Season start could be delayed (Merged threads)

[Hela Wigmen]

3 minutes ago, Spidey said:

The World Cup should be the priority. SL will need to work to fixed end point

I’d argue the other way is more important. Without the club game, we can’t have the International game and I’d rather we moved the 21 World Cup than put clubs existences at risk. 

[Spidey]

27 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

I’d argue the other way is more important. Without the club game, we can’t have the International game and I’d rather we moved the 21 World Cup than put clubs existences at risk. 

The only reason the World Cup should move is if fans aren’t allowed in.

A shortened season shouldn’t put clubs at risk, and if they had any nouse they should use it to give them a boost

[Hela Wigmen]

Just now, Spidey said:

The only reason the World Cup should move is if fans aren’t allowed in.

A shortened season shouldn’t put clubs at risk, and if they had any nouse they should use it to give them a boost

A shortened season almost certainly puts clubs at risk. 

[Blind side johnny]

2 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

While clubs can keep their costs down with the furlough scheme it makes sense to use it, however the later we start the bigger the conflict of interest will be between Super League and the World Cup.

Furlough isn't really of significant benefit to SL clubs though.

[Blind side johnny]

4 hours ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

I haven’t asked everyone, I must confess. If you read the entire post, it flows from the previous points. It is a hyperbolic call to arms. 

Hyperbole true.

Maybe I am just one of the minority who believe that sport is actually marginal in the current situation.

[Griff]

4 hours ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

As to how good those reasons are is a matter of opinion, and there is no absolute right or wrong answer to judgements of that kind. My point was prompted in part by the contrast between Vlandys’ let’s get it on if we possibly can approach, as against let’s be ultra cautious. I much prefer the former.

If: 

- the vaccines function as they always do (and hats off to our brilliant vaccine strategy to get us this far), then the people most likely to go to hospital will be protected by mid March; and 

- the restrictions in place have been justified on the basis of hospital numbers (unless I have missed something), which will drop once we have vaccinated the vast majority of the most vulnerable; 

- given that the toll on people’s livelihoods and lives has been and will continue to be horrific, with the costs being paid for many years to come; then 

- the point every organisation should be making, and pressuring the Government on, is what is the earliest date we can open again. 

I would like to see our leaders making it clear that they are moving heaven and earth to get us back up and running as soon as possible. The emphasis (in my opinion and I respect the counter arguments) should be on what can we do to make this happen the instant it is feasible. I was hugely impressed by the efforts our game took last year, especially given the relative lack of resources, and have been really proud of the RFL’s measured efforts so far. Let’s be as bold as we can again this year. The world needs The Greatest Game more than ever. 

Sadly, this new variant appears to be increasingly affecting younger folk, who won't be getting the vaccine by mid March.

I keep saying this but - wait and see.

One of Boris's weaknesses is to make ludicrously optimistic comments which he then follows up ten minutes later with a humiliating climbdown.   Kids at school Monday, lockdown Tuesday is merely one of many examples.

[tiffers]

"There is also a balance to be struck between having enough games in the calendar to help fill clubs' empty coffers and satisfy TV demands, but not playing too many matches and potentially damaging England's World Cup campaign in the autumn."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/55619672
 

Or perhaps, we could name an England squad towards the back end of the season, whereby they aren't forced to play 5 fixtures in 18 days then back that up with an intense world cup shortly afterwards. i.e. keep those players slightly more fresh for a world cup year.

I highly doubt the clubs would agree to resting their better players. But perhaps cancelling relegation would help in:

1) providing certainty for all teams for the next 12 months

2) sacrificing oneself for the greater good of a home World Cup victory and the benefits to the game that would generate. I wonder if we feel it would bring enough tangible & monetary benefits for clubs to back it...

[ATLANTISMAN]

Personally I think that the No 1 focus for Rugby League at present should be on getting both super league and the championship started as near on time as possible.

With regards to the World Cup there are so many factors (Main one being travel) that I think a sensible thing would be at present to wait and see and make a firm YES/NO on a move to 2022 no later than June 1st.

I think that the focus from most sporting federations will be on home competitions this year and so it should be.

