Leeds are my bet to go down

[GUBRATS]

26 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

Your posts are a self serving moral high ground, that either has no idea of the reality of what Superleague is actually about. or is being disingenuous because it's your club in pole position.

It's about having the best clubs in there in terms of their ability to underpin the SKY TV contract, and their ability to underpin the development of Superleague quality players. Leeds have a good player development system and Leeds are a big draw card for the TV audience. It's many many years since RL here was a pure "sport"..... Superleague is a made for TV product.

You clearly have not looked anything up. Huddersfield came bottom in 1998, 1999 and 2000 and were not relegated, clubs refused promotion included Hunslet and Dewsbury, In 2005 two clubs were relegated, Widnes and Leigh to make way for Les Catalans who were protected from relegation, and yes when Celtic Crusaders just missed promotion in 2008 they went to 14 clubs because Crusaders actually were a club expanding the playing pool in Wales and underpinning the TV deal selling SKY subscriptions in Wales.

The club you want to be promoted promised both these things and delivered neither where is the integrity in that.

Even at the start of Superleague in 1996 they did not look at the league table and draw a line and say "You 12 deserve to go up" they refused entry to clubs in the top 12 and asked others to merge. The whole history of Superleague is not your faux moral high ground of clubs deserving to go up on merit.

And just where is the "merit" of spending the full Superleague cap plus marquee signings and trampling over part time clubs? If your hero has a bottomless wallet let him pay for player development officers and rent local facilities and engage staff to develop players like Leeds do, let him find a TV company to pay big money to share with SL clubs here to show his team on TV, before the drawcard that has been Leeds for 23 years is removed from Superleague to the dismay of many many fans here who do not dream about phoney clubs.

McManus on behalf of Superleague was very clear about the end of the season play off game that is heading to be Toronto.v.Toulouse. He was clear Toulouse would give a major boost to RL in France player and TV wise, but Toronto would do neither, and his bottom line was you cannot change the Superleague rules for the first quarter of the season to suit one club. Especially one club who have reneged on their promises to attract new TV money or new players - again ask yourself where is the integrity in that

You play to the rules set out at the start of the season , to change those rules during the season damages the sport more than anything else you could possibly do 

[Loiner]

10 hours ago, TheLegendOfTexEvans said:

14 team super league

I keep hearing this but read nothing to back it up. Surely too late in the day now to change it for next season. From a personal point of view if Leeds finish bottom they deserve to go down and I would be happy with that. Although 14 teams would make sense as I think the loop fixtures are ridiculous.

[redjonn]

2 hours ago, North but south said:

And this my friend is why people outside the sport see it as small time. 

Do you think if Liverpool were relegated the premier league would expand to stop it? Or stop Blackpool gaining promotion by changing the rules during/after the season?

The cornerstone of the sport should be that anyone can reach the top and anyone can be relegated. No wonder there is a lack of new investment and new expansion around the UK when small minded men are using it as a play thing.

yep, but they have no salary cap... the purpose of which is to try and have equal teams on the field. Thus the stronger run clubs are as likely to go down as others.

The premier league is nothing like that...

Its small minded to restrict the stronger clubs to what the weakest can afford. Its why we lack star dust players, and hence significant commercial opportunities.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

Not a chance of a 14 team SL next year. Theres no way the present incumbents would vote for a reduction in central funding.

[Clogiron]

Giving it some thought I think it's a fluid situation at the moment, do I think Leeds could finnish bottom, yes do I think they will be relegated,no. By the same token will TWP finish top/win the play off, yes will they be promoted, unlikely.

This view has no relation to what the village idiot says but over the past few weeks more clubs have fallen into the relegtion fight: Wakey, Shuddersford, Salford who are probably safe now anyway but if any of those plus London or KR were to finnish bottom the rest would be happy to wave them goodbye so it's as you were, relegation, no need to say or alter anything.

However, if Leeds finish bottom they would have to exempt them, 14 clubs is a non starter as it reduces their money so exclude the team who have won promotion on some pretext and as you were.

