If we brought back licensing....

[GUBRATS]

13 minutes ago, RP London said:

He’s not the only one I agree... but I find him the most patronising and tedious, you know exactly what he is going to say and then repeat ad nauseam. Hence not being bothered to read them again. On one thread or another they have all been answered by me or someone else often with facts and figures but the same “opinion” gets rolled out on the next one only to be debunked with facts again... quote that are taken out of context or don’t exist are proven to be so but are used again etc... just not worth the time to read the long posts with the same thing over and over and over again... people like yourself can say similar things in a much shorter and better way. I’ve found since ignoring him I have had much more interesting and better conversations with people that have also influenced and changed my position on certain things. Parky was never able to do that due to his way of posting.

Of course it’s just my opinion but also got a lot more work done without reading the same long winded thing over and over and over nd over and over....

 

' Facts and figures ' ? , you mean like the ones politicians use all the time , but his or my or anybody else only provides ' opinions ' ?

There are plent of ' facts ' that he has used to debunk other peoples ' opinions ' , he is completely correct in stating that something like 50 odd attempts at expansion have failed previously

Yes he does repeat himself , why is that ? , maybe because quite often his ' opinions ' which are quite often ' facts ' are ignored and the same ' facts ' which are actually ' opinions ' are trundled out again suggesting that we are going to see ' World domination ' of sport by having a non existent billionaires fund new RL clubs all over the planet

Its a bit like my long running ' debate ' yesterday with regards the likelyhood of mergers in the UK being a viable option , where we had somebody suggesting that just because over a hundred years ago 2 recently formed [ 10 years or so ]essentially amateur football clubs both based and named after a single city had decided to chuck it in together , that present day mergers of clubs with over a hundred years of their own history in different towns would be a succsses

So yes , they were correct , it is a fact that about 120 years ago 2 football clubs in Newcastle , both called Newcastle , that both had been in existence a few years did merge and call themselves ' Newcastle ' but seriously is that a relevant argument to what we are discussing on this thread ?

Similarily when the argument that Catalans , the product of 2 merged clubs in France is used as ' proof ' that it would work here , well in truth it isnt , Les Catalans arent a merger of 2 previous UK RL clubs with a history all of their own , they are a completely new club started in 2006 into the British game , no different to Toronto , its the equivalent of Hull FC and HKR merging to play as one club in SL at New Craven Park and them sending a club to play in the NRL based at the KC stadium

So there we have it , another long winded post , this time by me , at some point in the day I'm sure parky will be along to provide his ' opinion ' or ' Facts ' on what other ' facts ' or ' opinons ' others have posted

So yes we all post ' opinions ' as ' facts ' , sometimes its just how relevant they are that is the question

[yipyee]

4 hours ago, The Parksider said:

By all means fantasise about what you dream the game could have been, but don't expect to not be challenged when you put it on a public forum. The "ignore" button is a very convenient piece of censorship. your reply completely ducks the points I make. Others can make their own mind up why you really do this.

The fact is Rugby Union has just about won the day outside the M62 and south west France. This is why the viability of RL is based on 11 M62 clubs and a french club, and the ability of those clubs to develop and maintain a pool of just over 200 decent pro-RL players.  This is augmented by players surplus to the NRL. This gets a TV contract because a lot of northern people and ex-northern people will buy SKY subscriptions to watch it, Over 122 years 51 clubs outside the M62 have failed to create any expansion and several more failures will go when a reduced SKY deal comes into place. We must concentrate on keeping the M62 strong or Union will have that too......And that is the truth many cannot take. 

Your not one for the facts are you. There is no Cumbria academy and the junior game there is on it's last legs. The last few West Cumbrian SL players include Donaldson who nearly didn't get a contract and Lunt whose had health problems. A merged side would lose the traditional fans, and without a rich mans backing lose their games, and lose literally £Millions. Manchester already has Swinton and Salford why invent a third failing club unless you happen to know just how many £Millions Manchester are backed by?????

