Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
GUBRATS

Any 1 from 7

Recommended Posts

Relegation and the risk of relegation is too big a risk for clubs and the game to bear and the benefits of P+R are so minor as to be inconsequential. 

The people so vociferously in favour of P+R are in favour of it because they would like their club to be promoted without it having the infrastructure necessary to take the game forward. They complain that there are clubs in SL that don't contribute to its value and they would like their club to be one of those clubs in SL not contributing to its value. 

Right now, if we made a decision to go to14 sides, no P+R, promoting Toulouse and Toronto they could be preparing for SL now, SL could go out and sell multi-year broadcast deals to france and Canada, we could be creating a package to sell to sky, putting in place the time-slots and fixtures we would need to to make it as attractive as possible to broadcasters, London could be looking at what they need to do to strengthen their young, largely british, often London developed squad, Leeds could be giving more game time to the fantastic crop of young players on cusp of breaking through, Hull KR could be investing in their youth development so they have more than 1 product getting games. 

Instead, London will be picked apart, players like Ferres will continue getting game time because its too much of a risk to rely on the likes of Holroyd and Trout, Hull KR will rely on players they have brought in from elsewhere, we can't sell tv rights because we don't know the make up of the comp.

And the biggest irony is, all this "interest" apparently being generated by the relegation dog-fight isn't attracting people to watch. 

Edited by scotchy1
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Relegation and the risk of relegation is too big a risk for clubs and the game to bear and the benefits of P+R are so minor as to be inconsequential. 

The people so vociferously in favour of P+R are in favour of it because they would like their club to be promoted without it having the infrastructure necessary to take the game forward. They complain that there are clubs in SL that don't contribute to its value and they would like their club to be one of those clubs in SL not contributing to its value. 

Right now, if we made a decision to go to14 sides, no P+R, promoting Toulouse and Toronto they could be preparing for SL now, SL could go out and sell multi-year broadcast deals to france and Canada, we could be creating a package to sell to sky, putting in place the time-slots and fixtures we would need to to make it as attractive as possible to broadcasters, London could be looking at what they need to do to strengthen their young, largely british, often London developed squad, Leeds could be giving more game time to the fantastic crop of young players on cusp of breaking through, Hull KR could be investing in their youth development so they have more than 1 product getting games. 

Instead, London will be picked apart, players like Ferres will continue getting game time because its too much of a risk to rely on the likes of Holroyd and Trout, Hull KR will rely on players they have brought in from elsewhere, we can't sell tv rights because we don't know the make up of the squad. 

And the biggest irony is, all this "interest" apparently being generated by the relegation dog-fight isn't attracting people to watch. 

Funnily enough I can't argue against anything you've put there 

But lose P and R and I'll probably stop going as I did last time , so it's me being entirely selfish 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We now have five sides separated by just two points and all of those sides are in danger as the bottom three sides are all picking up wins. 

I've had a look over the tables in past years.  The highest points totals for a bottom placed sides are:

1. Catalans in 2006 - 16 points
2. Huddersfield in 2001 and Salford in 2007 - 13 points 

It is quite likely that whoever gets relegated may finish on a record number of points for a bottom-placed side in Super League. It will be a shame for whichever sides goes down and for the league, as all 12 sides have contributed to the league this year. Saying that, whoever does go down this year, if they retain the bulk of their squad, should bounce back next year.

Maybe in 2021, we will be in a position to expand to 14, but I don't think we should rush to it, as I don't think we have the player pool and quality to sustain it at present.

Interesting watching RL Back Chat this week, hearing Francis Cummins saying that we should change the rules to prevent Leeds getting relegated. If we believe that any club is too important or too big to go down, then we cannot have automatic relegation from Super League.

One thing that is quite unique about a relegation battle (in rugby league terms) is that it makes every round gain importance. Everything else in our sport is decided solely in a one-off match.

In an ideal world, I would quite like a 14-team Super League, with bottom place relegated automatically and first place in the Championship automatically promoted, with the 13th place Super League team having a survival play-off or perhaps entering the Championship play offs as the first ranked seed, as they do in Scottish football.


