Jump to content

Relegation


Who will go down?  

122 members have voted

  1. 1. Who do you think will go down?

    • London
      34
    • Hull kr
      26
    • Huddersfield
      39
    • Wakefield
      19
    • Leeds
      4


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I have spent the last hour looking and re-looking at the remaining fixtures and I am still no closer to predicting who will go down.

Due to for & against, London have to finish two points above somebody to be safe but with their final three games all against teams in the bottom 5 this is starting to look possible.

I have no doubt it will come down to the final round and I agree with some of the posts above that for the integrity of the competition the games that have any influence should all kick off at the same time (in fact, this should be a given for all games in the final round every season).

they only need to finish 1 point above someone to stay up and that could be interesting if that was also the situation for Wakefield on the last day of the season.

hull kr Huddersfield, Wakefield and London all on 20 points with Huddersfield having played all there games and its Wakefield v London in the last game of the season and hull kr at Salford and losing.

maybe even golden point with hull kr having lost at Salford in normal time and are on 20 points. 

a point is good enough for both wakey and London do you just drive the ball out for 5 tackles and kick for touch or risk a drop goal knowing you could end up on the wrong end of a 7 tackle set if you miss. even kicking off at the same time would not stop that scenario given a game can go to golden point .

yep fantasy and I'm sure it wont happen yet it is possible

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

London Broncos were in it last time , as were Bradford with their dirt cheap STs 

ah forgot London were in but Bradford did have pretty good gates to make up the numbers and Leeds were doing well with gates higher than this season 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

No he didn't he asked for evidence that none relegation matches increased or sustained attendances.

We can easily show that by comparing the difference between the same clubs not being threatened with relegation and being threatened with relegation.

Yes as long as they are in the same or similar positions in the league table , So Wakey in next to bottom in a licenced year compared to Wakey next to bottom in a relegation year 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, paul hicks said:

ah forgot London were in but Bradford did have pretty good gates to make up the numbers and Leeds were doing well with gates higher than this season 

Bradford were right in the middle of their sell it cheap , pile it high marketing strategy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scotchy1 said:

No, their position in the table is irrelevant. 

The idea is that relegation and 'playing for something' increases attendances. Clearly if attendances are lower then it cannot be said it increases attendances whatever other factors you want to blame for the fall. 

Of course it is relevant , the higher up the table the better your results have been , the more games you will have won , although this particular season is probably as close as we will ever see 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

What?

Please show that, particularly within the current season , all games involving non-relegation zone teams show a maintenance of, or increased attendance. If you, for example , find that a game or games involving 2 top 5 teams i.e a play off zone game, shows a decrease in attendance could you advise as to why this is and why play off zone games are "failing to attract people".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

But the argument is that being in a relegation battle increases attendances. 

Where is it increasing them? 

Nobody is arguing that , there are instances when it has , Wigan in 2006 being one , to compare like for like would require comparing the same club being in the same positions after the same number of games in non relegation and relegation years , now if you want to do that , be my guest 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, paul hicks said:

I thought it was about how many were going not how much they paid

Yes , but it has been suggested that the cheap price of the ST ( which wasn't sustainable financially ) resulted in people not being that bothered if they went or not , but the ticket still got counted , Bradford were hoping to make up the difference on ancillary sales , but it didn't work 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Yes , but it has been suggested that the cheap price of the ST ( which wasn't sustainable financially ) resulted in people not being that bothered if they went or not , but the ticket still got counted , Bradford were hoping to make up the difference on ancillary sales , but it didn't work 

 

as a supporter of a club that's not been in the habit of giving out cheap season tickets yet still got good crowds I just see cant why giving out cheap tickets is such an attraction if your not going to use them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relegation is obviously a bad thing , we all know that , and indeed agree on it 

But that is obviously offset by promotion , which is a good thing , we all know that and if the truth was told agree on that as well 

That's me done on it today 

Bye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we have to be vary careful about drawing conclusions on specific points out of general statistics like average attendances. 

For example Leeds and Wigan's attendances have dropped significantly since 2010. There's plenty of factors that feed into that imo:

For Leeds: Going from the threepeat team to a bang average league side who could turn it on in the playoffs, losing the big Bradford game, the club generally taking its eye off the ball with regards visibility and presence in the city, failing to come up with a solution to keep lots of fans attending during the rebuild meaning many got out of the habit, not capitalising on Grand Final wins, then of course 3 woeful years out of 4 since 2015 based a lot on poor recruitment. Many of these are interlinked of course.

For Wigan (as an outsider): Long term effect of Waneball and Maguire's methods producing efficient but robotic rugby, decrease in atmosphere at the DW. I assume Wigan fans will know more.

For both: decline in profile of RL more generally (and thus these teams leaned upon more on TV repeatedly).

Now I'm not going to say relegation is brilliant for spectators, but its certainly more interesting than dead rubbers. Equally, without the threat of relegation I doubt my team Leeds would have got their fingers out and made some mid season changes so we'd have had to put up with more dross with no prospect of the club doing any different because they wouldn't have to. 

The big losses (multiple thousands) these two clubs have seen in their average attendances are just as much a factor in the overall stagnation of the league's average attendances.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

RL isn't just effort based , skill and composure also come into the equation , sometimes players can ' try ' too hard 

Composure is something that doesn't get mentioned enough. Looking at things from a neutral perspective, I see it in St. Helen's, no matter what is happening they stay calm and composed and go about their work with the minimum of fuss. With a lot of other team's they can start well enough, maybe better, but when things start going wrong they can fast lose their composure. There must be something special in the way Saints are coached. I think they will surely miss Justin Holbrook next season. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

This is a complete straw man. The argument has nothing to do with the playoffs. 

