Toulouse Olympique

[Harry Stottle]

On 12/04/2020 at 15:44, kiwis 13 6 said:

What French or Canadian Broadcaster is going to want a long term Super League TV rights deal when one of the French or Canadian sides could be relegated at the end of each year? Super League would need to guarantee the French or Candian TV rights holders the number of sides participating in the competition for the term of the contract to have any form of long term TV rights deals in either France or Canada.

So lets forget about the very 'British' way we play our sport in this country,  it is a competition not only for the top but also to avoid the bottom and relegation, French and Canadian teams are not British, but they want to play in our League's, it is they who approached the RFL not the other way round, we have allowed them into our comp to take part and not change the bloody rules to suit them.

[Harry Stottle]

On 12/04/2020 at 18:03, kiwis 13 6 said:

In the case of relegation which the UK fans seem to love so much there could still be promotion/relegation between UK sides

Talk sense man, half the comp plays under jeopardy, whilst others are excempt from relegation, I can't think of a better way to manipulate a league system.

[Oxford]

12 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

sane labour members working against the commies.

Clearly you've not read the report then.

19 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

after all we are not communists.

Speak for yourself Tommy

TO should be in SL but I'm a lefty, what do I know?

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, Oxford said:

Clearly you've not read the report then.

Speak for yourself Tommy

TO should be in SL but I'm a lefty, what do I know?

EXCUSE ME Oxy, you have copied and pasted someting I didn't write, into the box that states "Harry Stottle said" that is a complete misuse of the forum's rules.

[Oxford]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

EXCUSE ME Oxy, you have copied and pasted someting I didn't write, into the box that states "Harry Stottle said" that is a complete misuse of the forum's rules.

Yes I know Harry I just couldn't find the original and it's a fault of the system rather than me (Marxist Theory 101). And I did say Tommy in my post not Harry, Harry.

Anyway it just shows you can't trust lefties, doesn't it?

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, Oxford said:

Yes I know Harry I just couldn't find the original and it's a fault of the system rather than me (Marxist Theory 101). And I did say Tommy in my post not Harry, Harry.

Anyway it just shows you can't trust lefties, doesn't it?

You said it Oxy.

[Oxford]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

You said it Oxy.

Yes and I'm well aware  of how we're viewed, but if you think it's us you need to worry about, take a look around.

I hope those ideas for two up and no one down come about Leigh and TO would be great as far as I'm concerned.

[Omott91]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

So lets forget about the very 'British' way we play our sport in this country,  it is a competition not only for the top but also to avoid the bottom and relegation, French and Canadian teams are not British, but they want to play in our League's, it is they who approached the RFL not the other way round, we have allowed them into our comp to take part and not change the bloody rules to suit them.

This might cop some criticism but I think the sooner some English people drop the outlook of Super League being ''our league, our comp,'' the better Super League will be as I think this is what holds it back. The ''us'' and ''them'' mentality should stop and this includes higher management and powers that be. I think the worst examples of this are the Chairmen themselves.

It's fine to be parochial, but leave that for the on-field stuff and build up the rivalry like that. As they say in nature, diversity makes us stronger.

[Gooleboy]

1 hour ago, Oxford said:

Clearly you've not read the report then.

Speak for yourself Tommy

TO should be in SL but I'm a lefty, what do I know?

Toulouse Olympic should only get in to the SL by winning the Championship, same as everybody else 

[Lowdesert]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Ouch!

People forget last time in SL '17 we beat Saints, Warrington, Wigan, Hull FC and didn't finish bottom, such was the injury situation we played I think it was 34 player's, but it was Leigh so that plight and disadvantage didn't matter as much as when one of the 'top' clubs get an injury crisis and they recieve all the sympathy going.

Oh, forgot we also had Keiron Cunningham with his 'stupid' idea's, as a coach I don't  think I will get that much criticism from Saints supporters for saying that.

IMO of course.

Do you think Leigh would do better than last time around?

[ATLANTISMAN]

I think everyone has to realise that the chances of a French broadcaster paying money for SUPER LEAGUE/ FRL is ZERO (It won't happen in a million years Bien Sport paying some was a minor miracle) 

For the last 17/18 years (Since the end of the Pathe Sport contract FRL has been paying the production costs for TV back in 2004 it was Euros 30000.00 a match and would have gone up maybe by 5/10000 euros since)

For the record (Rough dates here) TV deals for FRL

1998 EUROSPORT This was by far the best deal FRL had for years as the channel is very popular in France many commented it was great to see the game back on TV after many years.

1999/2002 PATHE SPORT  Small cable channel (The old UK cinema news brand is still alive in France where they have many cinemas:)

2003/2011/12 (Around this time) SPORTS + Spin off from Canal +

2012/13/14 Onwards  BIEN SPORT 

In between various matches have been covered by ORANGE SPORT and a couple of other small channels that have now disappeared.

Way forward is for the FRL (As they did for the Lord Derby Cup) to put it on YOU TUBE and built things up from there maybe building up a small subscription base.