The Tryline Blog - http://thetryline.blogspot.com/ - Twitter - @TrylineBlog
Latest Blog - "The Demise of Bradford Bulls - From Wests Tigers to West Wales - Next Stop: Dewsbury

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chris22 said:

We now have five sides separated by just two points and all of those sides are in danger as the bottom three sides are all picking up wins. 

I've had a look over the tables in past years.  The highest points totals for a bottom placed sides are:

1. Catalans in 2006 - 16 points
2. Huddersfield in 2001 and Salford in 2007 - 13 points 

It is quite likely that whoever gets relegated may finish on a record number of points for a bottom-placed side in Super League. It will be a shame for whichever sides goes down and for the league, as all 12 sides have contributed to the league this year. Saying that, whoever does go down this year, if they retain the bulk of their squad, should bounce back next year.

Maybe in 2021, we will be in a position to expand to 14, but I don't think we should rush to it, as I don't think we have the player pool and quality to sustain it at present.

Interesting watching RL Back Chat this week, hearing Francis Cummins saying that we should change the rules to prevent Leeds getting relegated. If we believe that any club is too important or too big to go down, then we cannot have automatic relegation from Super League.

One thing that is quite unique about a relegation battle (in rugby league terms) is that it makes every round gain importance. Everything else in our sport is decided solely in a one-off match.

In an ideal world, I would quite like a 14-team Super League, with bottom place relegated automatically and first place in the Championship automatically promoted, with the 13th place Super League team having a survival play-off or perhaps entering the Championship play offs as the first ranked seed, as they do in Scottish football.

If you're going to do that then whoever finishes top is the SL Champions 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Private Baldrick said:

Well either way, Leeds will be in the do do if they lose to Saints on Friday.

One silver lining if they do get relegated, it will put an end to the moaners and whingers of our (Fev's) dual reg partnership we have with them!  

More chance of my hair growing back than Leeds getting relegated, & if it happened sky money would drop a lot with the next tv deal & nobody would be laughing then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Competitive tension is good.

Leeds seem run well enough to cut their cloth accordingly if they went down and not go pop like Bradford. If not, tough titties. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Competitive tension is good.

Leeds seem run well enough to cut their cloth accordingly if they went down and not go pop like Bradford. If not, tough titties. 

Leeds largest expenditures are fixed costs, not variable ones. Their stadium doesn't make money at championship level. Its not a matter of cutting their cloth accordingly. 

The alternative would have been for them to not bother investing in the stadium. Im not sure RL needs to encourage clubs to do that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Relegation and the risk of relegation is too big a risk for clubs and the game to bear and the benefits of P+R are so minor as to be inconsequential. 

The people so vociferously in favour of P+R are in favour of it because they would like their club to be promoted without it having the infrastructure necessary to take the game forward. They complain that there are clubs in SL that don't contribute to its value and they would like their club to be one of those clubs in SL not contributing to its value. 

Right now, if we made a decision to go to14 sides, no P+R, promoting Toulouse and Toronto they could be preparing for SL now, SL could go out and sell multi-year broadcast deals to france and Canada, we could be creating a package to sell to sky, putting in place the time-slots and fixtures we would need to to make it as attractive as possible to broadcasters, London could be looking at what they need to do to strengthen their young, largely british, often London developed squad, Leeds could be giving more game time to the fantastic crop of young players on cusp of breaking through, Hull KR could be investing in their youth development so they have more than 1 product getting games. 

Instead, London will be picked apart, players like Ferres will continue getting game time because its too much of a risk to rely on the likes of Holroyd and Trout, Hull KR will rely on players they have brought in from elsewhere, we can't sell tv rights because we don't know the make up of the comp.

And the biggest irony is, all this "interest" apparently being generated by the relegation dog-fight isn't attracting people to watch. 

This lack of intrest you talk of are you referring to at the gate or in TV viewer's?  Certainly for fan's of the game there's great intrest in it, Leeds being involved makes it even more so.