These six clubs between them have developed about a dozen of the 220 quality current home grown superleague players. If you want a 16 club Superleague where would you find the extra 100 players? A post on another thread says you can get them out of the championship and from Australia. There is a player agent called Tommy Cooper who can supply these players "just like that".

I prefer to work on the reality that SKY require a quality competition (not an any old player will do competition), and will only be subsidising professional RL from 2021 onwards to the tune of enough money to form a 10 club Superleague. Now why not try again and pick me the best 10 clubs to satisfy SKY and their traditional audience??

Thanks for having a stab at my question before I even asked it!!!  I agree with the 4 but there has to be Hull as well. Beyond that we have to accept sub-standard clubs, licensing only throwing up 4 "A" grade clubs in 2011. Beyond the 5 the "best of the rest" would be those viable through a rich backer and decent local junior game i.e. Castleford (Fulton) HKR (Hudgell) Fartown (Davey) and Wakefield (Carter) as it stands. It could be Bradford or Widnes may have a rich backer in 2021, it could be Argyle will be a first pick if he enters with a London club.  

All this "expansion" stuff is set to be put to one side once the SL bosses sit down with SKY........

In answer...

Cumbria academy had no FT club. 

People spout junior rugby is dead when it's the opposite that's true and it's actually flourishing! 

As stated Catalan clubs had low attendances in the hundreds. There is bound to be some disgruntled fans that walked away... but guess what they now have crowds of over 7k!!!!!!!!!!

Also I don't think you understand the concept of merger with your comments on Manchester...

As stated when a review is done and the advice is to merge clubs who fight alone are up against it and nearly always fail.

Any business looking to expand will always need upfront cash to do this, it's speculate to accumulate. This is usually expansion based on the core business producing surplus cash go fund expansion.

In RL case the surplus cash is going to propping up failing clubs. 

[yipyee]

3 hours ago, Wollongong said:

I’m not aware of such a geographical location ....  other than the one made up by  Maurice Lindsay in 1995.

 

is that you Maurice ???? 

Clearly you have heard of it then, I use the word Calder as people know the area I am referring to.

I had never heard of brexit before someone made it up to describe an event.

Now everyone in the country will know what your on about as soon as you say brexit but before the vote it was a made up word and wasn't in the dictionary.

[TBone]

1 hour ago, yipyee said:

Clearly you have heard of it then, I use the word Calder as people know the area I am referring to.

I had never heard of brexit before someone made it up to describe an event.

Now everyone in the country will know what your on about as soon as you say brexit but before the vote it was a made up word and wasn't in the dictionary.

The Calder is a river, Calderdale the district on the banks of the river and Calder is a Scottish Clan (and, hence surname) with the following tartan :

[Casually]

Proposal for a 16 team licensed format:

Wigan

Leeds

St Helens

Warrington

Hull FC

Bradford

York

Newcastle

London

Catalans

Toulouse

Toronto

New York

Welsh Dragons

Scottish Bravehearts

Irish Wolfhounds

 

Getting a representative team from the other home nations will be difficult, no doubt. Wales are on their way, Ireland are struggling but if the amateur GAA could be tapped then there's a playerbase there. Scotland would need to get their situation sorted, but there's a lot of good player potential. The other teams I chose for historical markets & good growth areas.

Format wise, have every team play each other once, then have the top 8 and bottom 8 split into two separate groups, playing the other 7 either home or away, whichever they didn't in the first round. Then top 4 playoff. So the winning team plays no more than 24 games in the Super League, meaning more can be given to each game/CC, OR a serious annual international set of games with the home nations and France can be established.

Get TWP on the phone and ask how they got such good crowds so early, and try to emulate that everywhere. Aim for 10k crowds at least and go from there. Every 4 years evaluate the format/teams, so if say a Coventry team is performing good in the Championship, have good crowds, and a reasonable plan for the future, consider booting out an underperforming team with poor crowds like York or whatever.

