for that market.

No expansion needs to be done at the expense of the Heartlands but equally helping the Heartlands should not be done at the expense of the expansion.. it is not an either or discussion but it gets polarised as such far far too often.

[JCXV]

Just now, scotchy1 said:

Its interesting that those who argue that if, say Leigh, didnt have access to SL through P+R people would stop watching and such kids would stop playing in those areas, also demand that clubs in new areas get kids playing and people watching BEFORE they have access to Super League.

If kids in Leigh or Fev are no longer going to play despite having Wigan and Cas/Wakefield on their doorstep, why are kids in areas where there isnt an SL club for miles going to play?

 

There is an old phrase that still rings true that it is far easier to keep existing customers than it is to gain new ones. For customers, read fans. Conversely, once you lose something that you once had, it is nigh on impossible to get it back again to anything like what it was. 

[JCXV]

1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

Thats working out well for the game

 

It says to me that existing fans are not being very well looked after. 

[GUBRATS]

17 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

Why not add East Yorkshire, Dublin, Occitanie and Solent City thus creating the big 16.

You can add anybody you like , as long as they arent an existing club

[GUBRATS]

12 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

You're a middle-aged man.

Is that meant as some form of insult ? , or just a random comment because you didnt have a reasoned sensible reply as an option , ie just your usual rubbish

[GUBRATS]

11 hours ago, yipyee said:

Newcastle football = success

Wales rugby mergers = success

Also is your name intentially starbug backwards?

looked up the Newcastle merger , so 2 clubs both called Newcastle , both playing in Newcastle merged to be called Newcastle , I can see the conflict they overcame

And they still havent won anything for half a century

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

Just pointing out to you that you are a middle-aged man. Trolling on a forum is something you should have grown out of.

I didnt realise trolling was only allowed to be done by experts like you

[RP London]

6 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Just pointing out to you that you are a middle-aged man. Trolling on a forum is something you should have grown out of.

 

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

I didnt realise trolling was only allowed to be done by experts like you

 

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

You're a middle-aged man.

c'mon guys this is quite an interesting conversation it doesnt need this.

if you cant be civil then just leave it.

[GUBRATS]

5 minutes ago, RP London said:

 

 

c'mon guys this is quite an interesting conversation it doesnt need this.

if you cant be civil then just leave it.

Oh dont worry its finished for now , it is a long standing conflict going back at least 13/14 years now , so it most likely will return at some point

[RP London]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Oh dont worry its finished for now , it is a long standing conflict going back at least 13/14 years now , so it most likely will return at some point

No i get that, been on here for long enough.. probably saw the start of it.. but just dont want to distract and get people just giving up on the thread as it descends down like so many when actually there is an interesting discussion happening for the most part.

lets all join hands and be friends 

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, RP London said:

No i get that, been on here for long enough.. probably saw the start of it.. but just dont want to distract and get people just giving up on the thread as it descends down like so many when actually there is an interesting discussion happening for the most part.

lets all join hands and be friends

Where's the fun in that ?

[Cdd]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

looked up the Newcastle merger , so 2 clubs both called Newcastle , both playing in Newcastle merged to be called Newcastle , I can see the conflict they overcame

And they still havent won anything for half a century

So the two Hull clubs merging to form a Hull club in Hull would be no problem by that logic? 

[DimmestStar]

To bring back licensing would require the current 12 Super League clubs to vote in favour.

Therefore I imagine the current 12 clubs would include themselves first and foremost. 

[The Parksider]

2 hours ago, RP London said:

Without writing an essay, or book, the basic thing is no 2 expansions are the same, no 2 survivals in the heartlands will be the same. However, we HAVE to have commitment from both the RFL and Super League that whatever we do we do it at 100% and really put the effort into it. The only way to get more & better players is to cast the net wider, be that increasing the number of schools in the hearltand areas (Jon Wilkin pointing out on the BBC RL podcast that the school St Helens trains at doesnt play RL for example) or expanding using DOs and on the road games (and new clubs if need be) but we have to cast the net wider. 

With regards the "circus" sometimes you need the circus to show you how great it is to then inspire people to build below it. As you say Perez is spreading the game  and that is a good thing  but arguably by spreading that interest he is building the momentum to build the rest below it. If he just turned up without building that momentum would any grass roots expansion happen at all... expansion is a long process no matter how it is done......

No expansion needs to be done at the expense of the Heartlands but equally helping the Heartlands should not be done at the expense of the expansion.. it is not an either or discussion but it gets polarised as such far far too often.

Let me say I wholeheartedly agree to your sentiments as regards Scotchy's behaviour. Nuff said let's debate.