 

Paul

[tiffers]

8 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Personally I think that the No 1 focus for Rugby League at present should be on getting both super league and the championship started as near on time as possible.

With regards to the World Cup there are so many factors (Main one being travel) that I think a sensible thing would be at present to wait and see and make a firm YES/NO on a move to 2022 no late than June 1st.

I think that the focus from most sporting federations will be on home competitions this year and so it should be.

 

Paul

Completely agree Paul. The short term focus has to be on securing domestic RL both playing but importantly, generating revenues as best as possible in the circumstances. No doubt that it is going to be a very tough financial year yet again.

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

1 hour ago, Blind side johnny said:

Furlough isn't really of significant benefit to SL clubs though.

Leeds employ around 150 members of staff, I expect the majority will be on furlough. I’m not sure how you can say it’s not a significant benefit to them. You could say it’s not a significant benefit to Premier League Football clubs but it certainly is to Super League clubs, they’d of gone bankrupt without it. 

[Blind side johnny]

1 hour ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Leeds employ around 150 members of staff, I expect the majority will be on furlough. I’m not sure how you can say it’s not a significant benefit to them. You could say it’s not a significant benefit to Premier League Football clubs but it certainly is to Super League clubs, they’d of gone bankrupt without it. 

Many of the playing staff won't be covered by furlough or inadequately covered at best. Add in the loss of any sponsorship revenue and furlough won't really be beneficial.

[Oldbear]

9 hours ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Personally I think that the No 1 focus for Rugby League at present should be on getting both super league and the championship started as near on time as possible.

With regards to the World Cup there are so many factors (Main one being travel) that I think a sensible thing would be at present to wait and see and make a firm YES/NO on a move to 2022 no late than June 1st.

I think that the focus from most sporting federations will be on home competitions this year and so it should be.

 

Paul

Very logical Paul, after all international travel is still pretty much off the board for the foreseeable future and until it is back on again I can’t see how any sport can do World Cups, let alone RL. Of course the only sticking point could be what’s agreed with TV, after all if people  are still restricted in what they can do for leisure then the TV companies are going to want live sport content to broadcast, so they might not be so willing for a delay. We have just held the World Junior Hockey Championship in Alberta, teams from US and Europe in Edmonton, all quarantined in a bubble, no fans allowed, must have cost a lot more to organize than is usual, however TSN had a contract so wanted it played, loss of TV revenue almost certainly was the decider!

[gingerjon]

5 hours ago, Oldbear said:

Very logical Paul, after all international travel is still pretty much off the board for the foreseeable future and until it is back on again I can’t see how any sport can do World Cups, let alone RL. Of course the only sticking point could be what’s agreed with TV, after all if people  are still restricted in what they can do for leisure then the TV companies are going to want live sport content to broadcast, so they might not be so willing for a delay. We have just held the World Junior Hockey Championship in Alberta, teams from US and Europe in Edmonton, all quarantined in a bubble, no fans allowed, must have cost a lot more to organize than is usual, however TSN had a contract so wanted it played, loss of TV revenue almost certainly was the decider!

Quite. For reference, the World Handball Champs start in Egypt today. Two teams have had to completely withdraw at the last minute and be replaced by reserve list countries who have been able to assemble a squad whilst several of those who are already there have either had to keep players at home (and they now can't join) or isolate/quaratine players on arrival. It's a bit (lot) of a farce. I'm not even sure if every country has even arrived in Egypt yet given the rules on entry they have.

That is a sport with a very compressed schedule and reasonably small squads - the whole tournament will be done in around two weeks. If we're still having to do bubbles etc later this year then I think the RLWC becomes an impossibility.

[RP London]

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Quite. For reference, the World Handball Champs start in Egypt today. Two teams have had to completely withdraw at the last minute and be replaced by reserve list countries who have been able to assemble a squad whilst several of those who are already there have either had to keep players at home (and they now can't join) or isolate/quaratine players on arrival. It's a bit (lot) of a farce. I'm not even sure if every country has even arrived in Egypt yet given the rules on entry they have.

That is a sport with a very compressed schedule and reasonably small squads - the whole tournament will be done in around two weeks. If we're still having to do bubbles etc later this year then I think the RLWC becomes an impossibility.

add to that the European Short Track Speed Skating in Poland where the GB team wont travel for fear of being stuck due to changing regulations which would disrupt their chances at the Worlds in Holland.. and that is something that will probably take a week and they will have been bubbled as its a small team. 

