Rimmer ‘Clubs survival not guaranteed’

[Gooleboy]

2 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

If Cas, Wakey and Fev did merge then how many supporters would stick to the new team - assume it would still get called Calder as per the original plan 

Genuine question to fans of the clubs.... I'm predicting most would get behind it? Would certainly be a new Powerhouse club to rival the big 4/5

It would be goodbye from me.

[GUBRATS]

36 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

It would be goodbye from me.

More importantly , how do you think the 3 club owners would react ? , Do you genuinely believe they could sit down and work together ? , Or could 2 of them happily continue to contribute despite not being in sole control ?

[M j M]

3 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

If Cas, Wakey and Fev did merge then how many supporters would stick to the new team - assume it would still get called Calder as per the original plan 

Genuine question to fans of the clubs.... I'm predicting most would get behind it? Would certainly be a new Powerhouse club to rival the big 4/5

That club would be dead within two seasons due to lack of support - and one of Rugby League's strongest areas would be left decimated.

It amazes me how little understanding some people have for what makes people fans of a club, and if God forbid they were given the power how little care they would take in safeguarding the sport and the people and places that support it.

[GUBRATS]

3 minutes ago, M j M said:

That club would be dead within two seasons due to lack of support - and one of Rugby League's strongest areas would be left decimated.

It amazes me how little understanding some people have for what makes people fans of a club, and if God forbid they were given the power how little care they would take in safeguarding the sport and the people and places that support it.

As I put above , forgetting the fans for a moment , does anybody actually believe the 3 current owners/ investors would continue their support ? , Given as in any boardroom there is and always has to be one person in charge ?

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

As I put above , forgetting the fans for a moment , does anybody actually believe the 3 current owners/ investors would continue their support ? , Given as in any boardroom there is and always has to be one person in charge ?

As always it would depend on how a merger was brought in. If it was a Wests Tigers scenario we'd see the two clubs maintaining separate identities at the boardroom level for a considerable time with a concerted effort to work between the two. 

If it was a St George Illawarra example we'd see 1 club brought in as the clear junior partner in a club (only owning 25%) and eventually be bought out. 

If it was a Northern Eagles example we'd see two clubs merge, it fail, and the RFL choose 1 to carry on at the top level.

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

As always it would depend on how a merger was brought in. If it was a Wests Tigers scenario we'd see the two clubs maintaining separate identities at the boardroom level for a considerable time with a concerted effort to work between the two. 

If it was a St George Illawarra example we'd see 1 club brought in as the clear junior partner in a club (only owning 25%) and eventually be bought out. 

If it was a Northern Eagles example we'd see two clubs merge, it fail, and the RFL choose 1 to carry on at the top level.

And if it was the CAS,Wakey , Fev model ?

[Davo5]

7 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

And if it was the CAS,Wakey , Fev model ?

Well you’d gain a half decent stadium,Leeds would lose its “A” team and artist’s impressions work would dry up.

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Well you’d gain a half decent stadium,Leeds would lose its “A” team and artist’s impressions work would dry up.

That's about the best case scenario 

[Snowys Backside]

'merger'. 

What a nasty word. 

We have new words now like 'align' which is absolutely laughable. 

The best use of the 16 mlion quid would be to spread it to every single professional Rugby League club old and new and ensure they get through this horrible 12 months or so. 

No true RL fan would Ever support a merger as your Town, history and upbringing is everything. If Leigh went bust as a result of Covid, although I live in Warrington, that will be me done with the sport. 

My loyalty is with no other club! 

I would put my mortgage on most true RL fans perceptions being the same so stop all the stupid emails of mergers and look into ways of preserving RL at both Grass roots and within the current structure we have. SL 2020 is a completely irrellevent non event! 

[yipyee]

8 hours ago, WakefieldCityLoyal said:

You don’t understand the area if you think most would get behind it.

 Up the Trin 

 

Everytime this is mentioned it brings me back to scene on finding eric where a charicter is in the pub and says hes not bothered about utd on tele as he supports the breakaway club, as he leaves they start to cheer pretending utd have scored and he runs back in and shouts who scored it...

[yipyee]

1 hour ago, Snowys Backside said:

'merger'. 

What a nasty word. 

We have new words now like 'align' which is absolutely laughable. 