[sweaty craiq]

1 minute ago, Casually said:

Proposal for a 16 team licensed format:

Wigan

Leeds

St Helens

Warrington

Hull FC

Bradford

York

Newcastle

London

Catalans

Toulouse

Toronto

New York

Welsh Dragons

Scottish Bravehearts

Irish Wolfhounds

 

Getting a representative team from the other home nations will be difficult, no doubt. Wales are on their way, Ireland are struggling but if the amateur GAA could be tapped then there's a playerbase there. Scotland would need to get their situation sorted, but there's a lot of good player potential. The other teams I chose for historical markets & good growth areas.

Format wise, have every team play each other once, then have the top 8 and bottom 8 split into two separate groups, playing the other 7 either home or away, whichever they didn't in the first round. Then top 4 playoff. So the winning team plays no more than 24 games in the Super League, meaning more can be given to each game/CC, OR a serious annual international set of games with the home nations and France can be established.

Get TWP on the phone and ask how they got such good crowds so early, and try to emulate that everywhere. Aim for 10k crowds at least and go from there. Every 4 years evaluate the format/teams, so if say a Coventry team is performing good in the Championship, have good crowds, and a reasonable plan for the future, consider booting out an underperforming team with poor crowds like York or whatever.

TWP give out freebies at the hockey and have a real ale party behind the sticks every game - Argyle foots the bill.

[TBone]

2 hours ago, Casually said:

Proposal for a 16 team licensed format:

Wigan

Leeds

St Helens

Warrington

Hull FC

Bradford

York

Newcastle

London

Catalans

Toulouse

Toronto

New York

Welsh Dragons

Scottish Bravehearts

Irish Wolfhounds

 

Getting a representative team from the other home nations will be difficult, no doubt. Wales are on their way, Ireland are struggling but if the amateur GAA could be tapped then there's a playerbase there. Scotland would need to get their situation sorted, but there's a lot of good player potential. The other teams I chose for historical markets & good growth areas.

Format wise, have every team play each other once, then have the top 8 and bottom 8 split into two separate groups, playing the other 7 either home or away, whichever they didn't in the first round. Then top 4 playoff. So the winning team plays no more than 24 games in the Super League, meaning more can be given to each game/CC, OR a serious annual international set of games with the home nations and France can be established.

Get TWP on the phone and ask how they got such good crowds so early, and try to emulate that everywhere. Aim for 10k crowds at least and go from there. Every 4 years evaluate the format/teams, so if say a Coventry team is performing good in the Championship, have good crowds, and a reasonable plan for the future, consider booting out an underperforming team with poor crowds like York or whatever.

So, in one fell swoop you've p-d off the following supporters in the Yorks area: (using 2018 average attendances)

Castleford 8k

Wakefield 5k

Huddersfield 5k

HKR 8k

 

Ok, you've brought in: (I've been generous with these attendances)

Bradford 5k

York 2k

That makes about 19k down on a region that currently sustains 50k (about 50% of the SL total), a potential  reduction of about 40% in the area (or 20% of all the people who attend SL). Good move!

Ok, some of those 19k might go to another club but I doubt it would be substantial. Oh, and Bradford might compensate for some of the loss as they might be able to get back to 8-10k  - but that might take some time as a lot of people got burned on the way down.

[Private Baldrick]

On ‎2‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 6:16 PM, Private Baldrick said:

Hang on a minute...….just getting my map out and some pins...………………….

I posted this on page 1 of this thread, 10 pages on and that is what's happening, same old arguments, same old pie in the sky nonsense. I will pop back in 10 pages time to see if it is still the same.  

[Casually]

21 minutes ago, TBone said:

So, in one fell swoop you've p-d off the following supporters in the Yorks area: (using 2018 average attendances)

Castleford 8k

Wakefield 5k

Huddersfield 5k

HKR 8k

 

Ok, you've brought in: (I've been generous with these attendances)

Bradford 5k

York 2k

That makes about 19k down on a region that currently sustains 50k (about 50% of the SL total), a potential  reduction of about 40%. Good move!

