Clubs vote in favour of New York and Ottawa

[phiggins]

19 hours ago, Kayakman said:

Plus the league will then need to expand to include more teams; no one will be left out.  There is room for all.

But this sort of stuff needs to be planned now, which could be why clubs voted against the idea.

At the moment, there's a possibility of a 12 team SL with 5 overseas teams. So what's the plan to make sure that eventuality is planned for? Otherwise would be bad for the British game to lose another 4 top flight clubs.

[Oxford]

9 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

Of course most on here have no idea as they don't read anything up.

Do you have any evidence Parky? That's quite a damning statement!

 

10 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

It's easy to follow your own fantasy than the more informed RL press

My assessment is slightly different I feel they're prone to staying at home to cover matches and stories and relying on old data to inform their writing.

They also tend to be fans writing about their sport and that makes their judgement questionable at best.

13 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

(read it Perez's script is a re-run of his 2016 boast about North American development, and NA make the same wild claims of TV riches, players and anonymous rich investors

Are you saying that such opportunities are now unavailable in the US or just unavailable for RL?

14 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

"jam tommorrow"

So you're maintaining that despite all the evidence that  long term targets, commitments and a lot of hard work are the key issues in global marketing and recognition that no jam today means it's failed?

I would like to point out that at no time and at no point in the history of our sport has expansion had those three elements in place and has left everything to die on the vine after about five minutes. Which seems to coincidentally be the time span of your limits now, funny that!

19 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

puts the ball back into Superleague's court to be the ones to kill the American dream,

On what sort of evidence are you basing this idea? Which championship chairman have intimated in any way that they voted this way so SL can derail it all?

 

[Damien]

17 minutes ago, phiggins said:

But this sort of stuff needs to be planned now, which could be why clubs voted against the idea.

At the moment, there's a possibility of a 12 team SL with 5 overseas teams. So what's the plan to make sure that eventuality is planned for? Otherwise would be bad for the British game to lose another 4 top flight clubs.

There is no possibility of that in this TV deal. The absolute most that could happen in this TV deal is 3. If in the next TV deal Super League went to 14 clubs that immediately frees up 2 more spots for additional clubs, with the bonus of getting rid of the loop fixtures.

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, phiggins said:

At the moment, there's a possibility of a 12 team SL with 5 overseas teams. So what's the plan to make sure that eventuality is planned for? Otherwise would be bad for the British game to lose another 4 top flight clubs.

This should not be the plan. If it is, it is RL folk in charge missing the point. Dumping clubs for NA teams is a move envisioned by expansion's detractors, a piece of scaremongering of the worst sort. If it is the vision of an SL chairman then he's only concerned about his club and not the sport. If its shared by a pundit that's because bad news provides more in the way of interest especially in a sport with as gloomy a set of fans as RL.

This "will they let them in won't they let them in" nonsense is what drives away people who might invest in the sport. It has the same effect as the economic uncertainty we're feeling at the moment.

And of course it all needs to be planned for! When you're proactive you ask questions which could come from Parky's issues with expansion but you are really looking at solutions and ideas that will marry what you've got with where you want to be, in the best possible way.

The general tendency and certainly in Parky's case is that we're all supposed to be like Salford fans hoping that guy with the sandwich board  of "The End is Nigh"  outside the stadium, was right but before the final whistle if they're losing and aftewards if they're ahead. Sensible enough for a fatalist but hardly the way to run a game let alone the Universe.

 

 

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, The Parksider said:

Of course most on here have no idea as they don't read anything up.

The RL press ran plenty of analysis on Monday

As someone who reads League Express and RLW etc I don't think its a stretch to say these aren't reaching huge numbers of people, though still a decent chunk of supporters. Clubs have the benefit of social media now. They can speak directly to the fans. If I was involved in the backroom at say Batley or Halifax or Newcastle, I'd be wanting a press release out asap after the vote so that we could set our stall out to our fans. 

The fact that of the 4 dissenting clubs only Hunslet actually spoke to 1 of the papers is a pretty damning indictment of the cloak and daggers running this.

As for the rest, I listened to the 5 Live podcast in which Ricky Wilby, New York's frontman, appeared. A key thing I took away from that is that both NYC and Ottawa have learned from Toronto yet also want to do things differently by learning from their mistakes. 