The best use of the 16 mlion quid would be to spread it to every single professional Rugby League club old and new and ensure they get through this horrible 12 months or so. 

No true RL fan would Ever support a merger as your Town, history and upbringing is everything. If Leigh went bust as a result of Covid, although I live in Warrington, that will be me done with the sport. 

My loyalty is with no other club! 

I would put my mortgage on most true RL fans perceptions being the same so stop all the stupid emails of mergers and look into ways of preserving RL at both Grass roots and within the current structure we have. SL 2020 is a completely irrellevent non event! 

With all sports there are 2 types of fan,

A fan of the club and a fan of the game.

Any fan of the game would still watch.

Interestingly theres a lot of football fans who arr only fans of the club and would not watch any other game. 

[yipyee]

7 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

" Well run club , player development and minimum stadium standards " , so no London , no Toronto ?

Haha you dont have a clue do you!

[yipyee]

9 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

I asked you for examples of badly run clubs , YOU stated clubs that had sold their stadiums , it was YOU that introduced stadiums 

So if London are not 40 years old , how old are Bradford,Widnes,Leigh ,Wigan,Saints,Salford,Hull FC ,HKR and plenty of others 

Toronto are THE biggest loss making club in the history of RL irrelivant of any plans they had or Covid 

Widnes is definatly a new club as they where badly run and failed leaving hard working contractors out of pocket.

A new club is now operating and said they neex to be semi pro as that is their level

[yipyee]

8 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

I was just going to add another of your criteria suggestions to a post, you have said it should be of a protectionist capability, so please put some meat on the bones of your suggestion.

It is not my call for a criteria to be set, it is you who keeps qouting the word, I won't be around if the game has a need to use one for we will be back in a closed shop situation, I am 100% behind retaining P&R

You can have P&R but with standards in place.

If every club in the leagues adhere to the standards set by the criteria then thete would be seamless P&R as with the NCL.

Do you even know about the NCL and their set criteria ??

Do you know what you need in place at amateur but dont at semi pro level??

I dont think setting criteria in place is so outlandish and a bad thing.

I think you are mistaking my comments as the criteira set years ago which IMO was designed to keep certain clubs out.

Even the previous system of liecencing wasnt a closed shop with Widnes and then waz it Salford? Who gained a licence..

Can i ask who you support as thered clearly chips knocking about with the whole standards and liecencing 

[GUBRATS]

19 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Haha you dont have a clue do you!

Both clubs ' lose ' millions every year , if that constitutes ' well run ' in your eyes ? Thankfully you're not in charge of one 

 

[yipyee]

4 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Both clubs ' lose ' millions every year , if that constitutes ' well run ' in your eyes ? Thankfully you're not in charge of one 

 

Proof please

Also if they are working to a budget and are happy to add money in to plug gaps then that would constitue well run.

London is a stable club who dont face winding up orders or stumble from one crisis to another with the begging buckets out.

I would hazard a guess that you support one of the smaller M62 clubs and have SL envy? 

[GUBRATS]

9 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Proof please

Also if they are working to a budget and are happy to add money in to plug gaps then that would constitue well run.

London is a stable club who dont face winding up orders or stumble from one crisis to another with the begging buckets out.

I would hazard a guess that you support one of the smaller M62 clubs and have SL envy? 

M Argyle has admitted to 10 million + put into Toronto so far 

London are virtually soley financed by David Hughes , a northerner from a town near the M 62 reportedly to the tune of 1.5 million a year 

Little point in discussing anything with you , you do seem to be just a wind up merchant , so I'll leave it here 

[yipyee]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

M Argyle has admitted to 10 million + put into Toronto so far 

London are virtually soley financed by David Hughes , a northerner from a town near the M 62 reportedly to the tune of 1.5 million a year 

Little point in discussing anything with you , you do seem to be just a wind up merchant , so I'll leave it here 

Not a wind up merchant at all, i made a valid post and you have consistanlty nit picked at 'criteria' until you come to additonal money put into clubs,

This is clearly all you have and it would appear to be jealosy as there are several clubs with rich benefectors like man city in the football world who can put into place the foundations of good well run clubs. Yes money is needed for this and yes a loss is made initially like any business.

Lets remeber Wigan, saints, Salford, Leeds, hull, catalan, huddersfield, warrington, hull kr, bradford (although these were badly managed) etc have all had directors who were willing to add money as necessary but all these strived to balance the books and ran the clubs as businesses, all of the above have made good business decisions and this is why they are the top clubs in the competiton. 