Ok, some of those 19k might go to another club but I doubt it would be substantial. Oh, and Bradford might compensate for some of the loss as they might be able to get back to 8-10k  - but that might take some time as a lot of people got burned on the way down.

I admit there's a few kinks to work out

[TBone]

1 minute ago, Casually said:

I admit there's a few kinks to work out

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, TBone said:

So, in one fell swoop you've p-d off the following supporters in the Yorks area: (using 2018 average attendances)

Castleford 8k

Wakefield 5k

Huddersfield 5k

HKR 8k

 

Ok, you've brought in: (I've been generous with these attendances)

Bradford 5k

York 2k

That makes about 19k down on a region that currently sustains 50k (about 50% of the SL total), a potential  reduction of about 40%. Good move!

Ok, some of those 19k might go to another club but I doubt it would be substantial. Oh, and Bradford might compensate for some of the loss as they might be able to get back to 8-10k  - but that might take some time as a lot of people got burned on the way down.

Not forgetting another 1,000 + at Fev and around 10,000 at Widnes,Leigh and Salford , and yet it all sounds so easy , doesnt it ?

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Not forgetting another 1,000 + at Fev and around 10,000 at Widnes,Leigh and Salford , and yet it all sounds so easy , doesnt it ?

Some of these guys should be in the running to take over from Ralph and/or Robert....

[RP London]

7 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

' Facts and figures ' ? , you mean like the ones politicians use all the time , but his or my or anybody else only provides ' opinions ' ?

There are plent of ' facts ' that he has used to debunk other peoples ' opinions ' , he is completely correct in stating that something like 50 odd attempts at expansion have failed previously

Yes he does repeat himself , why is that ? , maybe because quite often his ' opinions ' which are quite often ' facts ' are ignored and the same ' facts ' which are actually ' opinions ' are trundled out again suggesting that we are going to see ' World domination ' of sport by having a non existent billionaires fund new RL clubs all over the planet

Its a bit like my long running ' debate ' yesterday with regards the likelyhood of mergers in the UK being a viable option , where we had somebody suggesting that just because over a hundred years ago 2 recently formed [ 10 years or so ]essentially amateur football clubs both based and named after a single city had decided to chuck it in together , that present day mergers of clubs with over a hundred years of their own history in different towns would be a succsses

So yes , they were correct , it is a fact that about 120 years ago 2 football clubs in Newcastle , both called Newcastle , that both had been in existence a few years did merge and call themselves ' Newcastle ' but seriously is that a relevant argument to what we are discussing on this thread ?

Similarily when the argument that Catalans , the product of 2 merged clubs in France is used as ' proof ' that it would work here , well in truth it isnt , Les Catalans arent a merger of 2 previous UK RL clubs with a history all of their own , they are a completely new club started in 2006 into the British game , no different to Toronto , its the equivalent of Hull FC and HKR merging to play as one club in SL at New Craven Park and them sending a club to play in the NRL based at the KC stadium

So there we have it , another long winded post , this time by me , at some point in the day I'm sure parky will be along to provide his ' opinion ' or ' Facts ' on what other ' facts ' or ' opinons ' others have posted

So yes we all post ' opinions ' as ' facts ' , sometimes its just how relevant they are that is the question

But that is my point... yours have been relevant and not done like the above ina long winded post but to answer questions.. which allows for the discussion, whether we agree or not... I agree Newcastle is a poor example, I disagree Catalans is a poor example, for example. But you are at least discussing the points... parky just churns at the same old same old which has been shown to be factually incorrect ie the quote was never said or was fundamentally different to what he said it was, or figures were completely wrong.. rather than the interpretation of the fact which is what you are talking about and is fair comment and fair debate.

[Wollongong]

10 hours ago, yipyee said:

Clearly you have heard of it then, I use the word Calder as people know the area I am referring to.