It's laughable, immoral, self serving, and deserves the contempt it will arouse in all who follow the game and wider but when has that made any difference before?

I'm probably crediting them with more nounce than they have displayed before in having contingency plans, it will just be the usual last minute panic, but that's my take on it.

Pity it couldn't just be played out on the field.

[redjonn]

3 minutes ago, Clogiron said:

Giving it some thought I think it's a fluid situation at the moment, do I think Leeds could finnish bottom, yes do I think they will be relegated,no. By the same token will TWP finish top/win the play off, yes will they be promoted, unlikely.

This view has no relation to what the village idiot says but over the past few weeks more clubs have fallen into the relegtion fight: Wakey, Shuddersford, Salford who are probably safe now anyway but if any of those plus London or KR were to finnish bottom the rest would be happy to wave them goodbye so it's as you were, relegation, no need to say or alter anything.

However, if Leeds finish bottom they would have to exempt them, 14 clubs is a non starter as it reduces their money so exclude the team who have won promotion on some pretext and as you were.

It's laughable, immoral, self serving, and deserves the contempt it will arouse in all who follow the game and wider but when has that made any difference before?

I'm probably crediting them with more nounce than they have displayed before in having contingency plans, it will just be the usual last minute panic, but that's my take on it.

Pity it couldn't just be played out on the field.

The rules are the rules as many say... that's fine you have to live within them

Never-the-less the rules are barmy... and lack any strategic insight or aforethought.

By the rules I don't mean P&R but the combination of rules such as lowest salary cap to suit the weakest team combined with simple P&R & "best player drain"... if it continues for a number of seasons, then as is being shown a number of teams could easily be P&R candidates.   At the moment their is a lot of glee that Leeds are getting their come uppance for all the success many hated them having, but it can be and will be other "bigger" teams if rules remain consistent.

It was only a couple of seasons ago when Warrington, another of SL stronger clubs, were in a relegation fight. As it is the salary cap looks as if it will be raised going forward. too late for Leeds maybe.

[MADREDNIGE]

12 hours ago, Canis Lupus said:

NO!  They need to be there on merit alone . Same as anyone else. The league will look like a joke if P & R is not done correctly

 

The game is a joke to most people with all the chopping and changing, even the papers and TV news sport don't have much to say about it. Good job us supporters stick by it. 

[Clogiron]

38 minutes ago, MADREDNIGE said:

The game is a joke to most people with all the chopping and changing, even the papers and TV news sport don't have much to say about it. Good job us supporters stick by it. 

If any of the scenario's I alluded to prove to be the case it will be the straw that broke the camels back for me, I have become increasingly dissalusioned with events that have played out on and off the field for the last few years and have experienced everything that I could expect, including a GB test series win over the Aussies (1967), to witness as a spectator. The lack of foresight, ambition and competance of the present ruling bodies just frustrates me to dispair and I can't see anything to give it the kick up the posterior it badly needs.

[Manx RL]

4 hours ago, Loiner said:

I keep hearing this but read nothing to back it up. Surely too late in the day now to change it for next season. From a personal point of view if Leeds finish bottom they deserve to go down and I would be happy with that. Although 14 teams would make sense as I think the loop fixtures are ridiculous.

Where do you keep hearing it though?

Mostly on this forum?

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

14 hours ago, SL17 said:

It wont be Hastings..

I think it will

[DiH68]

16 hours ago, Chris22 said:

If Leeds finish 12th, they will go down in my view.

I wouldn't then rule out an expansion to 14 for 2021. That would ringfence Toronto and London for a year and as close as you can, guarantees an immediate Leeds return.

Definitely a sensible option. Would look awful for the game to change the rules mid season for this year, but your suggestion would be good. I don’t think a year in the championship would do Leeds much harm... it seems to be a great division with some cracking games (and their fans might actually welcome some different games instead of playing Wigan and Warrington six times ) and they’d be pretty much nailed on to come straight back up 

[DiH68]

16 hours ago, Chris22 said:

If Leeds finish 12th, they will go down in my view.

