Leeds are my bet to go down

[redsi42]

Big names for rl fans yes but do they attract fans from outside their respective areas.

[Marty Funkhouser]

The  Premier League has been in free-fall since the relegation of Leeds United  in 2004...

[headtackle]

5 hours ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

The  Premier League has been in free-fall since the relegation of Leeds United  in 2004...

Football has the advantage that when lose one big city club there is often another to replace them; Newcastle, Cardiff, Swansea, Sheffield, Norwich  etc etc 

OK some smaller clubs ie Burnley, Wigan, Bournmouth but in the Premier they have novelty value 

 

 

 

[The Parksider]

23 hours ago, Moove said:

I also think the current solution is the best. If Leeds finish bottom they go down and we let the chips fall where they may.

As for who replaces them, it should be whoever wins the championship.  I want transparency, not rules changing on a whim at the end of the season. Toronto, were made to pay £500k for the privilege of joining our league structure. The rules at the time included the same pathway to SL which is afforded to any club currently.  To reject clubs arbitrarily or with changed rules would set a dangerous precedent...........

Thanks for your interesting reply but in this area I think you do not realise that Toronto applied to the RFL to join their League structure, and not Superleague itself who are now a separate organisation. All guest clubs need an invite to get into Superleague and as I set out even member clubs Hunslet and Dewsbury were denied. The invite cannot be considered until a club has either asked to be allowed straight in or has won the Championship and asks to be allowed in with that element of qualification. To be fair to SL TWP have been pre-warned that the lack of their value to the SKY deal, the lack of their own TV deal, the lack of player development and their inability to play home and away ALL season will all count against them (please note they offer no real plus points)  if they win the championship and then ASK to become members of Superleague on that basis.

A championship they may win by heavily outspending the rest by a country mile. That's ""sport"" for you!! This is why I said the Championship needs a salary cap so it's a fair and even competition and everyone has a chance rather than a parade for a rich phoney club who may well just go on being a year on year block to proper club's (Like York and Newcastle) ambitions if Superleague decide TWP are not wanted. 

21 hours ago, TheLegendOfTexEvans said:

May be not but I am arguing the game needs to go through a rationalisation process.We need to think different, even our current process for expansion is a contradiction.It needs vision and people who can think a few steps ahead. sitting down and bring in business experts to look at clubs business plans and the business plan for each competition\league.

Please, not the "Marketing experts" again, I'm quite resilient to insults, and calls for me to be banned but not the "Marketing Experts" I beg of you, you heartless devil!!. By all means apply chinese water torture to me, or hang draw and quarter me and leave my remains hanging over the door of Red Hall but not the Marketing Experts........

13 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

' business plans ' , not worth a carrot , especially those which are dramatically affected by the bounce of a ball 

More real world common sense from a Gentleman who has seen it in action first hand. Was it Arthur Thomas who used to bankroll Leigh? Same as Mr. Beaumont, if he was putting the money in Leigh floated if he wasn't then they sank (and just avoided a drop to the third division in 2009?)

"The bounce of the ball" is a great phrase, but the "Whims of the chairman" may also qualify. Sinking or swimming depends on whether Widnes's O'Connor was throwing around £500K cheques as a bond to join SL, or swanning off to Australia for a new life leaving the Vikings high and dry. How about Koukash overpaying players in secret one season and another taking his bat home as the fans resisted his "Manchester" plans. He still seems convinced a big city name like Liverpool means success.

No Ken Davey no Fartown,  He's the reason they survived bottom spot year after year when his club were preferred to winners of the Championship. HKR any good without Hudgell and Crossland? They tried to sell out to was it a Mr. Larvin? That fell through so they stayed because they did not want to kill the club by leaving. Castleford are indebted to the Fulton family, who if they pulled out, Cas would be heavily in debt.

Equally Kurdi turns on the money tap, up go Newcastle.....

Superleague is no ordinary business, but it contains owners who have been extraordinary business men. The idea some "business experts" should come in to tell someone like Mr. Caddick how to operate would be absolutely ridiculous let alone Mr. Beaumont. Superleague is not a business, it has one contract that is inadequate to pay the bills for 12 professional RL clubs, and it is propped up by directors loans they will never see back.