I had never heard of brexit before someone made it up to describe an event.

Now everyone in the country will know what your on about as soon as you say brexit but before the vote it was a made up word and wasn't in the dictionary.

Stop using made up words... all of that last post was made up words!!!

[GUBRATS]

10 hours ago, yipyee said:

Clearly you have heard of it then, I use the word Calder as people know the area I am referring to.

I had never heard of brexit before someone made it up to describe an event.

Now everyone in the country will know what your on about as soon as you say brexit but before the vote it was a made up word and wasn't in the dictionary.

Yes they know of it , but they dont ' care ' about it

[The Parksider]

12 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

There are plenty of ' facts ' that he has used to debunk other peoples ' opinions ' , he is completely correct in stating that something like 50 odd attempts at expansion have failed previously

Yes he does repeat himself , why is that ? , maybe because quite often his ' opinions ' which are quite often ' facts ' are ignored and the same ' facts ' which are actually ' opinions ' are trundled out again suggesting that we are going to see ' World domination ' of sport by having a non existent billionaires fund new RL clubs all over the planet

It's 51 attempts and Sheffield (after 34  years) and Newcastle/Gateshead (after 20 years) and Donny (after 67 years) are still failing to make any progress in areas soccer and RU have the bigger and more established presence. I would guess under a reduced TV contract other "expansion" clubs like North & West wales and Coventry will disappear and take the figure towards 60 failures.......And it's notable that when clubs like Widnes, York, Bradford and your Leigh hit hard times, they don't just go "defunct" do they?? Good RL folk rally round. It's because they aren't a fantasy.........They are very real clubs with real substance and real and deep community support.....

13 hours ago, RP London said:

 I find him the most patronising and tedious, you know exactly what he is going to say and then repeat ad nauseam. Hence not being bothered to read them again. On one thread or another they have all been answered by me or someone else often with facts and figures

I have to repeat facts and figures only because you and others constantly ignore them. This is why I have to say them again and again. I do this because some other posters are open minded and are happy to discuss the game as it stands in the real world. Such posters without the alternative view sometimes start to believe the game is heading for Gubrats parody of: "World domination ' of sport by having a non existent billionaires fund new RL clubs all over the planet". 

Nobody has ever "answered me" (especially you, you forget you say you ignore me) as regards the inability of expansion to happen without backers who can provide the many £Millions over many years to keep a club going in non-RL areas, AND get the locals to actually play the sport. "Fact" is most won't play RL as they already have soccer and union (and american sports) to go at.

As Mr. Lenegan said expansion means a lot more people playing the game to a high level and as a result better paying TV contracts appearing. Maybe he is "Patronising and tedious" as well....

No offence to anyone, but why do we often start to believe these so called "expansion clubs" are real? Why do we believe everyone will embrace watching and playing RL in great numbers, oblivious to the reality sport outside the M62 does not want or need Rugby League, as it has soccer and rugby union thanks very much....

I say start backing OUR game in OUR area?? This is my bottom line. I don't mind anyone suggesting we should look to spread the sport in the hope it will catch on elsewhere but far far too often this is done in conjunction with insulting our great clubs who mostly have been flying the flag from the 1860's and 1870's, and suggesting they should give up. 

I'm sticking up for the "useless" M62 clubs against a constant barrage of insults against them and people like me from people like you. I love this game and it's real clubs. What is wrong with that?

[yipyee]

4 hours ago, The Parksider said:

It's 51 attempts and Sheffield (after 34  years) and Newcastle/Gateshead (after 20 years) and Donny (after 67 years) are still failing to make any progress in areas soccer and RU have the bigger and more established presence. I would guess under a reduced TV contract other "expansion" clubs like North & West wales and Coventry will disappear and take the figure towards 60 failures.......And it's notable that when clubs like Widnes, York, Bradford and your Leigh hit hard times, they don't just go "defunct" do they?? Good RL folk rally round. It's because they aren't a fantasy.........They are very real clubs with real substance and real and deep community support.....

