'This is why relegation shouldn't be allowed'

[GUBRATS]

40 minutes ago, Steve Slater said:

Why not? Do those other grounds have better looking empty seats?

To be fair there Steve , you have picked the best bits

[Steve Slater]

11 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

To be fair there Steve , you have picked the best bits

Alternatively GR, there's another thread on here about what's everyone's favourite ground, and there seems to be overwhelming support for Batley.

[Steve Slater]

2 minutes ago, Steve Slater said:

Alternatively GR, there's another thread on here about what's everyone's favourite ground, and there seems to be overwhelming support for Batley.

Sorry, I meant to say "everyone's favourite away ground".

[sentoffagain2]

12 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

To be fair there Steve , you have picked the best bits

  Steve should get photographer of the year for that.

[Griff]

On 19/02/2021 at 19:48, DEANO said:

Agreed it’s different this year but their is always an imbalanced fixture list with loop fixtures.

It's not even just that.  Some teams will play opponents without their star players, some won't.  There's always an element of chance.

[dboy]

On 23/02/2021 at 11:03, Steve Slater said:

Featherstone is well up to standard apart from one moot point - Their floodlights, which they will have no problem upgrading if they win promotion, but no point in doing this until the time comes while Sky have chosen to televise Challenge Cup games under the existing lights. They even have separate changing rooms in their training facility behind the stands.

Fev is poor.

It's an undersized vegetable patch, with a slope that a 4x4 would struggle on.

[dboy]

2 hours ago, Steve Slater said:

Alternatively GR, there's another thread on here about what's everyone's favourite ground, and there seems to be overwhelming support for Batley.

Batley is poor.

It's an undersized vegetable patch, with a slope that even a piste-basher would struggle on.

[The Phantom Horseman]

26 minutes ago, dboy said:

Fev is poor.

It's an undersized vegetable patch, with a slope that a 4x4 would struggle on.

The 20th century just called and wants its hot takes back.

The pitch was extended by about 10 metres six or seven years ago and now stands comparision with most other leading grounds in  that respect, and the slope was significantly reduced at the same time - there is still a slope but your granny could stroll up and down the pitch never mind a 4x4.

[Gooleboy]

59 minutes ago, dboy said:

Fev is poor.

It's an undersized vegetable patch, with a slope that a 4x4 would struggle on.

You have very high standards then. 

[GUBRATS]

4 hours ago, Steve Slater said:

Sorry, I meant to say "everyone's favourite away ground".

Mine as well , but not really relevant if you can't actually be there with a pint poured by the chairman and a plate of cheesy chips

[dboy]

1 hour ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

The 20th century just called and wants its hot takes back.

The pitch was extended by about 10 metres six or seven years ago and now stands comparision with most other leading grounds in  that respect, and the slope was significantly reduced at the same time - there is still a slope but your granny could stroll up and down the pitch never mind a 4x4.

I seem to recall they ended up not doing the slope in the end.

If you see my granny walking up that slope - run!  We buried her last year.

[DEANO]

6 hours ago, Griff said:

It's not even just that.  Some teams will play opponents without their star players, some won't.  There's always an element of chance.

But that’s sport

[Griff]

17 hours ago, DEANO said:

But that’s sport

Exactly.

[The Blues Ox]

On 26/02/2021 at 12:25, dboy said:

Batley is poor.

It's an undersized vegetable patch, with a slope that even a piste-basher would struggle on.

You would have loved Thrum Hall then. 

[dboy]

This is why relegation is an issue (and every season with loop fixtures). Credit to NottinghamTiger on Castleford's forum...

Based on previous finishing positions, the big clubs have a massively easy ride, with extra fixtures against the poor minnows. The flip-side = how the hell can the minnows attract the youngsters/overseas talent, when getting into the play-offs is stacked against them.

To be clear - I am FOR promotion and relegation, but the competition needs to be formatted in a fairer way = the sport on the field will determine the table, not artificial advantages, given to favoured clubs.