You can't beat a good bit of Car Crash TV,  and don't give me any of that carp about people's livelihoods being at stake, that's the nature of being a professional sportsman, you have to perform when it matters or else you get shipped out just as people in day to day life understand😎

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Clogiron said:

This lack of intrest you talk of are you referring to at the gate or in TV viewer's?  Certainly for fan's of the game there's great intrest in it, Leeds being involved makes it even more so.

You can't beat a good bit of Car Crash TV,  and don't give me any of that carp about people's livelihoods being at stake, that's the nature of being a professional sportsman, you have to perform when it matters or else you get shipped out just as people in day to day life understand😎

Both, attendances are pretty poor, viewing figures for these games arent great either.

You absolutely can beat a good bit of car crash TV, I can list you off lists of great games I have enjoyed watching and remember. None of them were the generally turgid, low quality relegation battles we get.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

The introduction of Golden Point has ruined this next week for me .... all week I’d have been praying for a draw between Broncos and KR so Leeds could be bottom 😂😂😂

I wouldn’t be surprised if Leeds just break the salary cap to stay up and take a penalty next year. Remember Wigan a few years ago ....

Didn't you win the 2005 Grand Final signing Adrian Morley and been over the cap?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Taxi4stevesmith said:

Didn't you win the 2005 Grand Final signing Adrian Morley and been over the cap?

And?


Nottingham Outlaws Rugby League

Harry Jepson Winners 2008

RLC Midlands Premier Champions 2006 & 2008

East Midlands Challenge Cup Winners 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008

Rotterdam International 9's Cup Winners 2005

RLC North Midlands Champions 2003 & 2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Right now, if we made a decision to go to14 sides, no P+R, promoting Toulouse and Toronto they could be preparing for SL now, SL could go out and sell multi-year broadcast deals to france and Canada, we could be creating a package to sell to sky, putting in place the time-slots and fixtures we would need to to make it as attractive as possible to broadcasters, London could be looking at what they need to do to strengthen their young, largely british, often London developed squad, Leeds could be giving more game time to the fantastic crop of young players on cusp of breaking through, Hull KR could be investing in their youth development so they have more than 1 product getting games. 

So, to be absolutely clear, you are proposing that we change the rules of competition mid-season based on the possibility (by no means guaranteed) that 'multi-year broadcast deals' could be secured off the back of parachuting Toronto and Toulouse into what would then become a closed shop?

Can you really not see why a lot of people would have an issue with that scenario?

To be clear, I hope (and expect) that Toronto will be promoted this year, and I'd also like to see Toulouse in SL as well (although I'm not convinced they are anywhere close to being ready for it). At some stage, I'm not against the idea of a properly developed 'closed shop' top division. But why is there such a rush to do it now, even to the extent of changing the rules mid season? I don't suppose it could be connected to your club being in some danger of relegation could it?

And before you bite back, yes I am a Bulls fan and I don't want the door slamming in my clubs face. So we've all got self interest here. What I do want is for us to earn promotion, if there is going to be promotion and relegation, OR, if we are not going to have p&r, then I want us to have at least the opportunity to be considered as a candidate for that licensed / franchise league. That means putting the date for that in the future, and telling ourselves and other aspirational clubs what conditions we'd need to meet to be considered.

What I can't accept is a bunch of chairmen, some from clubs that actually contribute nothing to the size of the TV deal themselves, deciding to invite their hand-picked two clubs (only picked, if we are honest, so that we can get overseas TV deals), then telling the rest of the clubs that they can sod off, before slamming the door shut forever on them. If that happens, well, this supporter of almost 50 years will be done with RL.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Taxi4stevesmith said:

So why so bitter if Leeds did?

I think he’s just championing it as a method of achieving the goal without much of a penalty! 😁

He didn’t say he didn’t agree with it! 😉

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

So, to be absolutely clear, you are proposing that we change the rules of competition mid-season based on the possibility (by no means guaranteed) that 'multi-year broadcast deals' could be secured off the back of parachuting Toronto and Toulouse into what would then become a closed shop?