This isn't a "business" or a "sport" in the pure sense it's made for TV entertainment so the TV deal is everything, so No Mr. Caddick's Highly valuable Leeds do not go down and the empty vessel that is Toronto Wolfpack do not go up if sense prevails.......

[hunsletgreenandgold]

6 hours ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

The  Premier League has been in free-fall since the relegation of Leeds United  in 2004...

This was no doubt tongue in cheek but you'll find few in the game that don't agree Leeds have been massively missed from the PL. Obviously that's more in a sporting sense - but let's not compare the two sports as it never looks good for RL compared to Football, that if they did lose a side like Leeds it could have huge ramifications for the whole league. Leeds won't go down and not because they'll be 'saved' - they're just simply not the worst team in the league. 

[Davo5]

1 hour ago, The Parksider said:

 

A championship they may win by heavily outspending the rest by a country mile. That's ""sport"" for you!! This is why I said the Championship needs a salary cap so it's a fair and even competition and everyone has a chance rather than a parade for a rich phoney club who may well just go on being a year on year block to proper club's (Like York and Newcastle) ambitions if Superleague decide TWP are not wanted. ..

Was it "sport" when Leigh & Beaumont did the same a few years ago ?

Is that the same salary cap that Leigh & Beaumont managed to get scrapped a few years ago ? 

Normally I'd say you couldn't make it up,but you do over & over again.

[Omott91]

1 hour ago, Davo5 said:

Was it "sport" when Leigh & Beaumont did the same a few years ago ?

Is that the same salary cap that Leigh & Beaumont managed to get scrapped a few years ago ? 

Normally I'd say you couldn't make it up,but you do over & over again.

Logic appears to be lacking with certain posters posts.

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, Davo5 said:

Was it "sport" when Leigh & Beaumont did the same a few years ago ?

Is that the same salary cap that Leigh & Beaumont managed to get scrapped a few years ago ? 

Normally I'd say you couldn't make it up,but you do over & over again.

In defence the Championship SC was scrapped after the introduction of the ' 8 ' s structure , as that did require Championship clubs to compete against SL clubs on the pitch , that is no longer the case , so overall Derrick did Toronto a favour 

[GUBRATS]

10 minutes ago, Omott91 said:

Logic appears to be lacking with certain posters posts.

See above 

[Rupert Prince]

14 hours ago, headtackle said:

Can't see Leeds finishing bottom as the cynic in me suspects that they may start to get the rub of the green with some refereeing decisions to avoid the possibility

If they do however whilst it would be great fun it would cause some issues for the game as a whole 

Do we really want to lose a club like Leeds to the Championship at a time when we seem to be focusing on big city clubs as a means of attracting the international element

If Leeds went down would we be opening the door to the Union club. probably not but they wouldnt half milk it

Depending to your answer to the first question to make sure we don't lose the high profile "bigger" clubs are some clubs to be treated as too big to fail. I don't think so as would be unfair but then again Leeds is not my team

Would they be guaranteed to return quickly. Who knows - Leigh and Widnes havent and with Toulouse pushing hard for a SL place no guarantees

Interesting times !

You can finish top by 10 points and still run the danger of not being promoted.

[Omott91]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

See above 

The more teams that can spend the cap, the better off rl is, do you agree?

 There is absolutely no point in criticising twp because they spend the cap. Leigh did it a couple years ago who also had the same objective, reach Super league. In an ideal world every team would spend the cap. Most people understand this, unless they have an agenda.    

[GUBRATS]

2 hours ago, Omott91 said:

The more teams that can spend the cap, the better off rl is, do you agree?

 There is absolutely no point in criticising twp because they spend the cap. Leigh did it a couple years ago who also had the same objective, reach Super league. In an ideal world every team would spend the cap. Most people understand this, unless they have an agenda.    