I have to repeat facts and figures only because you and others constantly ignore them. This is why I have to say them again and again. I do this because some other posters are open minded and are happy to discuss the game as it stands in the real world. Such posters without the alternative view sometimes start to believe the game is heading for Gubrats parody of: "World domination ' of sport by having a non existent billionaires fund new RL clubs all over the planet". 

Nobody has ever "answered me" (especially you, you forget you say you ignore me) as regards the inability of expansion to happen without backers who can provide the many £Millions over many years to keep a club going in non-RL areas, AND get the locals to actually play the sport. "Fact" is most won't play RL as they already have soccer and union (and american sports) to go at.

As Mr. Lenegan said expansion means a lot more people playing the game to a high level and as a result better paying TV contracts appearing. Maybe he is "Patronising and tedious" as well....

No offence to anyone, but why do we often start to believe these so called "expansion clubs" are real? Why do we believe everyone will embrace watching and playing RL in great numbers, oblivious to the reality sport outside the M62 does not want or need Rugby League, as it has soccer and rugby union thanks very much....

I say start backing OUR game in OUR area?? This is my bottom line. I don't mind anyone suggesting we should look to spread the sport in the hope it will catch on elsewhere but far far too often this is done in conjunction with insulting our great clubs who mostly have been flying the flag from the 1860's and 1870's, and suggesting they should give up. 

I'm sticking up for the "useless" M62 clubs against a constant barrage of insults against them and people like me from people like you. I love this game and it's real clubs. What is wrong with that?

Parky, how many M62 clubs have failed?

Liverpool clubs included?

Also it's unfair to say if central funding is pulled Coventry and Wales will fail as half the m62 clubs would as well..

In fact we have had Bradford, Keighley, Oldham, Widnes, Salford, wakefield and Leigh all fail in recent times, some on multiple occasions! And this was with central funding in place! 

 

 

 

[GUBRATS]

15 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

But not enough 'care' about what they 'care' about.

Maybe not enough do , but there is actually ' some ' , whereas there wouldnt be ' any '

And yes this is me doing what I accused you of doing , pretending I know more about the opinions of people from a place I dont live in , so I'm quite happy to put it out there

Come on you ' fans ' of ' Calder RL team ' come on here and give us your thoughts on if you'd give up on Cas,Wakey and Fev to follow a merged ' super ' club ?

I await in anticipation

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Maybe not enough do , but there is actually ' some ' , whereas there wouldnt be ' any '

And yes this is me doing what I accused you of doing , pretending I know more about the opinions of people from a place I dont live in , so I'm quite happy to put it out there

Come on you ' fans ' of ' Calder RL team ' come on here and give us your thoughts on if you'd give up on Cas,Wakey and Fev to follow a merged ' super ' club ?

I await in anticipation

I reckon you must enjoy knitting fog in your spare time........

[Gooleboy]

So all these people in new areas are going to flock to see RL? Are these expansionist ideas similar to what Leeds have tried to do with an RU team and failed?

[M j M]

12 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

On average around 1700 people watch 2nd division RU at headingley, thats about the same as Fax get. 

The crowds are also systematically overstated - such that it has made a bit of a joke of the guess the crowd competition on the RU club's forum.

[Smudger06]

On 3/2/2019 at 2:53 PM, GUBRATS said:

Maybe not enough do , but there is actually ' some ' , whereas there wouldnt be ' any '

And yes this is me doing what I accused you of doing , pretending I know more about the opinions of people from a place I dont live in , so I'm quite happy to put it out there

Come on you ' fans ' of ' Calder RL team ' come on here and give us your thoughts on if you'd give up on Cas,Wakey and Fev to follow a merged ' super ' club ?