 

P 

[Harry Stottle]

8 minutes ago, Omott91 said:

This might cop some criticism but I think the sooner some English people drop the outlook of Super League being ''our league, our comp,'' the better Super League will be as I think this is what holds it back. The ''us'' and ''them'' mentality should stop and this includes higher management and powers that be. I think the worst examples of this are the Chairmen themselves.

It's fine to be parochial, but leave that for the on-field stuff and build up the rivalry like that. As they say in nature, diversity makes us stronger.

Yes in reading my statement back Omitt it coukd be construed as a 'us and them' but that is not really my intention, I would protect at all costs a proper contested competition that rewards the Champion teams and the least successful being relegated, I cannot see for the life of me as was suggested and applauded/liked by others how a league system could be operated with a portion of the teams exempt from the jeopardy situation,  I would like one of those in agreement to explain how it would work in practise, and I will start simply with the possibility of a team finishing in 8th position out of 12 teams who could be relegated whist 4 teams who underperformed being saved from relegation?

[Harry Stottle]

15 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

IMO of course.

Do you think Leigh would do better than last time around?

It was luck of the bad variety that stopped us retaining our SL position last time, all the injuries as I alluded to and not finishing bottom, and off course no Cunningham, even with the player's at our disposal we would have made a better fist of it if he and his methods had not been involved.

In answer to your question YES, we would do better than last time, and an average hone attendance of 6,500 would be better than others can acheive.

[Oxford]

24 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Toulouse Olympic should only get in to the SL by winning the Championship, same as everybody else 

Tribalism is everything Googlies even in these strange times.

[Harry Stottle]

17 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Tribalism is everything Googlies even in these strange times.

What has tribalism got to do with wanting a league system that is played out on the field and recognising those who are the best whilst not rewarding those who perform the worst, then replacing those team(s) with the best of the rest to allow them to have some time in the sunshine with the benefit's that come with it, surely the 'lefty' in you wants to spread things about a bit more and not just keep it to the chosen few?

[Oxford]

43 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

What has tribalism got to do with wanting a league system that is played out on the field and recognising those who are the best whilst not rewarding those who perform the worst, then replacing those team(s) with the best of the rest to allow them to have some time in the sunshine with the benefit's that come with it, surely the 'lefty' in you wants to spread things about a bit more and not just keep it to the chosen few?

To do with labels, the ones  we identify with and the ones which we don't, which is what tribalism is Harry.

In this case they must go through the proper channels v me.

[Eddie]

2 hours ago, Oxford said:

Tribalism is everything Googlies even in these strange times.

Tribalism

[Oxford]

6 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Tribalism

Did you not understand either?

Be well, take care.

[Eddie]

Just now, Oxford said:

Did you not understand either?

Be well, take care.

I just find it strange that you think liking the concept of promotion and relegation, and not wanting to promote someone in favour of another when they haven’t earned it on the pitch is tribalism. 

[mrfranco]

5 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes in reading my statement back Omitt it coukd be construed as a 'us and them' but that is not really my intention, I would protect at all costs a proper contested competition that rewards the Champion teams and the least successful being relegated, I cannot see for the life of me as was suggested and applauded/liked by others how a league system could be operated with a portion of the teams exempt from the jeopardy situation,  I would like one of those in agreement to explain how it would work in practise, and I will start simply with the possibility of a team finishing in 8th position out of 12 teams who could be relegated whist 4 teams who underperformed being saved from relegation?

I see this as a compromise - as we've seen before with various combinations of elevation into SL and protection from relegation for Catalans, London and other, briefer-lasting expansion teams in our promotion/relegation system. It wouldn't be perfect, but i think it could work.

The road we've gone down with Toulouse and all the N. Am teams is that they have to win promotion on the field. As a British sports fan, I agree with that and think it is working. The teams have to prove themselves worthy on the field, and the clubs get a few years to hone their working before hitting SL.

As more and more of these overseas teams hit SL, I think we will need to expand SL. I mean, otherwise it isn't expansion of the league, it's replacing historic English teams with shiny new foreign ones, whereas what expansionists want to see is a combination of the two - so let's keep a core of historic English teams and add the exotic overseas ones on top.

As SL expands with additional overseas teams that have won their way up on the field, I think it then makes sense to look at how you enable those new clubs to succeed in business and help grow revenue for SL and lay roots that will hopefully eventually lead to some development on the ground AND how you help the traditional clubs succeed too. You do that by looking at awarding franchised places to those overseas teams that have made it into SL for a period of say 3 or 5 years. But the key bit (and the bit that responds to your natural feeling of unfairness at having only some teams not subject to jeopardy) is that you have to have those franchises subject to review at the end of the period. And - unlike when SL was franchised - that review has to have teeth. If they are not up to scratch on (and off) the pitch by the end (or by near the end) of the period, then the franchise will not be renewed. This will only work if it does not appear to be a stitch-up like it did when SL was franchised.
Meanwhile, you keep the base of English clubs happy and healthy by guaranteeing they have 10 or so places in SL AND avoid the stifling of the lower leagues we had last time by continuing promotion and relegation for those domestic clubs. This also keeps the excitement of PR and our British sporting sensibilities alive. I agree there is a certain amount of "sticking in the craw" at the idea that not all clubs can be relegated, but it is a compromise solution.