Not bothered either way , just pointing out how the cap came to be dropped 

As long as we retain P and R then it is preferable to let the clubs that can afford it to run full time and prepare for the possibility of entering SL , if a closed shop is introduced then a cap would be a better option , although the spending on players will drop dramatically anyway as income declines 

[TheLegendOfTexEvans]

13 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Thanks for your interesting reply but in this area I think you do not realise that Toronto applied to the RFL to join their League structure, and not Superleague itself who are now a separate organisation. All guest clubs need an invite to get into Superleague and as I set out even member clubs Hunslet and Dewsbury were denied. The invite cannot be considered until a club has either asked to be allowed straight in or has won the Championship and asks to be allowed in with that element of qualification. To be fair to SL TWP have been pre-warned that the lack of their value to the SKY deal, the lack of their own TV deal, the lack of player development and their inability to play home and away ALL season will all count against them (please note they offer no real plus points)  if they win the championship and then ASK to become members of Superleague on that basis.

A championship they may win by heavily outspending the rest by a country mile. That's ""sport"" for you!! This is why I said the Championship needs a salary cap so it's a fair and even competition and everyone has a chance rather than a parade for a rich phoney club who may well just go on being a year on year block to proper club's (Like York and Newcastle) ambitions if Superleague decide TWP are not wanted. 

Please, not the "Marketing experts" again, I'm quite resilient to insults, and calls for me to be banned but not the "Marketing Experts" I beg of you, you heartless devil!!. By all means apply chinese water torture to me, or hang draw and quarter me and leave my remains hanging over the door of Red Hall but not the Marketing Experts........

More real world common sense from a Gentleman who has seen it in action first hand. Was it Arthur Thomas who used to bankroll Leigh? Same as Mr. Beaumont, if he was putting the money in Leigh floated if he wasn't then they sank (and just avoided a drop to the third division in 2009?)

"The bounce of the ball" is a great phrase, but the "Whims of the chairman" may also qualify. Sinking or swimming depends on whether Widnes's O'Connor was throwing around £500K cheques as a bond to join SL, or swanning off to Australia for a new life leaving the Vikings high and dry. How about Koukash overpaying players in secret one season and another taking his bat home as the fans resisted his "Manchester" plans. He still seems convinced a big city name like Liverpool means success.

No Ken Davey no Fartown,  He's the reason they survived bottom spot year after year when his club were preferred to winners of the Championship. HKR any good without Hudgell and Crossland? They tried to sell out to was it a Mr. Larvin? That fell through so they stayed because they did not want to kill the club by leaving. Castleford are indebted to the Fulton family, who if they pulled out, Cas would be heavily in debt.

Equally Kurdi turns on the money tap, up go Newcastle.....

Superleague is no ordinary business, but it contains owners who have been extraordinary business men. The idea some "business experts" should come in to tell someone like Mr. Caddick how to operate would be absolutely ridiculous let alone Mr. Beaumont. Superleague is not a business, it has one contract that is inadequate to pay the bills for 12 professional RL clubs, and it is propped up by directors loans they will never see back.

This isn't a "business" or a "sport" in the pure sense it's made for TV entertainment so the TV deal is everything, so No Mr. Caddick's Highly valuable Leeds do not go down and the empty vessel that is Toronto Wolfpack do not go up if sense prevails.......

Never mentioned marketing experts, I am talking about having an effective business model.

Not the same thing.

 

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, TheLegendOfTexEvans said:

Never mentioned marketing experts, I am talking about having an effective business model.

Not the same thing.

 

But he did point out the businessmen involved with the clubs , I'd suggest they all could produce effective business plans for their clubs 

[The Future is League]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/9355195/leeds-rhinos-set-to-swoop-for-salfords-robert-lui-in-65000-move/

[Moove]

13 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Thanks for your interesting reply but in this area I think you do not realise that Toronto applied to the RFL to join their League structure, and not Superleague itself who are now a separate organisation. All guest clubs need an invite to get into Superleague and as I set out even member clubs Hunslet and Dewsbury were denied. The invite cannot be considered until a club has either asked to be allowed straight in or has won the Championship and asks to be allowed in with that element of qualification. To be fair to SL TWP have been pre-warned that the lack of their value to the SKY deal, the lack of their own TV deal, the lack of player development and their inability to play home and away ALL season will all count against them (please note they offer no real plus points)  if they win the championship and then ASK to become members of Superleague on that basis.

