League Restructure Thread (Merged Threads)

[Scubby]

Just now, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

I guess you disagree with Cas getting £1.8m then?

Cas are currently running a team on £1.7m and a historic loyal following. Even with 20 years of SL and some success they struggle to turnover £4m (and the get 40% of that from Central funding).

Yes they have to show they can grow as a club and add real value to the bigger competition. If they can't then they are a small town that cannot grow with the times.

[M j M]

So TRL now reporting there isn't going to be a change in structure for next year.

Thank God. The current competition structure isn't the problem. Twelve teams is fine for a league of this size whilst up to fourteen and down to ten was insane.

The number of teams in the top flight is simply not the problem. Indeed changing it with a couple of months before the end of the season would have underlined the problems with the game, not addressed them. Namely, short-termism, a lack of direction, mickey mouse ill-thought out changes, clubs deciding each other's destiny, a lack of central, independent control.

[Angelic Cynic]

8 hours ago, Chronicler of Chiswick said:

One thing I have problems understanding is why dominance by a few clubs is so detrimental to RL. Last Sunday 'The Observer' published it's annual PL predictions from supporters of the clubs and all bar one had the top four in various orders as the two Manchester clubs, Chelsea and Liverpool ( the exception was the Leicester supporter who put his own club there instead of Man U). This could have been the result for a number of seasons but doesn't lessen people's interest or have Sky screaming about an uncompetitive structure.

Yes - the same would apply if followers of rugby league were to make predictions - the usual Top clubs would be predicted to be top.

There was the interesting comments,from the Prime Minister, fairly recently. 

Downing Street also said Johnson had sent his “unwavering support” to football authorities over the issue, and condemned the ESL’s “closed shop” plan, under which 15 of the 20 league members would have permanent status and be free from the risk of relegation.  

This was in relation to the association football Super League. The followers of some perceived current top clubs also involved themselves in some disorder  ' for the future good of the game. ' I wonder how followers from the current top clubs in rugby league will conduct themselves if there is any unfair repercussions on lower league clubs who may have originally been in Super League or enjoyed a period of success,just because they have been restricted from finance,or individuals, who were allowed into the clubs by the RFL,who were less than decent?

Pleasing  that we glean information  from journalists and not so pleasing that clubs aren't keeping sponsors and fans in the loop.

[Scubby]

36 minutes ago, M j M said:

So TRL now reporting there isn't going to be a change in structure for next year.

Thank God. The current competition structure isn't the problem. Twelve teams is fine for a league of this size whilst up to fourteen and down to ten was insane.

The number of teams in the top flight is simply not the problem. Indeed changing it with a couple of months before the end of the season would have underlined the problems with the game, not addressed them. Namely, short-termism, a lack of direction, mickey mouse ill-thought out changes, clubs deciding each other's destiny, a lack of central, independent control.

There we have it...

"... some clubs were concerned about the impact of diluting the share of the income that each club would receive by inviting another two clubs into the competition, even though it would only be for one year."

https://www.totalrl.com/super-league-clubs-likely-to-stick-with-current-competition-format/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=super-league-clubs-likely-to-stick-with-current-competition-format

 

[Scubby]

I wonder if Leigh would have a legal grounds to challenge a relegation on percentages (i.e an incomplete season).

[M j M]

9 minutes ago, Scubby said:

There we have it...

"... some clubs were concerned about the impact of diluting the share of the income that each club would receive by inviting another two clubs into the competition, even though it would only be for one year."

https://www.totalrl.com/super-league-clubs-likely-to-stick-with-current-competition-format/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=super-league-clubs-likely-to-stick-with-current-competition-format

 

The right decision for all the wrong reasons. I did hope there would be more than the usual couple of SL club bosses who are able to think vaguely strategically with the interests of the wider game in mind but nope I guess not. 

[M j M]

9 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I wonder if Leigh would have a legal grounds to challenge a relegation on percentages (i.e an incomplete season).

No, the rules were clear at the start of the season. 

Leigh's mistake was in applying for the SL place in the first place.

[Blind side johnny]

3 hours ago, redjonn said:

of course media comes into it, but that media huge interest is because of the standard of players leading to the glamour of the football in this country. That relative high standard is because of the money. That money is because of originally the top 4, then top 6 and now the top 8.

That is the top clubs have been the key catalyst bringing in the big deals, which subsequently is big enough so that even the lower standard clubs of the PL are now able to bring in international level players - thus raising those clubs playing standards.  The PL success has been spurned by the Man Utd, Liverpool's, etc leading to the huge profile and subsequent investments by multi billionaires leading to likes of Chelsea, Man City greatly adding to the competition at the top and further glamour of the sport. 

If the PL had gone the SL way in limiting the top clubs to a salary cap so low as to help the poorest/weakest clubs (or to have shared it out across the whole of the professional league structure) I don't think the huge monetary success of the PL would be as it is now.

No it isn't.

It is because the number of people interested in football, and likely to spend some money watching it, is an order of magnitude greater than for RL.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Scubby said:

Cas are currently running a team on £1.7m and a historic loyal following. Even with 20 years of SL and some success they struggle to turnover £4m (and the get 40% of that from Central funding).

Yes they have to show they can grow as a club and add real value to the bigger competition. If they can't then they are a small town that cannot grow with the times.

Cas turned over £6m in 2017, how did they deliver a 50% drop on that by 2019?

[JM2010]

Now we hopefully have some stability in the structure, regardless of what we all think about it, the RFL and SL now need to look at how they can increase revenue, media coverage and viewing figures/attendances both for the competitions as a whole and for individual clubs.