My point on criteria was a list of things that a club should spend resource any yes MONEY on.

You seem to have run out of options for debate and left it as my club has no money or a plan to grow and get more money to invest in systems so i will call you a wind up merchant to make me feel better...

As pointed our Saints were badly run and could well be in oblivion or league1 without an ex banker businessman stepping in and providing expert leadership...

Well run clubs is the key to the future, 

A list of criteria provided by an unbias source of what clubs should be spending on is also key.

[Bostik Bailey]

On 29/08/2020 at 09:19, Manfred Mann said:

We need to retain Wigan, St Helens, Warrington, Leeds, Hull FC, Castleford, Catalans and Toronto at a minimum to have a credible competition.

Add soon after. if possible, Toulouse, London, Bradford, Ottawa, New York, and Hull KR and the game will be reborn stronger as a somewhat international transatlantic competition.

Then the formula will be to ensure sufficient long term  success in terms of fans and sponsorship for all those 14 clubs to prosper. Their success will attract more interest in forming more clubs in north America and France. 

 

Sorry but despite Castleford’s on field success their ground is still in the nineteenth century. They make the competition un-credible, when a top club cannot offer basic hygiene (i.e. flushing toilets - not an outside wall) To their paying customers.

Cas cannot be included in any credible top flight professional competition.

[Snowys Backside]

21 hours ago, yipyee said:

Proof please

Also if they are working to a budget and are happy to add money in to plug gaps then that would constitue well run.

London is a stable club who dont face winding up orders or stumble from one crisis to another with the begging buckets out.

I would hazard a guess that you support one of the smaller M62 clubs and have SL envy? 

I can credit London but over the past 2 years they have punched well above their weight. Their was no one more pleased than I when they whizzed on Torontos chips and although they did really well in SL, their main chance to enhance their audience never materialised nor was their ambition to. The ambition of the club to grow their attendances a couple of years ago was zero. SL should have told them to move to a more suitable venue. 

They can never be a sustainable outfit having poor attendances in such a huge catchment area and that's where it ends and has done since everyone got over excited about 15000 crowds back in 1980.

Fair play to them though as they have picked up some good players no one wants and gelled together under a very good young coach. The infatuation with London Broncos though in its current state needs to stop. I have a back garden that holds more! 

[Wolford6]

I suspect there's a movement to merge the Bulls and Dewsbury. If that happens, I'll switch to Fax or the Cougars.

[Anonymouse]

I cannot see a season taking off in 2021 for the Championship or League one . There isn't going to be a tested vaccine until next winter they say and there is no way most of the clubs can afford to test players a couple of times a week during pre season and the season itself 

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

Always makes me laugh when the talk of six "big clubs" plus some exotic invention's are brought up.

Those six are currently "big" because they are up and around the top most seasons.

I reckon two or three really poor seasons in a "Northern Hemisphere" league would have the potential to reduce a few of them to the levels of those currently looked down on.

Lets take Saints under Cunningham as an example.

 "Red Vee" was in uproar, they won't be going again this year, they won't be renewing season tickets, they are finished with the game, etc etc.

All because Saints weren't walloping everyone every week.

They sacked the coach, started handing out spankings again and everyone's happy.

But in this brave new world what happens if that doesn't work, what happens if Saints are not just scraping wins, they are getting walloped.

How many are a struggling Saints going to pull after a couple of really poor seasons?

Same goes for most of the six.

Fifty odd years following the game tells me the fickleness of rugby league "supporters" should never be under estimated.

Twenty or so years on here tells me many are happy for sacrifices to be made as long as its somebody else making the sacrifice.

 

 

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Wolford6 said:

I suspect there's a movement to merge the Bulls and Dewsbury. If that happens, I'll switch to Fax or the Cougars.

What would be the (imagined) benefits of a merger? If you're Dewsbury, why not just let the Bulls go bust?

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

13 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

What would be the (imagined) benefits of a merger? If you're Dewsbury, why not just let the Bulls go bust?

Possibly because the Dewsbury chairman (48% shares owner, a further 20% owned by his family) has money invested (24.9% of the shares, with a further 8.1% owned by his family) in the Bulls?

And he's the Bulls' CEO.....