Let's put another slant on it then.

Measure all national (and local) newspaper column inches, media interest before and after, TV reports, figures and appearances etc etc etc connected to promotion/relegation matches for example Hull KR v Salford 2016 or  Toronto v London 2018 or Wakefield v Bradford 2015 against similar late season normal league games in a non-relegation season.

The difference is exponential.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

For Wigan (as an outsider): Long term effect of Waneball and Maguire's methods producing efficient but robotic rugby, decrease in atmosphere at the DW. I assume Wigan fans will know more.

They certainly got the results but it wasn't always pretty to watch. Having got off to a slow start this year Wigan quietly motored up the table. If Adrian Lam can orchestrate Results with Entertainment, they will have hit Rugby gold. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

So why are Leeds attendances so bad. Surely as Leeds have moved away from relegation we would have seen a fall as leeds moved away from a fight that was the only thing keeping some fans watching?

But we dont, the fact is that none of the figures show what is being suggested which is that relegation increases attendances. We just dont see it.

 

Leeds have had 2 seriously good performances against Huddersfield and Catalans and are still in the mire and that's it imo. As I've said before I think there are many reasons contributing to the Rhinos attendances that aren't related purely to relegation or even this season.

I never actually specified which fans it was interesting for - which is an important aspect of why I said at the start we can't pull specifics from generalised figures.

Clearly for many supporters of those in a relegation battle it doesn't increase their likelihood of attending, I'd argue from experience with fellow Leeds fans as much of that is about being out of the habit of going and the generally rubbish quality on the pitch all season - rather than relegation. For others in the media and fans of all teams it adds another chapter to the story of the season and gives a narrative to each game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Andy Capp said:

They certainly got the results but it wasn't always pretty to watch. Having got off to a slow start this year Wigan quietly motored up the table. If Adrian Lam can orchestrate Results with Entertainment, they will have hit Rugby gold. 

I agree, I think its certainly the reason why they went with Lam and were going to go with Edwards because fans were voting with their feet and they wanted a change of direction and style of play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a personal perspective I am really interested in this current relegation battle, it is both fascinating and thrilling.

Will I be watching the TV games involving the relegation threatened teams with more interest than if it were just 'bottom is bottom' - absolutely I will.

I am also planning to get along to the London Leeds game on the 1st of September, a game I may not have been as bothered about were it not for wanting to see London beat the odds and stay up.

Just a personal perspective but at least it is factual and not speculation about what we think others may want/like.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

adds another chapter to the story of the season and gives a narrative to each game.

There is no doubt that it does that but does a story containing threat ever mean crowds increase?

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Then I believe you are misguided John, I have watched hundreds of games at all levels pro and amatuer since 1960, and I have always maintained that at whatever level this great game is contested if you have two teams of equal abillity the end result for those spectating is a usually a joy to watch. 

aah yes I agree, I guess I didn't explain myself well.

I was assuming teams in a league are more or less of similar abilities and hence why they are in the same league, I was trying to say that the game should be worth watching irrespective of relegation/promotion positions.  Of course some years you have a run-away team like Saints, but then they themselves are worth watching whomever they are playing.   That not to say that their isn't more general and media interest in relegation and league winning aspects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, redjonn said:

aah yes I agree, I guess I didn't explain myself well.

I was assuming teams in a league are more or less of similar abilities and hence why they are in the same league, I was trying to say that the game should be worth watching irrespective of relegation/promotion positions.  Of course some years you have a run-away team like Saints, but then they themselves are worth watching whomever they are playing.   That not to say that their isn't more general and media interest in relegation and league winning aspects.

And the interest in who is coming up , lose relegation and it's 2 narratives you lose , I'm sure the fans at Lamport won't be bothered in the least if they lose this years MPG/GF again ? , After all they don't have P and R in NA sport , or the NRL for that matter , I'm sure Mr Argyle isn't too fussed either way ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

And the interest in who is coming up , lose relegation and it's 2 narratives you lose , I'm sure the fans at Lamport won't be bothered in the least if they lose this years MPG/GF again ? , After all they don't have P and R in NA sport , or the NRL for that matter , I'm sure Mr Argyle isn't too fussed either way ?

not saying they wouldn't be. nor that it doesn't add additional interest. I'm saying or trying to say on the narrow point of attending or watching an individual game that the spectacle in itself (the nature of the sport entertainment value) should be why you want to attend.

If not it says a lot of whether people think the game/sport is exciting or good entertainment. If it take's relegation or promotion (or whatever ) to be the major factor or whatever to encourage the majority to attend then it doesn't imo say much for our sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, redjonn said:

not saying they wouldn't be. nor that it doesn't add additional interest. I'm saying or trying to say on the narrow point of attending or watching an individual game that the spectacle in itself (the nature of the sport entertainment value) should be why you want to attend.

If not it says a lot of whether people think the game/sport is exciting or good entertainment. If it take's relegation or promotion (or whatever ) to be the major factor or whatever to encourage the majority to attend then it doesn't imo say much for our sport.

As I pointed out before , let's just all play friendlies , who cares who wins SL ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.