Jump to content

League Restructure Thread (Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts

Going from 14 to 12 achieved nothing so why will going from 12 to 10 be any different,  local derbies were something to look forward too but when you play them  4 or 5 times a season they become just another fixture, 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

You move clubs that are clubs in name only, plenty are just a squad of twenty players and nothing more, no ground, no fans, no academy, no reserves, no pathways, no community work, to a level more befitting of their level and not just continue pumping money into them through a misguided sense of loyalty and tradition. 

The clubs are not having money 'pumped' into them.The governing body,who do not micro- manage the clubs,yet allow undesirable owners,remove academy and reserve sides,distribute central funding - the majority of that funding obtained from a broadcast deal, they secured.

This is rugby league - we saw the loyalty and tradition evidently displayed by Messrs.Lenagan,McManus and Moran when they introduced Elstone.

That went well - and expensively!

Just as Super League hasn't improved the standard of the national side to defeat Australia,etc.the efforts of both the governing body/ies,and the owners of the elite clubs have failed to grow the sport,the player participation and the attendances.

The running of the clubs into the ground,when they have battled to overcome numbers of hurdles,isn't the answer. 

A bit of urgency into dealing with the sport wouldn't go amiss.

The number of clubs in the top tier doesn't help the whole sport question...

     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

What do you refer to?

Workington Town a few seasons ago suddenly having to play a team from the league above to see who goes/stays up. Stadium decided on the toss of a coin. Utter farce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dkw said:

Workington Town a few seasons ago suddenly having to play a team from the league above to see who goes/stays up. Stadium decided on the toss of a coin. Utter farce.

What drove that mate? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

What drove that mate? 

It was when they decided to add two teams to the Championship to make it a 14 team league IIRC. Whatever the exact reason it was decided to do it out of the blue when the season had almost been completed. Of the two teams due to be relegated to League 1 one was given a reprieve, the promotion protocol in League 1 was changed to facilitate adding two extra teams to Championship including as dkw posted, one team (Workington) playing a team from Championship for the final place in the Championship. The Championship club (Swinton IIRC) won and kept their place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, wiganermike said:

It was when they decided to add two teams to the Championship to make it a 14 team league IIRC. Whatever the exact reason it was decided to do it out of the blue when the season had almost been completed. Of the two teams due to be relegated to League 1 one was given a reprieve, the promotion protocol in League 1 was changed to facilitate adding two extra teams to Championship including as dkw posted, one team (Workington) playing a team from Championship for the final place in the Championship. The Championship club (Swinton IIRC) won and kept their place.

Oh yeah I remember that. A lot of workington players had already booked holidays too. Since then league 1 has always been an afterthought 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Angelic Cynic said:

The clubs are not having money 'pumped' into them.The governing body,who do not micro- manage the clubs,yet allow undesirable owners,remove academy and reserve sides,distribute central funding - the majority of that funding obtained from a broadcast deal, they secured.

This is rugby league - we saw the loyalty and tradition evidently displayed by Messrs.Lenagan,McManus and Moran when they introduced Elstone.

That went well - and expensively!

Just as Super League hasn't improved the standard of the national side to defeat Australia,etc.the efforts of both the governing body/ies,and the owners of the elite clubs have failed to grow the sport,the player participation and the attendances.

The running of the clubs into the ground,when they have battled to overcome numbers of hurdles,isn't the answer. 

A bit of urgency into dealing with the sport wouldn't go amiss.

The number of clubs in the top tier doesn't help the whole sport question...

Whataboutism is not the answer either. McManus has moved St Helens into the 21st century and a 365 day income generator, the same for Moran, too. We need more like that and less West Yorkshire nobodies (evening Mr Carter) who belittle people for needing a second source of income to merely survive.

The £75,000 annual metaphorical oxygen tank needs switching off for plenty. It’s a harsh reality of the world and business. Sentiment means nothing in the real world but it reins supreme in Rugby League. Give extra money to clubs who actually serve a purpose, your West Wales’, London Skolars’ and Coventry’s (isn’t their geographic location interesting) of this world and not continuing to let other clubs get away with being on life support each year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So from what I gather nobody has a clue what 2023 will look like, making 2022 a complete farce.

why would any championship club spend any more than the bare minimum if they can’t get promoted due to 2 x 10’s coming in, but no, not a vibrant comp with 10 FT clubs in it but an underfunded PT comp the winners of which have an even bigger mountain to climb and the relegated into it moving to PT unless you have a Davy to fund you for a season as the only FT club in a PT comp