I wouldn't then rule out an expansion to 14 for 2021. That would ringfence Toronto and London for a year and as close as you can, guarantees an immediate Leeds return.

Definitely a sensible option. Would look awful for the game to change the rules mid season for this year, but your suggestion would be good. I don’t think a year in the championship would do Leeds much harm... it seems to be a great division with some cracking games (and their fans might actually welcome some different games instead of playing Wigan and Warrington six times ) and they’d be pretty much nailed on to come straight back up 

[Morris Wanchuk]

Trinity need bodies back quickly, they are just not at the races presently. London & Hull KR are gonna overhaul them pretty quickly at this rate!

[Lobbygobbler]

2 hours ago, DiH68 said:

Definitely a sensible option. Would look awful for the game to change the rules mid season for this year, but your suggestion would be good. I don’t think a year in the championship would do Leeds much harm... it seems to be a great division with some cracking games (and their fans might actually welcome some different games instead of playing Wigan and Warrington six times ) and they’d be pretty much nailed on to come straight back up 

 

2 hours ago, DiH68 said:

Definitely a sensible option. Would look awful for the game to change the rules mid season for this year, but your suggestion would be good. I don’t think a year in the championship would do Leeds much harm... it seems to be a great division with some cracking games (and their fans might actually welcome some different games instead of playing Wigan and Warrington six times ) and they’d be pretty much nailed on to come straight back up 

Why not relegate one bottom garbage SL team (hopefully “broken promises” Wakey or “no away fans” Shudds) and promote 3?

[North but south]

7 hours ago, redjonn said:

yep, but they have no salary cap... the purpose of which is to try and have equal teams on the field. Thus the stronger run clubs are as likely to go down as others.

The premier league is nothing like that...

Its small minded to restrict the stronger clubs to what the weakest can afford. Its why we lack star dust players, and hence significant commercial opportunities.

They have ffp which includes a maximum salary spend with a maximum increase  per year calculated on how much they spent last year on salaries and how much extra income they bring in. 

[Segovia Carpet]

10 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

You play to the rules set out at the start of the season , to change those rules during the season damages the sport more than anything else you could possibly do 

Very True Starburg BUT never forget :-

 

Runcorn, Nottingham & Blackpool were thrown out of the League BEFORE the Season ended in 1992.  (Were given notice)

[redjonn]

13 minutes ago, North but south said:

They have ffp which includes a maximum salary spend with a maximum increase  per year calculated on how much they spent last year on salaries and how much extra income they bring in. 

chuckle, hardly equivalent to SL, and no doubt highly impacts Man City...

They do not set a salary or financial restrictions based on what the poorest club can afford.  Plus its the "glamour" clubs that drove the huge financial inputs to the Premier League that even the poor relation clubs can afford to pepper their teams with internationals from many countries further driving up the value to media and broadcasters and watching public.  With more clubs slowly adding to "glamour" clubs now moving from a top 4, to a top 6, to a top 8...so on over time.

 We drive and restrict our "stronger" clubs so they don't have financial (although with marquee giving a little more scope) advantage over the poorest club when it comes to the team on the pitch.  One of the reasons the sport is driving down hill, hard to attract major sponsors, limited broadcast appeal, with the star dust players moving to Australia further impacting its value.

Yep, we have a competitive teams on the park as a result but giving limited appeal to commercial entries.

We see things different to how to grow or at the minimum sustain the value and hence future of the sport here.

[redjonn]

3 hours ago, DiH68 said:

Definitely a sensible option. Would look awful for the game to change the rules mid season for this year, but your suggestion would be good. I don’t think a year in the championship would do Leeds much harm... it seems to be a great division with some cracking games (and their fans might actually welcome some different games instead of playing Wigan and Warrington six times ) and they’d be pretty much nailed on to come straight back up 

Wouldn't be so sure they would come straight back up.  I guess they would have to release their currently SL contracted players and would imagine the better players/ prospects such as Walker going elsewhere.