Can you really not see why a lot of people would have an issue with that scenario?

To be clear, I hope (and expect) that Toronto will be promoted this year, and I'd also like to see Toulouse in SL as well (although I'm not convinced they are anywhere close to being ready for it). At some stage, I'm not against the idea of a properly developed 'closed shop' top division. But why is there such a rush to do it now, even to the extent of changing the rules mid season? I don't suppose it could be connected to your club being in some danger of relegation could it?

And before you bite back, yes I am a Bulls fan and I don't want the door slamming in my clubs face. So we've all got self interest here. What I do want is for us to earn promotion, if there is going to be promotion and relegation, OR, if we are not going to have p&r, then I want us to have at least the opportunity to be considered as a candidate for that licensed / franchise league. That means putting the date for that in the future, and telling ourselves and other aspirational clubs what conditions we'd need to meet to be considered.

What I can't accept is a bunch of chairmen, some from clubs that actually contribute nothing to the size of the TV deal themselves, deciding to invite their hand-picked two clubs (only picked, if we are honest, so that we can get overseas TV deals), then telling the rest of the clubs that they can sod off, before slamming the door shut forever on them. If that happens, well, this supporter of almost 50 years will be done with RL.

Which is what happened to me after 3 years of licencing , it wasn't a conscious decision , I just lost interest , watching more away games than home for the day out 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cheshire Setter said:

I think he’s just championing it as a method of achieving the goal without much of a penalty! 😁

He didn’t say he didn’t agree with it! 😉

Indeed!


Nottingham Outlaws Rugby League

Harry Jepson Winners 2008

RLC Midlands Premier Champions 2006 & 2008

East Midlands Challenge Cup Winners 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008

Rotterdam International 9's Cup Winners 2005

RLC North Midlands Champions 2003 & 2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, paulwalker71 said:

So, to be absolutely clear, you are proposing that we change the rules of competition mid-season based on the possibility (by no means guaranteed) that 'multi-year broadcast deals' could be secured off the back of parachuting Toronto and Toulouse into what would then become a closed shop?

Can you really not see why a lot of people would have an issue with that scenario?

To be clear, I hope (and expect) that Toronto will be promoted this year, and I'd also like to see Toulouse in SL as well (although I'm not convinced they are anywhere close to being ready for it). At some stage, I'm not against the idea of a properly developed 'closed shop' top division. But why is there such a rush to do it now, even to the extent of changing the rules mid season? I don't suppose it could be connected to your club being in some danger of relegation could it?

And before you bite back, yes I am a Bulls fan and I don't want the door slamming in my clubs face. So we've all got self interest here. What I do want is for us to earn promotion, if there is going to be promotion and relegation, OR, if we are not going to have p&r, then I want us to have at least the opportunity to be considered as a candidate for that licensed / franchise league. That means putting the date for that in the future, and telling ourselves and other aspirational clubs what conditions we'd need to meet to be considered.

What I can't accept is a bunch of chairmen, some from clubs that actually contribute nothing to the size of the TV deal themselves, deciding to invite their hand-picked two clubs (only picked, if we are honest, so that we can get overseas TV deals), then telling the rest of the clubs that they can sod off, before slamming the door shut forever on them. If that happens, well, this supporter of almost 50 years will be done with RL.

The championship changed their rules last season  mid-season, and are rumoured to be doing so this as well. So lets not pretend this is the big bad SL clubs throwing their weight around. 

Changing the rules mid-season isn't ideal, but if the decision is made that this is the best way, delaying it a year and making next year some transition year not only delays us putting in place what we believe to be the best system, it leaves us with a damaging transition year where nothing really counts. 

I would be in favour of this change, at any time, whether Leeds were at the top or bottom of SL. However, lets say Leeds do get relegated, is forcing them to play in the championship for a year, the year prior to the new TV deal, before promoting them again to a franchised league doing any good for anyone? Is anybody going to watch Leeds run through the championship racking up big scores when promotion is already guaranteed? 

