Jump to content

Match cancellations


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Hammerless Nail said:

I attended a presentation given by then owner Marwan Koukash about the closure of the academy. He said that the RFL had assessed all SL clubs' academies, and had given Salford the lowest rating, a rating that meant the club wouldn't receive any funding from the RFL for their academy. The criticisms seemed to be all about the management side rather than what was happening with player development. Marwan accepted those criticisms and spent money correcting them. He then asked the RFL to reassess Salford's academy, but they refused, and said they wouldn't reassess for another five years. That meant that, in order to run an academy, Salford would have to pay around £100,000 per year for five years, and that would have to come out of money intended to pay for the first team squad. Marwan didn't think this was fair or viable, and so felt he had no choice but to disband it.

It's fair to say that Marwan had a somewhat tenuous connection with reality, but this story seemed to be confirmed by the clubs then performance director. I've never seen cost issues alone cited as the reason the academy was closed, but I'd be interested to see any links you have for this claim.

Marwan later said that disbanding the academy was the worst decision he made at Salford, a bold assertion given the number of runners and riders in that particular field.

Just what was reported in the media via TotalRL and Love Rugby League. 

Still, £500,000 is a lot to spend to wait for a result in over five years’ time, so it’s an understandable financial decision to take. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

It wasn’t. Not at all. It was at the game. Not Salford. 

So why did you refer to Salford in every paragraph?

"A club that has been back in Super League for eleven years, earning £10 million"

"They closed their academy in 2016."

"They are now ... playing catch up."

I understand your points apply to other clubs. Can you understand how I think you just want to bash Salford?

 

Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society

Founder (and, so far, only) member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tonyXIII said:

So why did you refer to Salford in every paragraph?

"A club that has been back in Super League for eleven years, earning £10 million"

"They closed their academy in 2016."

"They are now ... playing catch up."

I understand your points apply to other clubs. Can you understand how I think you just want to bash Salford?

 

You know, because I’m reacting to the breaking news that Salford have had to postpone a game. It’s not happened at Huddersfield or Wakefield or Hull KR or Saints or Wigan...

Salford have earned in the region of £10m  

Salford did close their Academy in 2016.

Salford, off the back of a Wembley appearance, are playing catch up on games, alongside catch-up caused by a pandemic.

No, I can’t understand why you’d think that. 

Edited by Hela Wigmen
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

You know, because I’m reacting to the breaking news that Salford have had to postpone a game. It’s not happened at Huddersfield or Wakefield or Hull KR or Saints or Wigan...

Salford have earned in the region of £10m  

Salford did close their Academy in 2016.

Salford, off the back of a Wembley appearance, are playing catch up on games, alongside catch-up caused by a pandemic.

No, I can’t understand why you’d think that. 

All of which serve to identify Salford as your target, as I said.

 

  • Confused 1

Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society

Founder (and, so far, only) member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tonyXIII said:

All of which serve to identify Salford as your target, as I said.

 

You need to take your rose tinted specs off. 

Salford have postponed a game. I’ve reacted to this breaking news by questioning the fragility of the sport and questioning the choice of structure we work under, using Salford (y’know, the club who have just postponed a game) and their experiences since returning to Super League, by using factual comments; they have received in the region of £10m, they did close their Academy and they have been expected to play catch up this, and you’re arguing and taking things personally. My word. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

It seems to me that we are doing the right thing, playing where we can, and testing every week. We have to do the best we can in all the circumstances to get the games on, even if that means postponements along the way. We need the Sky money to survive, and our games are always  worth watching regardless of context. 

This is my view, play as many games as is safe to do so, we have now hit 15 for all teams apart from Catalans, we have a top 4 where Leeds replace them according to the rules, so we are in OK shape. We may need to have tighter bubbles for the semis and finals, but that is easier for a fortnight than for 3 months. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Neutralfan7 said:

Very harsh on Salford having to take the loss. After the year we've had and a few matches called off and now this happens!