As I say, it's not perfect (what system is?), but I think it could work.

 

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

Every hybrid solution is an avoidance at admitting key facts that deep down people largely know are true.

P+R is unsuitable for growing a game in new areas, it is unsuitable for selling commercial rights and tv rights, its unsuitable for expanding the sport and makes it riskier and more difficult to grow the businesses that sustain the game.

But, some people like it.

There is no solution that fits both of those arguments, no solution that suffices both sides. But rather a series of solutions that please neither of the parties. 

We can have P+R and please those who want it but the game will struggle to grow and will find expansion nigh on impossible

Of we can have franchises and the old guard will be unhappy, some who feel they should be in SL wont and the game can grow.

There isnt a solution that fits both aspects and any hybrid, rather than take the best of both ends up with the worst

Are you puzzled at how football is successful, despite it having the expansion-killing horror of P&R in every league in every country?

[Tommygilf]

11 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Are you puzzled at how football is successful, despite it having the expansion-killing horror of P&R in every league in every country?

The key difference is that its in every country. The FA isn't adding PSG or AC Milan to spread the game. FWIW I like mrfrancos compromise

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, mrfranco said:

I see this as a compromise - as we've seen before with various combinations of elevation into SL and protection from relegation for Catalans, London and other, briefer-lasting expansion teams in our promotion/relegation system. It wouldn't be perfect, but i think it could work.

The road we've gone down with Toulouse and all the N. Am teams is that they have to win promotion on the field. As a British sports fan, I agree with that and think it is working. The teams have to prove themselves worthy on the field, and the clubs get a few years to hone their working before hitting SL.

As more and more of these overseas teams hit SL, I think we will need to expand SL. I mean, otherwise it isn't expansion of the league, it's replacing historic English teams with shiny new foreign ones, whereas what expansionists want to see is a combination of the two - so let's keep a core of historic English teams and add the exotic overseas ones on top.

As SL expands with additional overseas teams that have won their way up on the field, I think it then makes sense to look at how you enable those new clubs to succeed in business and help grow revenue for SL and lay roots that will hopefully eventually lead to some development on the ground AND how you help the traditional clubs succeed too. You do that by looking at awarding franchised places to those overseas teams that have made it into SL for a period of say 3 or 5 years. But the key bit (and the bit that responds to your natural feeling of unfairness at having only some teams not subject to jeopardy) is that you have to have those franchises subject to review at the end of the period. And - unlike when SL was franchised - that review has to have teeth. If they are not up to scratch on (and off) the pitch by the end (or by near the end) of the period, then the franchise will not be renewed. This will only work if it does not appear to be a stitch-up like it did when SL was franchised.
Meanwhile, you keep the base of English clubs happy and healthy by guaranteeing they have 10 or so places in SL AND avoid the stifling of the lower leagues we had last time by continuing promotion and relegation for those domestic clubs. This also keeps the excitement of PR and our British sporting sensibilities alive. I agree there is a certain amount of "sticking in the craw" at the idea that not all clubs can be relegated, but it is a compromise solution.

As I say, it's not perfect (what system is?), but I think it could work.

 

That's exactly what I'd like to see. I think there is value in having new clubs prove themselves through the lower divisions but senselessly setting the game back in new areas does make no commercial sense.

[Eddie]

10 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Football isnt really growing the sport in new areas. In this country the youngest club that wasnt just the reformation of another club is Burton and that's a 70year old club.

Where the game is 'new' as a pro entity, america, australia it doesnt have P+R.

Football grew enormously with P&R, unless you don’t think it’s expanded since the formation of the second division in 1892.
 

It’s not P&R that is stopping rugby league growing, and imho it it was scrapped it would kill the game completely. 
 

ps I’m not arguing the point, I get what you are saying (though I disagree with it), but as a nerd I feel obliged to point out that Stevenage are a lot younger than Burton Albion. 

[Eddie]

6 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Football grew massively in the Victorian era and early 20th century. 

Most clubs alive in the football league now were alive in the early 1900's it hasnt, since then under gone any real expansion in this country  

Event stevenage whilst a new.club as stevenage borough they replaced an existing club in that area. It wasnt really taking the game to new places. 

Football expanded when sport wasnt really a business, now it is. P+R means that expanding the game is a much much bigger risk 

Are you only interested in SL though? What about all the clubs below who would be cut adrift if there was no P&R? There are plenty of teams in the championship who might realistically think they could get into SL at some point, and they and their fans would be lost to the game.

The club Stevenage replaced were only founded in 1968 and never played above counties level.