They also need a plan for increasing the player pool, improving junior pathways (especially at those clubs who haven't had much success at this), expanding the footprint of the game at community and eventually professional level, raising playing standards and improving facilities at many of the clubs.

Also, a plan to link with and support the FRL.

That's all

[Damien]

45 minutes ago, Scubby said:

There we have it...

"... some clubs were concerned about the impact of diluting the share of the income that each club would receive by inviting another two clubs into the competition, even though it would only be for one year."

https://www.totalrl.com/super-league-clubs-likely-to-stick-with-current-competition-format/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=super-league-clubs-likely-to-stick-with-current-competition-format

 

I'm glad this idea isn't being adopted but it really is for all the wrong reason. Reasons like this just typify why Super League continually struggles to grow and improve.

[lucky 7]

45 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I wonder if Leigh would have a legal grounds to challenge a relegation on percentages (i.e an incomplete season).

Seriously doubt it as Leigh were gifted promotion on an incomplete season

[Scubby]

37 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Cas turned over £6m in 2017, how did they deliver a 50% drop on that by 2019?

Well they lost 1500 in crowd average, 8700 (2017) to 7200 (2019). I would imagine corporates, merchandise and other things would have been down on that special season. They would have benefitted from reaching the GF in 2017 and the boost that gives the commercial department.

I would imagine 2022 income will be between £4m to £4.5m million based on season ticket dropped sales and lack of commercial and corporate facilities. Central funding will be down £200-300k on 2017. Crowds will be circa 6k to 6.5k if lucky (that's 2200-2700 down on 2017).

[Derwent Parker]

2 hours ago, Scubby said:

I've been many times  it is scenic but not big

give Workington £1.8 million a year and your team 75K a year and see who's got biggest team in 5 year

[Scubby]

1 minute ago, Derwent Parker said:

give Workington £1.8 million a year and your team 75K a year and see who's got biggest team in 5 year

I don't have a team, Workington will always struggle to get players to relocate to Cumbria. Bit like NE football clubs like Newcastle. Sad but true.

[PhilCarrington]

5 hours ago, The Frying Scotsman said:

Exactly. 100%.

Yet we have the editor of a leading Rugby League magazine publishing a piece stating that Les Catalans should be playing against London Skolars, who travel to games in a minibus.

Insanity? Or simply still living in a bygone era? 

 

 

I've seen the Skolars' bus. It's a proper coach. Go to Hunslet this weekend and see for yourself. Martyn's idea may not be sensible, but you are coming up with the worst reason for rejecting it.

[Derwent Parker]

Just now, PhilCarrington said:

I've seen the Skolars' bus. It's a proper coach. Go to Hunslet this weekend and see for yourself. Martyn's idea may not be sensible, but you are coming up with the worst reason for rejecting it.

Super League clubs set for more crunch talks over league restructure plans - YorkshireLive (examinerlive.co.uk)

SL clubs dont want 14 [ dilutes CF] surprise

[zorquif]

On 10/08/2021 at 18:09, Griff said:

What matters is what you watch.   

Why? Sky don't know whether I would cancel if they dumped rl, or if that is the reason I subscribe

[voteronniegibbs]

.

[lucky 7]

11 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

Super League clubs set for more crunch talks over league restructure plans - YorkshireLive (examinerlive.co.uk)

SL clubs dont want 14 [ dilutes CF] surprise

Like you say it's all about ££££ and they wasn't going to vote for a further reduction in TV which 14 teams would have meant. So for the foreseeable future we are stuck with loop fixtures.

[wiganermike]

If the 14 team single season and the split of funding was the only issue (pathetic and ultra short-term thinking though it is) then if the governing bodies still want 2x10s then perhaps we could have 1 up, 1 down this year as planned and then in 2022 relegate 3 of the 12 in SL, promote 1 from Championship and have the three relegated clubs join those finishing 2nd to 8th in the Championship in the second 10. Funding can stay the same next year, we still get to 2x10 (+16) by 2023 and every club (bar those 10 in League 1) get the opportunity to earn their place within the set up.

[The Frying Scotsman]

44 minutes ago, PhilCarrington said:

I've seen the Skolars' bus. It's a proper coach. Go to Hunslet this weekend and see for yourself. Martyn's idea may not be sensible, but you are coming up with the worst reason for rejecting it.

Not really. OK... They have a proper bus now. They previously travelled on a kind of glorified minibus thing. My point was simply that his idea expects élite professional teams to be mixed up with clubs that are barely above amateur. Can West Wales Raiders for example, even be trusted to turn up with a full team away at Catalans ... And then again away at TO XIII?? I suggest they would struggle to get their strongest team out for two away trips to France. They are barely capable of getting 17 players out every week for domestic fixtures. 

[Griff]

52 minutes ago, zorquif said:

Why? Sky don't know whether I would cancel if they dumped rl, or if that is the reason I subscribe

Nevertheless, it's what they base their decisions on.

If nobody watches a sport, they won't pay to screen it.

It's just business sense to them.

[Man of Kent]

1 hour ago, Derwent Parker said:

Super League clubs set for more crunch talks over league restructure plans - YorkshireLive (examinerlive.co.uk)

SL clubs dont want 14 [ dilutes CF] surprise

I read that as 10+10 possibly/probably will happen but they can’t agree on how to get there.

If they stuck with 12 teams next year, I make it they would have to relegate three from SL, with one up and six down from the Championship for 2023. Not much difference, really. 

[DI Keith Fowler]

4 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I read that as 10+10 possibly/probably will happen but they can’t agree on how to get there.

If they stuck with 12 teams next year, I make it they would have to relegate three from SL, with one up and six down from the Championship for 2023. Not much difference, really. 

Unless no one gets promoted next year, top 8 and 2 down.