I await in anticipation

Speaking as someone who invaded the pitch at post office road a few times in mass protest when the proposal was under consideration as a teen.....absolutely nothing has changed. The Clubs would seriously consider it, the vast majority of fans of all 3 Clubs would strongly oppose it. Therefore the clubs would not form a Joint Venture. These 3 Clubs muster 15k fans together each and every week out to the Rugby League grounds. 

I'd say 4k may follow a Calder Joint venture + maybe 2k new fans = 6k, 5k would continue to follow the 3 Clubs in a closed off from SL forever Championship.....a net loss of 4k fans in one of its strongest heartlands immediately....The realisation of a door never reopening for the Championship and dreams crushed forever would see a further loss of fans to the game....whilst the Calder team may get net gains at a rate comparable to the 3 Championship teams losses so no gaining back of the 4k loss in the 1st Place, not for at least 10 years anyhow. As Memories fade and hopes of p&r returning disappear then that new club may reach the 15k original level after about 15 to 20 years......will support grow after that? Who knows.

That, id guess is roughly the same across cheshire, cumbria, manchster, hull and S. Yorks So not much point in mergers........

[headtackle]

I don't wishe mergers on anybody and would not want it for my club

Saying that Union seem to have made it work in Wales, have relocated what were previously London clubs to get a better coverage.

Read earlier in the week that Wales are considering relocating a franchise to North Wales playing in a 6000 seater stadium in Colwyn Bay. Wonder what the difference is?

 

 

[TIWIT]

On 2/27/2019 at 3:17 AM, The Parksider said:

That's not a bad shout but SKY (forget anyone else, they ain't in the frame) will want to maximise sales. I don't really know what the exact make up of the SKY TV audience is but I bet it is on the whole English, and based in places where they play RL like the north. I also guess outside the north those who watch on SKY probably have an affinity with the north, maybe they have just moved away. So I would guess primarily SKY will want to show what people in England want to watch and that seems to me to be northern English Rugby League. Chuck out useless Fartown and Wakey and watch the dish sales drop. 

Did you not know every club everywhere is growing. This is the "Ivy League" where no matter what damage is done to the growth, and no matter how much the roots are pulled away it just goes on growing and growing. No club could have done more to buck the real life downward trend than Featherstone Rovers who grew and grew their lowly championship club and then pitched for SL not on that "Growth", but on the back of rich man Faisal Nahaboo who rallied his troops for the assault on SL 

Nahaboo then scarpered and Rovers became Leeds"A" exposing that alleged growth as a myth Superleague will primarily always be picked on Northern RL clubs with rich owners who ensure the product is right, and who equally ensure they run player development systems promoting the local game and developing the local players into quality professionals - no decent players = no TV deal = no game, which you know.

You rightly called the big five but after that you lost it. HKR and Cas would have collapsed like packs of cards had Hudgell & Crossland, and Jack and Ian Fulton not put in several wedges of half a £million apiece. 

Superleague is clearly a rich owners league because the TV deal does not pay enough to professionalise smaller clubs or clubs with large overheads like Odsal. So primarily the first criteria necessary beyond the biggest of clubs is a rich owner which brings in HKR, Cas and like it or not Huddersfield.   I am told Michael Carter is a rich owner at Wakey.

The TV deal is set to go down and there is the issue of a reducing quality player pool. You cannot (and this was sorted out some years ago) have clubs in there who do not produce professional quality players, under licensing they were made to do this and will be again when we get sorted out so forget all your overseas (and North East) dreams, these are guest clubs and are not in the running to populate a league that runs professionally because fans of English clubs buy SKY dishes. 

Fartown have a mega rich owner, Fartown produce quality RL players, Fartown people subscribe to SKY sports, Fartown have a modern ground. Why on earth do you not have them on the list for goodness sake?

A reduced SKY deal and 10 clubs means:-

Wigan, Leeds, Warrington, Saints and Hull. Plus as it stands Huddersfield, Castleford, Wakefield and Hull.K.R. All with a rich owner and all producing players. The tenth could be Widnes or Bradford if they are picked up by a rich owner, or Leigh if Mr. Beaumont is prepared to play again after being shafted when his club went down from 11th. 