Yep they would be full time and have more financial strength compared to some but they have that now and can't spend. As Toronto showed last year, takes just one loss in a pressure game to miss out...

As to changing rules.. as many have said its something we have done before...

[North but south]

2 hours ago, redjonn said:

chuckle, hardly equivalent to SL, and no doubt highly impacts Man City...

They do not set a salary or financial restrictions based on what the poorest club can afford.  Plus its the "glamour" clubs that drove the huge financial inputs to the Premier League that even the poor relation clubs can afford to pepper their teams with internationals from many countries further driving up the value to media and broadcasters and watching public.  With more clubs slowly adding to "glamour" clubs now moving from a top 4, to a top 6, to a top 8...so on over time.

 We drive and restrict our "stronger" clubs so they don't have financial (although with marquee giving a little more scope) advantage over the poorest club when it comes to the team on the pitch.  One of the reasons the sport is driving down hill, hard to attract major sponsors, limited broadcast appeal, with the star dust players moving to Australia further impacting its value.

Yep, we have a competitive teams on the park as a result but giving limited appeal to commercial entries.

We see things different to how to grow or at the minimum sustain the value and hence future of the sport here.

you are right FFP and the Salary cap are very different things. FFP rewards the rich clubs whilst restricts any "poor" club wishing to challenge their way into the big teams. 

Both are wrong in my opinion but both were brought in to prevent owners from bankrupting teams.

[Davo5]

13 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Your posts are a self serving moral high ground, that either has no idea of the reality of what Superleague is actually about. or is being disingenuous because it's your club in pole position.

It's about having the best clubs in there in terms of their ability to underpin the SKY TV contract, and their ability to underpin the development of Superleague quality players. Leeds have a good player development system and Leeds are a big draw card for the TV audience. It's many many years since RL here was a pure "sport"..... Superleague is a made for TV product.

You clearly have not looked anything up. Huddersfield came bottom in 1998, 1999 and 2000 and were not relegated, clubs refused promotion included Hunslet and Dewsbury, In 2005 two clubs were relegated, Widnes and Leigh to make way for Les Catalans who were protected from relegation, and yes when Celtic Crusaders just missed promotion in 2008 they went to 14 clubs because Crusaders actually were a club expanding the playing pool in Wales and underpinning the TV deal selling SKY subscriptions in Wales.

The club you want to be promoted promised both these things and delivered neither where is the integrity in that.

Even at the start of Superleague in 1996 they did not look at the league table and draw a line and say "You 12 deserve to go up" they refused entry to clubs in the top 12 and asked others to merge. The whole history of Superleague is not your faux moral high ground of clubs deserving to go up on merit.

And just where is the "merit" of spending the full Superleague cap plus marquee signings and trampling over part time clubs? If your hero has a bottomless wallet let him pay for player development officers and rent local facilities and engage staff to develop players like Leeds do, let him find a TV company to pay big money to share with SL clubs here to show his team on TV, before the drawcard that has been Leeds for 23 years is removed from Superleague to the dismay of many many fans here who do not dream about phoney clubs.

McManus on behalf of Superleague was very clear about the end of the season play off game that is heading to be Toronto.v.Toulouse. He was clear Toulouse would give a major boost to RL in France player and TV wise, but Toronto would do neither, and his bottom line was you cannot change the Superleague rules for the first quarter of the season to suit one club. Especially one club who have reneged on their promises to attract new TV money or new players - again ask yourself where is the integrity in that

Another thread corrupted by your pathetic hatred.

[MattSantos]

Id love Leeds to go down. London will though.

Toronto will beat Fev or Leigh in final to go up.

[The Parksider]

21 hours ago, Clogiron said:

Giving it some thought I think it's a fluid situation at the moment, do I think Leeds could finnish bottom, yes do I think they will be relegated,no. By the same token will TWP finish top/win the play off, yes will they be promoted, unlikely. It's laughable, immoral, self serving, and deserves the contempt it will arouse in all who follow the game and wider but when has that made any difference before? Pity it couldn't just be played out on the field.