When you talk of pioneers "spreading the game" you do realise that the so called success we have to date is the shipping of 25 players from English and Aussie heartlands to pose as a North American RL team. We are in the third season and there isn't any kids with rugby league balls in hand over there probably because they are handling baseballs, Rugby Union balls, soccer balls and grid iron balls. Now let's examine the financial success of the project. The income comes from crowds of about 8K with many free tickets. I can only guess over the limited number of home games this season they may take in £500K. In terms of expenditure including long haul travel and accommodation, wages and ground expenses I can only guess this as at least £5Million. For sure some sponsorships will help reduce the deficit, but the problem is who else but a highly enthusiastic dyed in the wool Australian $$Billionaire who grew up with the NRL would be mad enough to copy this business model?

What value is there to our game here if this model is replicated by people who are far far from being $Billionaires, and unable to cover the massive losses a Barcelona, a Copenhagen or a New York would make? In over 2 years I have the name, CV and personal wealth details for ONE rich backer not from here, who fair play puts some of his money where his mouth is (but not into junior development). So can you now live up to your appeal for an interesting and informative debate and deal with the facts the only "expansion" business model we have is a complete financial failure, and we do not have a real name (just smoke and mirrors) or a CV, of anyone else intending to following this model?

Onto your idea of expansion via on the road and DO's. We used DO's extensively for several years under the governments sports England funding and we have been taking games "on the road" since 1908 when GB met Australia at QPR's ground. Latterly we took them on again in Coventry. In the final analysis the problem was for the games executive as regards "on the road games" and the problem for the DO's as regards introducing RL to kids, was that those kids interested were either already playing RU,  or if they fancied playing RL only had RU clubs to go play at. This illustrates that whether we try to expand to Coventry or New York there are not the highly wealthy investors we need in these places, to be the top of the pyramid, and there is no, and never will be the established junior structure to produce the required number of professional level players. 

In terms of financially breaking even with a decent professional RL club, that can only happen where there are enough sponsors, quality players and paying fans in place to support such a model. Getting a $Billionaire to subsidise ££Millions of losses isn't the kind of development we want. Now I can hear the cries of "Mr. Negative" from all those that dream the dream. 

But I am afraid this is the reality and the best business modal is to bolster what we have and of course Wilkin will always ape what his paymasters line is, but let Wilkin go try and get kids playing in Coventry. I'd rather he went round the schools in St.Helens and promoted an RL professional sporting career to the kids there whom RU are clearly after (RU will love it if we lose focus along the M62). This is what SL club foundations actually do along the M62, this is what keeps the game alive, this is the real world...........

[RP London]

11 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

Let me say I wholeheartedly agree to your sentiments as regards Scotchy's behaviour. Nuff said let's debate.

When you talk of pioneers "spreading the game" you do realise that the so called success we have to date is the shipping of 25 players from English and Aussie heartlands to pose as a North American RL team. We are in the third season and there isn't any kids with rugby league balls in hand over there probably because they are handling baseballs, Rugby Union balls, soccer balls and grid iron balls. Now let's examine the financial success of the project. The income comes from crowds of about 8K with many free tickets. I can only guess over the limited number of home games this season they may take in £500K. In terms of expenditure including long haul travel and accommodation, wages and ground expenses I can only guess this as at least £5Million. For sure some sponsorships will help reduce the deficit, but the problem is who else but a highly enthusiastic dyed in the wool Australian $$Billionaire who grew up with the NRL would be mad enough to copy this business model?

What value is there to our game here if this model is replicated by people who are far far from being $Billionaires, and unable to cover the massive losses a Barcelona, a Copenhagen or a New York would make? In over 2 years I have the name, CV and personal wealth details for ONE rich backer not from here, who fair play puts some of his money where his mouth is (but not into junior development). So can you now live up to your appeal for an interesting and informative debate and deal with the facts the only "expansion" business model we have is a complete financial failure, and we do not have a real name (just smoke and mirrors) or a CV, of anyone else intending to following this model?

Onto your idea of expansion via on the road and DO's. We used DO's extensively for several years under the governments sports England funding and we have been taking games "on the road" since 1908 when GB met Australia at QPR's ground. Latterly we took them on again in Coventry. In the final analysis the problem was for the games executive as regards "on the road games" and the problem for the DO's as regards introducing RL to kids, was that those kids interested were either already playing RU,  or if they fancied playing RL only had RU clubs to go play at. This illustrates that whether we try to expand to Coventry or New York there are not the highly wealthy investors we need in these places, to be the top of the pyramid, and there is no, and never will be the established junior structure to produce the required number of professional level players. 

In terms of financially breaking even with a decent professional RL club, that can only happen where there are enough sponsors, quality players and paying fans in place to support such a model. Getting a $Billionaire to subsidise ££Millions of losses isn't the kind of development we want. Now I can hear the cries of "Mr. Negative" from all those that dream the dream. 