A championship they may win by heavily outspending the rest by a country mile. That's ""sport"" for you!! This is why I said the Championship needs a salary cap so it's a fair and even competition and everyone has a chance rather than a parade for a rich phoney club who may well just go on being a year on year block to proper club's (Like York and Newcastle) ambitions if Superleague decide TWP are not wanted. 

No, I'm quite aware that they joined the RFL's league structure which SL have said they retain the right to a final say on promotion. My concern is the lack of transparency about what that is based on. Two months ago the criteria was apparently agreed in principle between the RFL and SL. Elstone admitted that the agreement of automatic promotion/relegation made it difficult to apply criteria retrospectively to clubs being admitted, however we're still waiting for the details to be confirmed. No mention of invites being required as far as I can see.

In my view it's wrong that we should be a few months away from the end of the season and still not know what this criteria is, but it's not entirely unsurprising. I also have concerns that the criteria may only apply to clubs looking for promotion and not the incumbents but that's probably a different discussion altogether.

You're quite right in pointing out that SL have referenced value to a TV deal, opportunity of a new broadcast deal and impact on competition integrity (I'm assuming that's what you meant by the home/away in winter issue for TWP?), albeit Elstone didn't actually quantify it. You did though choose not to reference that fanbase and adding to sponsorship opportunities were also referenced in equal measure as the other likely criteria. I genuinely cannot find any reference to growing the player pool being part of this criteria - regardless of how sensible that might be or your views on whether TWP should be held indefinitely to their original business plan which has since been abandoned.

On the salary cap point, I accept that having no spending limit skews the competition, but I'd be concerned about any club being capable of making the step up to SL and being competitive if the limits are too far apart. If Leeds are relegated and have to reduce salary spend from £2m to say £750k, they're basically starting with a new squad. If they then win promotion they've got two months to build a competitive squad otherwise they're straight back down again. If a club can show that they can sustain a higher figure then I think I'd want them to do that. Maybe if a club wants to spend at a higher rate they should pay an additional amount into a central pot for redistribution to the clubs who can't so they can invest more in infrastructure/marketing etc instead?

[The Parksider]

4 hours ago, TheLegendOfTexEvans said:

Never mentioned marketing experts, I am talking about having an effective business model.Not the same thing.

You can't wriggle out of this, whether people call for "Marketing experts" or "Business model experts" the same principle applies that all the rich SL club owners are rich because they created effective "Business models".  Gubrats has it bang on right as usual that it's the nature of the "market" the clubs are in that those who win games do well those that lose them do not do well and all clubs can't win all their games.

The most effective business model is win all your games....... So please no "experts" thank you

3 hours ago, Moove said:

I'm quite aware that they joined the RFL's league structure which SL have said they retain the right to a final say on promotion (my note - please see SL17's post). My concern is the lack of transparency about what that is based on. In my view it's wrong that we should be a few months away from the end of the season and still not know what this criteria is, but it's not entirely unsurprising. I also have concerns that the criteria may only apply to clubs looking for promotion and not the incumbents but that's probably a different discussion altogether.

I genuinely cannot find any reference to growing the player pool being part of this criteria - regardless of how sensible that might be or your views on whether TWP should be held indefinitely to their original business plan which has since been abandoned.

I'll take your point on the Championship salary cap. But can't agree on your view of P&R. The last major announcement from Superleague  came from McManus only weeks ago. Ever since the RFL and SL fell out Superleague's views have been publicised by articles that the top chairmen tend to take turns in writing. Once again McManus clearly said (and again I do not see this as a private view) that Toulouse offered infinitely more (French player development, French Derby, and possible French TV contract) than Toronto who offered nothing but a headache over early season fixture planning, and certainly no player development McManus said "TWP have got to start producing players but they are facing strong competition from Rugby Union. There is already a route to a hundred  semi pro union clubs over there"......There is no comparison......in France there is an infrastructure, there's a semi pro league, they are producing players".