It's not harsh, they are the rules. It's a shame for them, but their choices have led to a small squad. Other teams have used huge squads during this period.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's not harsh, they are the rules. It's a shame for them, but their choices have led to a small squad. Other teams have used huge squads during this period.

Yep, I don't have anything against Salford but they chose to sign Kallum Watkins, probably on a wage that could have got them 3-4 part-time squad players for the last few months of the year. That was their choice, keep it lean and it has come back to haunt them sadly. 

Edited by Scubby
  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

It seems to me that we are doing the right thing, playing where we can, and testing every week. We have to do the best we can in all the circumstances to get the games on, even if that means postponements along the way. We need the Sky money to survive, and our games are always  worth watching regardless of context. 

This sums it up in a nutshell. The game is in survival mode and the number one priority is getting Sky money and getting through the season as best we can.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Damien said:

This sums it up in a nutshell. The game is in survival mode and the number one priority is getting Sky money and getting through the season as best we can.

And I know some people are determined not to enjoy it, but in the main, there have been some fantastic matches. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

This is my view, play as many games as is safe to do so, we have now hit 15 for all teams apart from Catalans, we have a top 4 where Leeds replace them according to the rules, so we are in OK shape. We may need to have tighter bubbles for the semis and finals, but that is easier for a fortnight than for 3 months. 

If we were going to stop at 15 then why play all these games in a short time.  One of the games that Catalans missed was cancelled by Wigan.  They nearly had to cancel another by the weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

If we were going to stop at 15 then why play all these games in a short time.  One of the games that Catalans missed was cancelled by Wigan.  They nearly had to cancel another by the weather.

The plan isn't to stop at 15, but there is an acceptance that we are living in strange times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Dave T said:

This is my view, play as many games as is safe to do so, we have now hit 15 for all teams apart from Catalans, we have a top 4 where Leeds replace them according to the rules, so we are in OK shape. We may need to have tighter bubbles for the semis and finals, but that is easier for a fortnight than for 3 months. 

This sounds about right, but given we can all see what the final four will be, would it not be worth accelerating to the semis and getting those that need to be in bubbles into them sooner rather than later?

Just seems increasingly not worth the effort and risk of playing unnecessary fixtures in the current situation. 

I accept that this may not be financially easy but we're mucking Sky around a lot as it is and if somehow the semis and finals were impacted that would be a disaster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

This sounds about right, but given we can all see what the final four will be, would it not be worth accelerating to the semis and getting those that need to be in bubbles into them sooner rather than later?

Just seems increasingly not worth the effort and risk of playing unnecessary fixtures in the current situation. 

I accept that this may not be financially easy but we're mucking Sky around a lot as it is and if somehow the semis and finals were impacted that would be a disaster. 

I think that is a fair point.  

SKY were a bit lucky with the games this week. It was good of Saints to field a few reserves to make the game more equal and as the game presented itself it became very dramatic. 

If the ref had just sin binned the Cas player then that game too might have worked out more interesting !!!

But the reality is that the games being televised are artificial.  (But are still more interesting than Premier Football)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Cheshire Setter said:

So Warrington to play Hudds on Friday then? Was worried they’d be lose momentum if they ended up 3 weeks without a game. 

Works out well in the end.

 

Yeah Wire potentially  get 4 points for winning 1 game,crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Hammerless Nail said:

I don't think they chose to not have a wealthy backer. It kind of just happened.

I'd be careful with that argument. 

If the answer to the question "Why couldn't you field a team?" is because you are too poor, that highlights a bigger issue. 

Fulfilling games is a basic requirement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

This sounds about right, but given we can all see what the final four will be, would it not be worth accelerating to the semis and getting those that need to be in bubbles into them sooner rather than later?

Just seems increasingly not worth the effort and risk of playing unnecessary fixtures in the current situation. 

I accept that this may not be financially easy but we're mucking Sky around a lot as it is and if somehow the semis and finals were impacted that would be a disaster. 

I think Sky would prefer these last few games to be played tbh, I take your point, but we have schedules to fill. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...