The standard for promotion will constantly be moving, that's success, that's it working. If you aspire to be in SL, make yourself good enough to be in SL, to contribute to SL. If you do that, why wouldn't the other clubs want you in there? your participation means more for them. That's the reason for admitting Toulouse and Toronto. Their contribution to the whole. That's why they are handpicked. Its why other clubs aren't. 

The door is never shut on other clubs forever, they get to that point and SL will want them to get in. 

Bradford especially, why wouldn't SL clubs want Bradford in? We know how big and positive their contribution can be. The only reason Bradford wouldn't be admitted in to a franchised SL is that they haven't dealt with the fundamental infrastructure problems of their business that has meant for the best part of a decade they have been completely unsustainable. They only difference between P+R and Franchising in Bradfords case is that under P+R Bradford don't have to deal with the issues that has seen the business built on sand to get promoted. That is not a good thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Relegation and the risk of relegation is too big a risk for clubs and the game to bear and the benefits of P+R are so minor as to be inconsequential. 

The people so vociferously in favour of P+R are in favour of it because they would like their club to be promoted without it having the infrastructure necessary to take the game forward. They complain that there are clubs in SL that don't contribute to its value and they would like their club to be one of those clubs in SL not contributing to its value. 

Right now, if we made a decision to go to14 sides, no P+R, promoting Toulouse and Toronto they could be preparing for SL now, SL could go out and sell multi-year broadcast deals to france and Canada, we could be creating a package to sell to sky, putting in place the time-slots and fixtures we would need to to make it as attractive as possible to broadcasters, London could be looking at what they need to do to strengthen their young, largely british, often London developed squad, Leeds could be giving more game time to the fantastic crop of young players on cusp of breaking through, Hull KR could be investing in their youth development so they have more than 1 product getting games. 

Instead, London will be picked apart, players like Ferres will continue getting game time because its too much of a risk to rely on the likes of Holroyd and Trout, Hull KR will rely on players they have brought in from elsewhere, we can't sell tv rights because we don't know the make up of the comp.

And the biggest irony is, all this "interest" apparently being generated by the relegation dog-fight isn't attracting people to watch. 

What a load of gonads that is and the bit highlighted could very well be the fear of relegation from a threatend clubs supporter, your spin is as good as Alister Campbell and he was two notches below shi-ite.

Edited by Harry Stottle
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

What a load of gonads that is and the bit highlighted could very well be the fear of relegation from a threatend clubs supporter, your spin is as good as Alister Campbell and he was two notches below shi-ite.

Its funny to see you pretend this is some kind of gotcha. It literally says that the threat of relegation and relegation are hugely damaging above. That is literally the reason I said I was against it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

Its funny to see you pretend this is some kind of gotcha. It literally says that the threat of relegation and relegation are hugely damaging above. That is literally the reason I said I was against it

Well if the likes of you get your way, me and I am sure many others will never watch RL again and Club's may as well pack it all in. I cannot believe for the life of me why you want this closed shop scenario that stops smaller Clubs ambition stone dead. Elitism is a terrible thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/06/2019 at 04:54, The Future is League said:

Now with Tony Smith in charge of KR  they will climb the table and i think we are looking at a Leeds v London shoot out for relegation

Here's hoping.

We have made an excellent start under Smith and we now have a quick turnaround before Thursday's game.

The spotlight is on Leeds it seems. I think a lot of people would love for London to stay up, nobody has really talking been about us, which is strange considering we are 11th, and Leeds seem to be in free fall.

Still plenty of games to play. I think another 4/5 wins keeps us up and London's run in is difficult.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gooleboy said:

Well if the likes of you get your way, me and I am sure many others will never watch RL again and Club's may as well pack it all in. I cannot believe for the life of me why you want this closed shop scenario that stops smaller Clubs ambition stone dead. Elitism is a terrible thing.

Elite sport is a brilliant thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, after yesterday, I've decided that promotion is vastly overrated.

😉


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, bamfordsbeans said:

If the likes of London,Salford,Huddersfield and Wakefield are our "elite",the game is in a sorry state.

The game is in a sorry state

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...