The Skiing World Cup too had the whole Swedish team told to go home from one race as 1 coach tested positive while everyone else tested negative.. 

Its a mess across the world but some sports have no choice but to plough ahead.. i think we do have a choice as they said right at the start there were plans for moving it, as long as we call it early enough i dont see an issue pushing it to the same time & venues (if possible) in 2022.

[Hela Wigmen]

A decision to be made on the World Cup in March. 

[RP London]

20 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

A decision to be made on the World Cup in March. 

that seems a good idea, should have more idea of how the vaccine is working (on transmission too which is of huge importance) here and elsewhere in the world.. also early enough to be able to reorganise dates to keep clear at football grounds for the 2022-23 season.

[Harry Stottle]

23 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

While clubs can keep their costs down with the furlough scheme it makes sense to use it, however the later we start the bigger the conflict of interest will be between Super League and the World Cup.

Hi Kev, will those SL clubs who have none or even just a token international player playing in the WC be less effected than those with quite a few representatives for whichever international team, also if the Championship gets underway there may be some Championship player's from the better clubs those clubs who I would expect to be vying for promotion e.g. Toulouse and France.

If our domestic comp is played up to the time of the WC commencing with little time inbetween the preperations for the international teams will surely be affected, will this effect P&R across both divisions?

 

[Harry Stottle]

22 hours ago, Spidey said:

The World Cup should be the priority. SL will need to work to fixed end point

What will happen if all fixtures cannot be fulfilled with the League tables, surely consideration must be given for cancellations due to Covid?

[Harry Stottle]

20 hours ago, tiffers said:

"There is also a balance to be struck between having enough games in the calendar to help fill clubs' empty coffers and satisfy TV demands, but not playing too many matches and potentially damaging England's World Cup campaign in the autumn."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/55619672
 

Or perhaps, we could name an England squad towards the back end of the season, whereby they aren't forced to play 5 fixtures in 18 days then back that up with an intense world cup shortly afterwards. i.e. keep those players slightly more fresh for a world cup year.

I highly doubt the clubs would agree to resting their better players. But perhaps cancelling relegation would help in:

1) providing certainty for all teams for the next 12 months

2) sacrificing oneself for the greater good of a home World Cup victory and the benefits to the game that would generate. I wonder if we feel it would bring enough tangible & monetary benefits for clubs to back it...

There are more than just England players in SL Tiffers!

[gingerjon]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

What will happen if all fixtures cannot be fulfilled with the League tables, surely consideration must be given for cancellations due to Covid?

Relegation based entirely on "last in, first out"

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

Relegation based entirely on "last in, first out"

Now you know very well all those in favour of P&R says it has to be decided on tge field of play.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

Now you know very well all those in favour of P&R says it has to be decided on tge field of play.

I am happy to shift my firmly held beliefs to cause the maximum amount of pointless debate.

The short answer, as it's always been, is that they either should agree that PPG is how things are decided (and decide that before the season starts) or they agree that if the season doesn't reach a certain percentage completion that there's no relegation possible and championship play-offs will be decided by whatever mechanism they agree.

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Relegation based entirely on "last in, first out"

Would that also mean London got promoted if the fixtures cannot be fulfilled?  technically the last club in the Championship will be Newcastle, but I think you are referring to the division from whence they came.

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I am happy to shift my firmly held beliefs to cause the maximum amount of pointless debate.

The short answer, as it's always been, is that they either should agree that PPG is how things are decided (and decide that before the season starts) or they agree that if the season doesn't reach a certain percentage completion that there's no relegation possible and championship play-offs will be decided by whatever mechanism they agree.

Totally agree. That post came before I posted my reply above, pointless discussion over.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

Would that also mean London got promoted if the fixtures cannot be fulfilled?  technically the last club in the Championship will be Newcastle, but I think you are referring to the division from whence they came.

Another reason why relegation may be completely impractical is that it looks less and less likely that a full Championship season is going to be possible so we're back to not being very clear how you promote anyone.