I don't think you have given it any thought, just the usual banal mantra of blaming the governing bodies for everything possible as though there are some genius sports administrators out there that would take the game to the stars. As for played out "on the field" is this where a team on full Superleague salary cap plus marquee signings on top of that sit in Toronto enjoying the summer weather before hammering part time teams who have to work all week then come off tiring long haul flights??  Is that really fair in your mind?  Is this really "sport".

That is what is "laughable, immoral, self serving, and deserves contempt" All your sort do is look at a league table but see nothing beyond that. Toronto would have to play fair if they ever did enter Superleague, but they can't be playing here all winter and that is their problem. Don't bother to reply  with mindless insults, just think about it for once

23 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

You play to the rules set out at the start of the season , to change those rules during the season damages the sport more than anything else you could possibly do 

Well the rule for Cloghead above is that clubs should play home and away throughout the whole of the season (OK dispensation for Headingley not being finished in time this year) so on that basis as SL bosses say they cannot change the Superleague rules for one club, especially when that gives them an unfair advantage.

There are two governing bodies and I can't find what the rule is as regards winning the Championship. I don't think there is a rule that there would be automatic entry from the RFL competition into the Supeleague competition for championship winners? The status of TWP is guests of the RFL and as Lenegan has said before that has nothing to do with Superleague. Of course TWP can ask to be guests of Superleague if they win the Championship??

So I disagree that there is a rule that provides automatic entry for guest clubs in the Championship to go up to Superleague. I also don't really remember any "damage" when the powers that be mucked about refusing Hunslet and Dewsbury, keeping Fartown in year after year, dropping Widnes from 11th. position, giving Catalans 3 years exemption from relegation etc. You see it has been often said that the sport is and should be about the "Top clubs", not what is going on at the bottom of the table. That's why they scrapped the MPG which was the "rule" as regards promotion - didn't see any damage over that either?.

23 hours ago, Loiner said:

I keep hearing this but read nothing to back it up. Surely too late in the day now to change it for next season. From a personal point of view if Leeds finish bottom they deserve to go down and I would be happy with that. 

Your confusing pure sport with business. The SKY deal created a made for TV sport. We all agreed a few years back this is how it is and if we do not give SKY the best product we do not get the best price, and if we become too idiotic (something Clog Iron needs to think hard about) and put into SL North American clubs and take out clubs like Leeds  then it will be time for SKY to actually step in and tell Superleague that far more SKY dishes are sold in Leeds that in Toronto.

Three years on Gentlemen and it's time to wake up and smell the coffee. It's a business........Not dreamland.

[latchford albion]

This time last week I thought that Salford were in freefall and were the likely candidates, but two good wins and a positive points difference probably puts them safe.  Likewise after Magic, I could see no way that Hudds wouldn't be challenging for the top five but that's not going to happen.

I just can't see Leeds finishing twelfth although the above shows what I know.  My bet would be one of London, Hudds or Wakey.

[Moove]

39 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

and if we become too idiotic (something Clog Iron needs to think hard about) and put into SL North American clubs and take out clubs like Leeds  then it will be time for SKY to actually step in and tell Superleague that far more SKY dishes are sold in Leeds that in Toronto

Do you view licensing as the way forward? Or is the preference simply to remove Toronto and redistribute their players back to UK teams? If Featherstone or Leigh win the Championship should they be refused entry if Leeds finish bottom? I imagine less Sky dishes are sold in those places too.

Just interested in what you see being the preferred solution. Not just a restating of perceived problems with Toronto either.

[Mr Plow]

23 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Not a chance of a 14 team SL next year. Theres no way the present incumbents would vote for a reduction in central funding.

But wouldn’t SL be in a stronger negotiation position if they have Leeds, Toronto, London and 2 French teams in SL