The article appeared in League weekly just a few weeks back so there you can actually find it...... 

I also take serious issue with your idea that Toronto Wolfpack were at liberty to just "abandon" their original business plan without any consequences. Making promises to give the game here and ultimately Superleague, the two things they want of more class players and more TV money then just saying "we ain't going to do that any more" simply is not on. I take the minor point about what I think you are saying about criteria not applying to "incumbents" but if you mean Salford then you should remember they still run a development foundation to promote junior RL even though the academy closed.

22 hours ago, SL17 said:

Just get on with it. If Leeds are relegated, not good enough. P&R is in place for this season. The rules can't be changed.

We appear to be struggling with a definition of ""the rules!!"" what exact rules were they??. I do seem to recall somewhere way back early season that it was said that "P&R would happen" and someone would go up and someone would go down. This is Moove's recollection SL would have "the final say".  But I don't recall that being qualified as the winner of the Championship will go up and the bottom club in Superleague will go down.  As it stands now a very sensible and pragmatic decision indeed, could be for Superleague to promote favoured Toulouse regardless of who wins the Championship Final and relegate Salford who were stated just this week as having no benefactor, and are currently being heavily asset stripped and as such look like they may not be able to compete next season??.

Guaranteed P&R may well be in place but in what form and for who and why? Decided on the pitch/league table or decided by what's best for Superleague in the the SL boardroom??

[Moove]

7 hours ago, The Parksider said:

McManus said "TWP have got to start producing players but they are facing strong competition from Rugby Union. There is already a route to a hundred  semi pro union clubs over there"......There is no comparison......in France there is an infrastructure, there's a semi pro league, they are producing players".

The article appeared in League weekly just a few weeks back so there you can actually find it......

Fair enough, I don't read LW so hadn't seen that. If that's the view held by a majority of the other SL chairmen then I can see it would likely form part of any entry criteria. Whether that (along with other challenges if not met) would be enough to reject TWP remains to be seen.

I wasn't particularly referring to Salford (or any one team to be fair), but you are only looking at the player production element of any criteria. As Elstone has said fanbase, commercial opportunities, facilities etc would form part of the criteria as well, there are a few other clubs who might be struggling to meet them. Again it's difficult to know when there's no detail.

As for Toulouse, they would offer an infinitely more strategic option for SL but they have to prove themselves good enough on the field. Elstone said recently that there is no fast track route into SL at the moment (although I think that might have been in reference to the proposed Ottawa and NYC projects).

FWIW if TWP win the championship I can see SL taking a chance on them, giving them an opportunity to show they can attract the additional commercial aspect they've suggested. Particularly if they agree to forgo any Sky money. I'm not sure we can know what impact they'd have on SL unless we tried it because there isn't really a close comparison elsewhere.

If they do deem TWP as unsuitable for SL though then the way I've read the various comments from SL is that we would be unlikely to have P&R this year. They'd have to be very clear about the reasoning though if they wanted to keep themselves open to potential future opportunities whether that be in Canada, Toulouse, York, Bradford etc.

[Omott91]

If Twp win Championship grand final they will be in super league. End of story. Bet your house on it. Why else would they and now Ottawa be admitted into the English structure just to stay in the Championship?  

[Gooleboy]

7 hours ago, The Parksider said:

You can't wriggle out of this, whether people call for "Marketing experts" or "Business model experts" the same principle applies that all the rich SL club owners are rich because they created effective "Business models".  Gubrats has it bang on right as usual that it's the nature of the "market" the clubs are in that those who win games do well those that lose them do not do well and all clubs can't win all their games.

The most effective business model is win all your games....... So please no "experts" thank you

I'll take your point on the Championship salary cap. But can't agree on your view of P&R. The last major announcement from Superleague  came from McManus only weeks ago. Ever since the RFL and SL fell out Superleague's views have been publicised by articles that the top chairmen tend to take turns in writing. Once again McManus clearly said (and again I do not see this as a private view) that Toulouse offered infinitely more (French player development, French Derby, and possible French TV contract) than Toronto who offered nothing but a headache over early season fixture planning, and certainly no player development McManus said "TWP have got to start producing players but they are facing strong competition from Rugby Union. There is already a route to a hundred  semi pro union clubs over there"......There is no comparison......in France there is an infrastructure, there's a semi pro league, they are producing players".