But I am afraid this is the reality and the best business modal is to bolster what we have and of course Wilkin will always ape what his paymasters line is, but let Wilkin go try and get kids playing in Coventry. I'd rather he went round the schools in St.Helens and promoted an RL professional sporting career to the kids there whon RU are clearly after. This is what club foundations actually do along the M62, this is what keeps the game alive, this is the real world...........

i have you on ignore but someone pointed out that you had replied to me.. 

I've covered all that in other posts, I have pointed out how I can see it working and how each case is different and also how it takes longer than 3 years to get junior development of any meaningful sort up and running.. other than that there is nothing new you are saying there than the normal diatribe you spout... which is why I have you on ignore, its the same thing with no back up over and over again.

I will point out separately that I have experience of how the DO's worked in London and worked heavily within the structure and what you say is not true and it worked well if the funding had not been pulled then there would be a lot more kids in london playing RL (90% at South London had no access to RU through the schools and played wholly RL and that would have continued). It was a brilliant system and taking it away damaged the junior development massively.

edit: I still have you on ignore and so wont be responding to further posts. I said this was an interesting conversation and to be honest that normally means you havent come on board yet... its not that i disagree with you all the time but I cant stand your posting style... just an honest comment not calling you "mr negative" just cannot be doing with it when i come on here for a little "light relief" and "interesting conversations".

[GUBRATS]

4 hours ago, Cdd said:

So the two Hull clubs merging to form a Hull club in Hull would be no problem by that logic?

Certainly much less of a one than asking clubs from 2 different towns , but in truth I dont see what you would gain , when rovers were languishing in the Championship [ NL1 ] with us , their dormant fan base didnt switch to FC , they just didnt go , so if you want to lose 6/7,000 RL supporters from the game , just merge them

[GUBRATS]

4 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Let me say I wholeheartedly agree to your sentiments as regards Scotchy's behaviour. Nuff said let's debate.

When you talk of pioneers "spreading the game" you do realise that the so called success we have to date is the shipping of 25 players from English and Aussie heartlands to pose as a North American RL team. We are in the third season and there isn't any kids with rugby league balls in hand over there probably because they are handling baseballs, Rugby Union balls, soccer balls and grid iron balls. Now let's examine the financial success of the project. The income comes from crowds of about 8K with many free tickets. I can only guess over the limited number of home games this season they may take in £500K. In terms of expenditure including long haul travel and accommodation, wages and ground expenses I can only guess this as at least £5Million. For sure some sponsorships will help reduce the deficit, but the problem is who else but a highly enthusiastic dyed in the wool Australian $$Billionaire who grew up with the NRL would be mad enough to copy this business model?

What value is there to our game here if this model is replicated by people who are far far from being $Billionaires, and unable to cover the massive losses a Barcelona, a Copenhagen or a New York would make? In over 2 years I have the name, CV and personal wealth details for ONE rich backer not from here, who fair play puts some of his money where his mouth is (but not into junior development). So can you now live up to your appeal for an interesting and informative debate and deal with the facts the only "expansion" business model we have is a complete financial failure, and we do not have a real name (just smoke and mirrors) or a CV, of anyone else intending to following this model?

Onto your idea of expansion via on the road and DO's. We used DO's extensively for several years under the governments sports England funding and we have been taking games "on the road" since 1908 when GB met Australia at QPR's ground. Latterly we took them on again in Coventry. In the final analysis the problem was for the games executive as regards "on the road games" and the problem for the DO's as regards introducing RL to kids, was that those kids interested were either already playing RU,  or if they fancied playing RL only had RU clubs to go play at. This illustrates that whether we try to expand to Coventry or New York there are not the highly wealthy investors we need in these places, to be the top of the pyramid, and there is no, and never will be the established junior structure to produce the required number of professional level players.

In terms of financially breaking even with a decent professional RL club, that can only happen where there are enough sponsors, quality players and paying fans in place to support such a model. Getting a $Billionaire to subsidise ££Millions of losses isn't the kind of development we want. Now I can hear the cries of "Mr. Negative" from all those that dream the dream.

But I am afraid this is the reality and the best business modal is to bolster what we have and of course Wilkin will always ape what his paymasters line is, but let Wilkin go try and get kids playing in Coventry. I'd rather he went round the schools in St.Helens and promoted an RL professional sporting career to the kids there whom RU are clearly after (RU will love it if we lose focus along the M62). This is what SL club foundations actually do along the M62, this is what keeps the game alive, this is the real world...........

Which is why when on a different thread somebody suggested ' cloning ' Mr perez , I suggested ' cloning ' Mr Argyle

As for Mr Wilkin , maybe he could start at the high school were Saints train , that school doesnt play RL