[Damien]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

The fact that of the 4 dissenting clubs only Hunslet actually spoke to 1 of the papers is a pretty damning indictment of the cloak and daggers running this.

What did Hunslet have to say?

[mrfranco]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

What did Hunslet have to say?

To sum up, the Hunslet chairman said along the lines of 'I'm not being negative, we just need to think everything through and decide what league structure we're gonna have and where all these new clubs will fit, rather than just grabbing what is on offer now'.

[mrfranco]

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

What did Hunslet have to say?

A number of clubs (including Swinton and York) have also posted on their websites to say why they voted yes - mostly along the lines of what a good opportunity this is and it would be unwise to turn it down.

The York chairman is on record as saying that "It's more of a risk to say no than to say yes."

[Damien]

34 minutes ago, mrfranco said:

A number of clubs (including Swinton and York) have also posted on their websites to say why they voted yes - mostly along the lines of what a good opportunity this is and it would be unwise to turn it down.

The York chairman is on record as saying that "It's more of a risk to say no than to say yes."

It indeed is too good an opportunity. Beggars can't be choosers and their is a heck of a lot of upside and little downside. All with absolutely no investment and completely new money coming into the game.

[Oxford]

54 minutes ago, mrfranco said:

To sum up, the Hunslet chairman said along the lines of 'I'm not being negative, we just need to think everything through and decide what league structure we're gonna have and where all these new clubs will fit, rather than just grabbing what is on offer now'.

But he could just as easily voted yes and suggested and said that.

 

[Pulga]

8 hours ago, Chamey said:

If we take ticket sales averaging $30 a pop, 2250 average attendance, $30*2250*8 = $540,000, the current salary cap, then the tv deal just needs to cover flights for the league to be sustainable, for example net $2m/year.

At the halfway point of their second season they're not trending well. It's sitting at 1,850 average attendance which would drop 100k in ticket sales.

[Kayakman]

3 hours ago, phiggins said:

But this sort of stuff needs to be planned now, which could be why clubs voted against the idea.

At the moment, there's a possibility of a 12 team SL with 5 overseas teams. So what's the plan to make sure that eventuality is planned for? Otherwise would be bad for the British game to lose another 4 top flight clubs.

Nobody is going to lose anything...everyone is going to gain something.

[Oxford]

15 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

everyone is going to gain something.

I have argued this but part of the problem like throughout the UK is that the nay sayers have been determining the agenda for the discussion so it's always been about losing players, losing teams from the heartland and it's just Leigh in a suit!

They're British for the most part and TGG fans so they've spent their lives losing, feeling they've lost and assuming they've been cheated in some way. So their attitudes are not surprising in the least.

So many years of losing to the Kangaroos have simply confirmed their outlook and made them feel that's how the cosmos works.

I think we're a collective version of Stockholme Syndrome!

 

[Angelic Cynic]

4 hours ago, The Parksider said:

The RL press ran plenty of analysis on Monday and make no mistake this isn't about expanding the game in terms of players. TWP do not bother doing this. Perez is back to boasting that Ottawa is full of potential RL players "Within half a generation we should have some decent athletes" is about all he said on this, and all NY boasted was that North America was a "Massive market for athletes" and they would hold trials looking for potential top RL players. All this rubbish we have heard before.

 

4 hours ago, The Parksider said:

There's something tragic about Championship clubs living through several seasons of TWP and seeing themselves just how no TV deal to share here came from there and no players were developed yet they still end up having to vote for the same old "jam tommorrow"  baloney promised by Perez in 2016 and promised a second time. If you read what he said he boasted his financial backers were so rich they could fund Ottawa 15 times over, but declined to say who they were!!. Equally New York is full of rich investors but they could not possibly say who they were either!!!. Perez handed Wilby his script  and said "read that".