The article appeared in League weekly just a few weeks back so there you can actually find it...... 

I also take serious issue with your idea that Toronto Wolfpack were at liberty to just "abandon" their original business plan without any consequences. Making promises to give the game here and ultimately Superleague, the two things they want of more class players and more TV money then just saying "we ain't going to do that any more" simply is not on. I take the minor point about what I think you are saying about criteria not applying to "incumbents" but if you mean Salford then you should remember they still run a development foundation to promote junior RL even though the academy closed.

We appear to be struggling with a definition of ""the rules!!"" what exact rules were they??. I do seem to recall somewhere way back early season that it was said that "P&R would happen" and someone would go up and someone would go down. This is Moove's recollection SL would have "the final say".  But I don't recall that being qualified as the winner of the Championship will go up and the bottom club in Superleague will go down.  As it stands now a very sensible and pragmatic decision indeed, could be for Superleague to promote favoured Toulouse regardless of who wins the Championship Final and relegate Salford who were stated just this week as having no benefactor, and are currently being heavily asset stripped and as such look like they may not be able to compete next season??.

Guaranteed P&R may well be in place but in what form and for who and why? Decided on the pitch/league table or decided by what's best for Superleague in the the SL boardroom??

So it sounds like being promoted is an honour to be bestowed by the SL Chairmen to join their elite League as long as certain criteria is met, i.e. Rich Backer, Ground standard, Fan support etc. If these successful business men demanding such strict standards to join their competition, why did they let London in?

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

Wayne Bennett has been coaching the Rhinos on his UK trip. Thank you RFL 

[deluded pom?]

1 hour ago, Gooleboy said:

So it sounds like being promoted is an honour to be bestowed by the SL Chairmen to join their elite League as long as certain criteria is met, i.e. Rich Backer, Ground standard, Fan support etc. 

If that scenario ensues I think that will be it for me with professional rugby league in this country.

[Harry Stottle]

9 hours ago, The Parksider said:

 I take the minor point about what I think you are saying about criteria not applying to "incumbents"

In the main I am in agreement with most of what you write Mr. Parksider, but regarding what you deem as a minor point will surely be enticing a dispute maybe it go as as far as a court of law if a club is rejected on a criteria that a present SL club cannot fulfill. 

Lets take this a step further on and expand the suggestion to the re-introduction of Licensing (which I am sure will not be to far away) will that amount to being by "invitation" only or by conforming to a set scale of criteria, last time it was a total sham there were winners and losers being accepted or rejected by promises that were never fulfilled, if it is the former and by invitation, who precisely be doing the inviting, those who have a conflict of interest in their voting process?

Moove is right in that at this stage of the season - I would go further and say it should have been at the onset of this season that the rules for entry to SL should have been published - we should know the bench marks, it was Leneghan who interrupted Elstone at his introduction and the scrapping of the 8's fully 6 months before the start of the '19 season to add 'A promoted club will only be accepted to join SL if they can fulfill certain conditions' (or words to that effect) I have often wondered if that was just a spontaneous remark or a considered discussed intention, whatever he said it, only time will tell if there was any substance to it.

 

[Manx RL]

1 hour ago, Gooleboy said:

So it sounds like being promoted is an honour to be bestowed by the SL Chairmen to join their elite League as long as certain criteria is met, i.e. Rich Backer, Ground standard, Fan support etc. If these successful business men demanding such strict standards to join their competition, why did they let London in?

Rich Backer is a very popular guy, much in demand.

[East of the Moon]

1 hour ago, Manx RL said:

Rich Backer is a very popular guy, much in demand.

Rich Ricci the man who managed the Lehman Bros overtake is a very popular guy in horse racing, providing many jobs and stability in that sphere, he's very much in demand!