Wigan - Wakefield (10th), Leigh (12th) and Warrington (3rd) = 25.
Saints - Hull KR (11th), Salford (9th) and Catalans (4th) = 24.
Leeds - Wakefield (10th), Castleford (8th) and Hull FC (6th) = 24
Warrington - Castleford (8th), Leigh (12th) and Wigan (2nd) = 22.
Hull FC - Huddersfield (7th), Salford (9th) and Leeds (5th) = 21.
Huddersfield - Catalans (4th), Hull FC (6th) and Wakefield (10th) = 20.
Catalans - Hull KR (11th), Huddersfield (7th) and Saints (1st) = 19.
Castleford - Warrington (3rd), Leeds (5th) and Salford (9th) = 17.
Hull KR - St Helens (1st), Catalans (4th) and Leigh (12th) = 17.
Leigh - Wigan (2nd), Warrington (3rd) and Hull KR (11th) = 16.
Salford - St Helens (1st), Hull FC (6th) and Castleford (8th) = 15.
Wakefield - Wigan (2nd), Leeds (5th) and Huddersfield (7th) = 14.

[Gooleboy]

21 minutes ago, dboy said:

This is why relegation is an issue (and every season with loop fixtures). Credit to NottinghamTiger on Castleford's forum...

Based on previous finishing positions, the big clubs have a massively easy ride, with extra fixtures against the poor minnows. The flip-side = how the hell can the minnows attract the youngsters/overseas talent, when getting into the play-offs is stacked against them.

To be clear - I am FOR promotion and relegation, but the competition needs to be formatted in a fairer way = the sport on the field will determine the table, not artificial advantages, given to favoured clubs.

Wigan - Wakefield (10th), Leigh (12th) and Warrington (3rd) = 25.
Saints - Hull KR (11th), Salford (9th) and Catalans (4th) = 24.
Leeds - Wakefield (10th), Castleford (8th) and Hull FC (6th) = 24
Warrington - Castleford (8th), Leigh (12th) and Wigan (2nd) = 22.
Hull FC - Huddersfield (7th), Salford (9th) and Leeds (5th) = 21.
Huddersfield - Catalans (4th), Hull FC (6th) and Wakefield (10th) = 20.
Catalans - Hull KR (11th), Huddersfield (7th) and Saints (1st) = 19.
Castleford - Warrington (3rd), Leeds (5th) and Salford (9th) = 17.
Hull KR - St Helens (1st), Catalans (4th) and Leigh (12th) = 17.
Leigh - Wigan (2nd), Warrington (3rd) and Hull KR (11th) = 16.
Salford - St Helens (1st), Hull FC (6th) and Castleford (8th) = 15.
Wakefield - Wigan (2nd), Leeds (5th) and Huddersfield (7th) = 14.

A 14 team League and there would be no need for this Loop Fixture nonsense.

[dboy]

6 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

A 14 team League and there would be no need for this Loop Fixture nonsense.

Absolutely where we should be!

The clubs at the top of the Championship have never been closer to each other, and have never been closer to becoming sustainable in SL.

York, London, Halifax, Toulouse, Fev, possibly Widnes are all potentially in the right place to jump up.

I'd hope that a move to 14 clubs wouldn't just create a yo-yo situation, and that clubs going down would be established enough to survive the drop.

[Gooleboy]

35 minutes ago, dboy said:

Absolutely where we should be!

The clubs at the top of the Championship have never been closer to each other, and have never been closer to becoming sustainable in SL.

York, London, Halifax, Toulouse, Fev, possibly Widnes are all potentially in the right place to jump up.

I'd hope that a move to 14 clubs wouldn't just create a yo-yo situation, and that clubs going down would be established enough to survive the drop.

14 team League, 1 up 1 down P+R, and I am sure it would be a more interesting Competition.