The championship clubs if people can remember this time last year were told by SL 8 of them could join an SL2 to make a Superleague of 2x10 clubs and the rest could go to hell. The clubs resisted this and decided to stick together and fight for their future. In NOT voting for all this phoney baloney (read it Perez's script is a re-run of his 2016 boast about North American development, and guess what?? New York make the same wild claims of TV riches, players and anonymous rich investors) they would cut off the only lifeline they have so they just have to "suck it up" and put their hands up. In voting "FOR" (and this is the key point) they leave it to Superleague to be the one's to be seen to be killing the North American dream and I have this bang on right because two SL chairmen came out prior to the vote to suggest that they would do this as both McManus and Pearson indicated in the press last week.

Perez: "My goal..within 10 years...is to supercede the NRL as the premier (RL) competition, we are going to be in bigger markets than Australia has, Toronto has show there is a massive hunger for Rugby league, my goal is the best players in the world playing in the RFL"

 

    Parky,

               It appears you are doubting Mr Perez while hanging on to the words of those 'elite' club owners in England.

Mr Perez did not own Toronto Wolfpack,and the responsibility for developing the North American athletes from other sports to rugby league seemed to fall under the responsibilities of Brian Noble.I don't think Brian Noble endeared himself to another rich individual,Dr Koukash,in his previous job at Salford.

   Do you dismiss Mr Perez but believe the owner of the 'elite' club,Mr Pearson,who is going to have our sport match,and surpass,the other code? 

  https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/jan/07/super-league-clubs-transformed-adam-pearson-hull   

  There also appears to have been both disinformation and misinformation emanate from another 'elite' club over salary cap breaches and the position of head coach at that club.

  Meanwhile,Mr Perez has been going above and beyond getting the sport publicity in virgin territory,being the most positive of rugby league supporters,even after giving the sport more money,and time,than many,and it seems many players from the M62 heartlands,and the NRL,don't seem to be complaining.

   Better to try,and fail,than never to try at all.

  

[Damien]

18 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Better to try,and fail,than never to try at all.

Never a truer word said. Some seem perfectly happy with the game not trying at all and at best stagnating as a small game in its existing small pockets.

[mrfranco]

25 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

     Better to try,and fail,than never to try at all.

  

All the more so when somebody else is paying for it!

[Chamey]

1 hour ago, Pulga said:

At the halfway point of their second season they're not trending well. It's sitting at 1,850 average attendance which would drop 100k in ticket sales.

However Austin has no (or 1) more home match, whereas Toronto has 7, that should lead to a rise just above 2k. 75 matches averaging about 2k equals 150k ticket sales.

[phiggins]

4 hours ago, Oxford said:

This should not be the plan. If it is, it is RL folk in charge missing the point. Dumping clubs for NA teams is a move envisioned by expansion's detractors, a piece of scaremongering of the worst sort. If it is the vision of an SL chairman then he's only concerned about his club and not the sport. If its shared by a pundit that's because bad news provides more in the way of interest especially in a sport with as gloomy a set of fans as RL.

This "will they let them in won't they let them in" nonsense is what drives away people who might invest in the sport. It has the same effect as the economic uncertainty we're feeling at the moment.

And of course it all needs to be planned for! When you're proactive you ask questions which could come from Parky's issues with expansion but you are really looking at solutions and ideas that will marry what you've got with where you want to be, in the best possible way.

 The general tendency and certainly in Parky's case is that we're all supposed to be like Salford fans hoping that guy with the sandwich board  of "The End is Nigh"  outside the stadium, was right but before the final whistle if they're losing and aftewards if they're ahead. Sensible enough for a fatalist but hardly the way to run a game let alone the Universe.

 

 

I agree with your post entirely.

My point was that a plan is needed. And while some suggest Leigh and Widnes voted against purely out of self interest, and avoiding competition. It may be a lack of plan or at least a lack of clarity in any plan that led to their vote.

This article doesn't help, which talks of fears of a "third of the competition having zero Sky Sports subscribers". https://www.totalrl.com/super-league-work-on-criteria-for-north-american-teams-ahead-of-huge-vote-thursday/ 

[phiggins]

31 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

That article is typical of the problem because it is told in a narrative that doesn't actually fit what it is saying.

The article starts from a point that SL is worried about expansion sides so is putting in place criteria to block them. The other way of looking at it is that SL are looking at possible broadcast rights deals from France the US and Canada and are putting place the structures to admit them.

