RFL faces promotion and relegation conundrum

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Is that because they can't survive without a 75k handout

Not bothered going past your first sentance, now tell me in your hoped for licensed SL how many of the present clubs would survive without the 2M handout, quite relevant in the discussion considering you keep throwing licensing in to substansiate your point.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Not bothered going past your first sentance, now tell me in your hoped for licensed SL how many of the present clubs would survive without the 2M handout, quite relevant in the discussion considering you keep throwing licensing in to substansiate your point.

There's no point is there if you're not going to actually try and answer the questions posed to you.

I'm comfortable that my views on this are entirely consistent. Yours are completely hypocritical, and the only conclusion that I can come to is that your views are based around what happens to your club. So all of your views are biased because of this, and your wider opinions on what is best for the game as a whole therefore lack credibility.

[Harry Stottle]

5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

1. You literally created that hypothesis I  your post.

2. Those were the rules for everyone. The demand to change only came after Toronto steam rolled there way through the comp 

3. I'm right though. You can have a pop at armchair fans all you want but without them the game would be severely damaged. 

Well that really is a struggle to come up with any logical answers.

[Harry Stottle]

6 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

There's no point is there if you're not going to actually try and answer the questions posed to you.

I'm comfortable that my views on this are entirely consistent. Yours are completely hypocritical, and the only conclusion that I can come to is that your views are based around what happens to your club. So all of your views are biased because of this, and your wider opinions on what is best for the game as a whole therefore lack credibility.

Got me in one, I am now just a supporter of this game and favour one team in particular, I want the best for them and the best for me as a paying spectator, no different from all the other 'hypocrites' from other clubs, ic my team was no more what would you expect me to do, go to any of the nearest clubs Wigan, Wire or Saints not a cat in hells chance that woukd be 'ultra hypocritical' for me to do so. 

I will then just go along to the two NCL clubs in the town in the hope that I can see them promoted to L1 .

[Trojan]

2 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Yes I have. Are you suggesting that their grounds aren't good enough, and there should be some sort of minimum facility requirements? Seems sensible. Sounds like you're advocating a form of licencing.

I've never had a problem with minimum facilities.   LSV, Fev, and Widnes's grounds would guarantee they passed.  I haven't seen the new York ground yet. Whereas Wakey after dark is a death trap  waiting to happen.  Cas's main stand is made of wood.  So perhaps Wakey and Cas should be dropped and perm any one of three to replace them.  Dewsbury's ground is pretty good, and there's scope for expansion, so they could come into the equation if they get things right on the field.  Same goes for Hunslet if they got some investment.  If York's ground is as good as they say it will be, and they can get matters right on the field,  perhaps, given their geographical situation they should be allowed first crack at SL

[Harry Stottle]

22 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Struggling on all fronts today arent you Harry

At least its friday

Kin' hell man, that aint half rich coming from you.

And being Friday you can look forward to having sometime off to concentrate more on this site than performing that job you do from home and presumably get paid for.

[Gooleboy]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Not bothered going past your first sentance, now tell me in your hoped for licensed SL how many of the present clubs would survive without the 2M handout, quite relevant in the discussion considering you keep throwing licensing in to substansiate your point.

And SL Clubs are frightened to death of being relegated because of the effect on their finances. If they are as well run and superior to Lower League Clubs, as some on here seem to think, surely they should be able to handle relegation and cut their cloth accordingly.

[Harry Stottle]

23 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

And SL Clubs are frightened to death of being relegated because of the effect on their finances. If they are as well run and superior to Lower League Clubs, as some on here seem to think, surely they should be able to handle relegation and cut their cloth accordingly.

Doesn't count Gb. There is not one SL club that would fall on hard times, should they be relegated. Have you not grasped that yet.

[GUBRATS]

3 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

There's no point is there if you're not going to actually try and answer the questions posed to you.

I'm comfortable that my views on this are entirely consistent. Yours are completely hypocritical, and the only conclusion that I can come to is that your views are based around what happens to your club. So all of your views are biased because of this, and your wider opinions on what is best for the game as a whole therefore lack credibility.

Consistent ? , As in Ottawa starting at the bottom of the Pennine league ? , New York can start this side of the hill 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

32 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Consistent ? , As in Ottawa starting at the bottom of the Pennine league ? , New York can start this side of the hill 

 That was your suggestion!!!

 

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

 That was your suggestion!!!

 

Indeed it was , which is just as ridiculous as yours that there are non existent clubs in the amateur ranks demanding automatic P and R 

But I don't need to post funny little films to make my point , why would that be ?

[Gooleboy]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

Why?

Leeds are a well run club. They own their stadium, have great facilities, generally make money, have a great academy.

In SL they make a profit.

In the championship their fixed costs are going to be exactly the same. Sure they can cut player wages but player wages only make up about 20% of leeds outgoings.

So if they are relegated and they lose sponsors and ticket money and tv money, corporate money etc. What do they cut?

I thought one of the reasons along with many others that people on here mention is the damage that would be done to a Club suffering relegation.

[Angelic Cynic]

18 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

My what? 

Do you go off old criteria when packing hand luggage for travel? No, you don’t. Now would you start claiming certain clubs should be thrown out of Super League based upon a load of old criteria to a purely hypothetical situation? No, you wouldn’t. It’s just daft. 

One link is 9 years old, the other is 4 years old. 

  Yea.That was about the time Licensing came in.There were 2 Licensing periods.I think they lasted for 4 years each time.

   But I can't fully recall.

   I still wait for Super League to match the NRL,the other code,and for the international game to be of real interest.

    Promotion,relegation and Licensing changes seem to occur more often than clubs are promoted and relegated.

   I still feel the parachute payments are unfair.

   I wonder how the sport will restart post-pandemic,and what the future plans are to be.Maybe there will be one system that prevails for at least a decade...