And that's basically it, and anyone who wants to kick Castleford out on the state of their ground is simply mad. That would be time to give up.

So after 125 years you'd go back to the Northern League because there's nothing 'super' about that collection of provincial towns

[The Parksider]

20 hours ago, Gooleboy said:

So all these people in new areas are going to flock to see RL? Are these expansionist ideas similar to what Leeds have tried to do with an RU team and failed?

Leeds RU did not fail as such. Their £Billionnaire owner Mr. Caddick still runs them for what they are, a Rugby Union club with substance not a rich man's fantasy. They have to do the business on and off the field and Mr. Caddick appears to be be happy with that which is fair enough. North Leeds and north of Leeds is very much a Rugby Union area and historically has been such. They had an audience when they used to be called "Headingley". They are a proper club not a "failure" read on.....

On 3/1/2019 at 12:54 PM, yipyee said:

Parky, how many M62 clubs have failed? Liverpool clubs included?Also it's unfair to say if central funding is pulled Coventry and Wales will fail as half the m62 clubs would as well.In fact we have had Bradford, Keighley, Oldham, Widnes, Salford, wakefield and Leigh all fail in recent times, some on multiple occasions! And this was with central funding in place! 

South Wales got a junior structure up and running in a relatively small timescale.SL quality players came from this structure.

Also I don't think you understand the concept of merger with your comments on Manchester.Any business looking to expand will always need upfront cash to do this, it's speculate to accumulate. This is usually expansion based on the core business producing surplus cash go fund expansion. In RL case the surplus cash is going to propping up failing clubs. 

Thanks for your politeness. I have included points you made on another thread for expedience.  

I don't think you understand the concept of M62 clubs if you include Liverpool and Manchester.  Both cities were Rugby Union cities and their major RU clubs dated back long before Rugby League. In terms of which M62 RL clubs have "failed" I can find Bramley, Normanton and Brighouse Rangers "failing" in the professional ranks many years ago, but they are still very much alive and kicking in Amateur RL. In terms of other clubs "failing" they have their up's and down's.......

But they don't collapse like a pack of cards and disappear first time they hit the money buffers do they?

Whilst owners may come and go the support systems in the various M62 RL communities keep things going through thick and thin. You appear to believe "central funding" keeps some clubs alive when the Championship operated without central funding pre-1996 and for many years post 1996. Most of our clubs date from 1864 to 1890 so I do not think surviving for well over 100 years is failure especially where cups and trophies have been won over the years and those clubs have developed an RL infrastructure.

The phoney baloney clubs all survive on money alone, and when that is pulled everything disappears.

I agree with you that we have some substance in France, Wales and London, but we also have history there. In London we first started putting on big games in 1907 and before the advent of Fulham when playing RL was a sin, the Southern Rugby League was operating  in and around London. Equally France date back to the 1930's and in 1908 there were six Welsh clubs in the Rugby League. Where we do not have history and some roots of some sort the only thing that keeps the game alive there is money and it takes shed loads of it and once it runs out the whole thing dies as it never built anything of any substance.

And as you see with latest richest ever "expansion" club it isn't building any roots either. 

Your last paragraph I don't agree with at all. There is NO surplus business cash in RL and mergers won't create any, only large cheques gifted from private owners and directors creates a surplus to spend more. If you go to Hawai and gift Honolulu RLFC $$Billions I am sure they will survive for decades whether anyone but you as the owner is that bothered or not. But they won't "grow" they won't put down "roots".

And this is where the M62 succeeds, Widnes, York and Bradford go pop, and not long after they are back on the horse. Outside the M62 when the owner falls off the horse that's it. Yes let's bring back licensing and make it plain on the licence we will admit clubs that have a substantial RL infrastructure of support, not clubs like Honolulu RLFC dependent on a single wallet with no roots at all.