There is a real worry that there could be 4 overseas teams could also be there is real excitement that there could be 4 overseas teams, so much so "those criteria and the implementation of them will be on a case-by-case basis, and Super League has the right to relax or even ignore them if the case is strong enough from a club that wins promotion from the Championship into the top-flight."

Again, I don't disagree with what you are saying. But my point is, hopefully the RFL / SL have a plan for how to make the most of these expansion clubs, so it becomes true expansion, i.e. more full time clubs producing players, fans and income. But, whenever RL and planning are mentioned in the same sentence I live in hope more than expectation.

SL should be open to a plan where new clubs in new areas that bring extra money into the game can lead to a SL of 14 - 16 clubs, rather than 4 new clubs looking to take 4 existing clubs' places.

My original point was, if the 4 clubs felt there was a lack of overall planning and strategy around these 4 clubs entry to our leagues, they would have valid reason to vote against them that are beyond just self interest.

[North but south]

8 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Conversely Superleague are getting an English  SKY deal but a reduced one so the clubs will neither give the Championship a penny nor contemplate "too many overseas clubs in SL" IF ANY (and if they do they say they will be French) and that is just common sense because the subscribers here want to watch their own clubs not Leigh in TWP shirts or Leeds in Ottawa shirts, and don't mind the French because they are real and have history. 

You state this alot. Do you really believe that sky subscribers would rather watch local than the best? 

I think most people will see Toronto as a league team. I dont think more warrington supporters would care if Castleford is playing london or Toronto as long as it's a good game. 

 

[North but south]

7 minutes ago, SL17 said:

What is the "best"? Toronto are light years from being the best.

The best is the better players in the highest standard available. That can be playing for Wigan, London, halifax, or places like Toronto. 

Toronto are a very good championship team, in 5 years they could be a very good sl team. 

I believe most supporters will see Toronto like they see London. Another team playing in the league.

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, SL17 said:

No! He delivered the plans for a Canadian side. Of which the RFL bought into. The investors delivered the side. Then set aside Perez. The Ottawa project could end up Déjà vu Toronto. As he said, he was told to go get the license and we'll talk. He's a baggage man nothing more.

Some can see it, obviously some can't.

I have no idea what you're saying here whether some can see it or not.

[Tommygilf]

18 minutes ago, SL17 said:

They should be, given their investment. But its not Candians players is it! So how could they have a very good SL side in 5 years without using RL Countries. Lets put it this way, if the RFL said tomorrow English players are classed as quota to Toronto it would be good night Toronto.

Thats the point of expansion not just a case of having a very good SL team. Two seasons in and not a Canadian in the team. Its not up to the m62 corridor, the RFL or anybody else to make that so,only Toronto.

The RFL quite clearly stating the due dilligence will be around development and a TV contract for Ottawa and New York. If the RFL don't see either, then the door should close straight away. Hopefully they have learned from the mistakes of taking Toronto on, on a whim in first place.

Why would they do that? From an English perspective they're giving more English players the ability to play professionally - surely if the RFL were being selfish and 'English first' minded, that is exactly what you would want.

Equally, that's not the only point of expansion is it?

 

[North but south]

40 minutes ago, SL17 said:

They should be, given their investment. But its not Candians players is it! So how could they have a very good SL side in 5 years without using RL Countries. Lets put it this way, if the RFL said tomorrow English players are classed as quota to Toronto it would be good night Toronto.

Thats the point of expansion not just a case of having a very good SL team. Two seasons in and not a Canadian in the team. Its not up to the m62 corridor, the RFL or anybody else to make that so,only Toronto.

The RFL quite clearly stating the due dilligence will be around development and a TV contract for Ottawa and New York. If the RFL don't see either, then the door should close straight away. Hopefully they have learned from the mistakes of taking Toronto on, on a whim in first place.

That's not what I was saying though. 

Do Warrington complain that they have Australian players or do they want the best team? Would more people watch rugby league if we banned all non home grown players? 

The point was that most sky subscribers want to watch good top quality rugby,  not just local players otherwise the NCL would be on sky not the super league.

[North but south]

46 minutes ago, SL17 said:

Two seasons in and not a Canadian in the team.

 

But they did have 3 and 1 American when they were in league 1.