The sport as almost lost me over this last straw, wonder if TW fancy joining a new comp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

So from what I gather nobody has a clue what 2023 will look like, making 2022 a complete farce.

why would any championship club spend any more than the bare minimum if they can’t get promoted due to 2 x 10’s coming in, but no, not a vibrant comp with 10 FT clubs in it but an underfunded PT comp the winners of which have an even bigger mountain to climb and the relegated into it moving to PT unless you have a Davy to fund you for a season as the only FT club in a PT comp

The sport as almost lost me over this last straw, wonder if TW fancy joining a new comp

Yep attendances are going to go through the roof in a 2022 Championship when no one knows what is happening.

But there is one man, who could blow the whistle.

Considering Mr Beaumont must have been in attendance as the report stated all 12 SL clubs were present and considering his club have as much chance of staying up as I have of courting Elle Macpherson, he should come out and tell us all what transpired at the meeting, name names, give reasons, and tell us all where it has been left and in his opinion with how the discussions went what he expects will be happening in '23.

It could be construed as a £600K shortfall information leak that was withheld by the very same clubs this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Whataboutism is not the answer either. McManus has moved St Helens into the 21st century and a 365 day income generator, the same for Moran, too. We need more like that and less West Yorkshire nobodies (evening Mr Carter) who belittle people for needing a second source of income to merely survive.

The £75,000 annual metaphorical oxygen tank needs switching off for plenty. It’s a harsh reality of the world and business. Sentiment means nothing in the real world but it reins supreme in Rugby League. Give extra money to clubs who actually serve a purpose, your West Wales’, London Skolars’ and Coventry’s (isn’t their geographic location interesting) of this world and not continuing to let other clubs get away with being on life support each year. 

Snobbish elitism won't save the sport,either.

Well done Moran for having political support,and Tesco to help out a club with such a long history,and McManus can also thank Tesco - if they aren't too inferior.

The 3 clubs you mention,after Whataboutism,are relatively new and have offered opportunities to hundreds of young players.

They,like supporters,academy coaches,et al seem to be finding alternatives to the sport.

You elite followers will enjoy your ever decreasing sport.

Good luck with your life support,when an American owned television company also finds an alternative. 

Sentiment reigns supreme in rugby league? I reckon Elstone may think differently. 

     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

If London Broncos are playing at Plough Lane and Toulouse go up then we actually have enough for a decent 14 team SL. It is only protectionism from weaker teams preventing this. 

St, Wig Leeds, Hud Hull, Kr Cat, Tou, Cas, Wak London, Wire 2 others out of a dozen (York, Newcastle, Leigh, Widnes, Fev, Salford, etc...) 

 

Leighs struggles this year tell us otherwise, they were and have remained a Championship level side, As would TO, and Broncos be if promoted. Nobody relegated means no SL players available from that source.

There's enough quality for a 10 clubs SL, not what people may want but it's a fact.

SKY won't want many of the games from the strugglers. 10 clubs means loop fixtures but SKY will take a third Wigan.v.Saints over a first London.v.Toulouse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, steve oates said:

Leighs struggles this year tell us otherwise, they were and have remained a Championship level side, As would TO, and Broncos be if promoted. Nobody relegated means no SL players available from that source.

There's enough quality for a 10 clubs SL, not what people may want but it's a fact.

SKY won't want many of the games from the strugglers. 10 clubs means loop fixtures but SKY will take a third Wigan.v.Saints over a first London.v.Toulouse.

Sky don't want another Leigh. Who ever wins the Championship Grand Final will be better prepared for Super League than Leigh, and won't lose 15 Super League games on the trot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Griff said:

Ach - the final league tables have never been anything but a basis for negotiation in rugby league.

One of the main reasons Rugby League exists is because of a row about P&R in the 1890s.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Snobbish elitism won't save the sport,either.

Well done Moran for having political support,and Tesco to help out a club with such a long history,and McManus can also thank Tesco - if they aren't too inferior.

The 3 clubs you mention,after Whataboutism,are relatively new and have offered opportunities to hundreds of young players.

They,like supporters,academy coaches,et al seem to be finding alternatives to the sport.

You elite followers will enjoy your ever decreasing sport.

Good luck with your life support,when an American owned television company also finds an alternative. 

Sentiment reigns supreme in rugby league? I reckon Elstone may think differently. 

It’s how the wheels of economy works, it’s not a big deal but because it’s sport, it’s emotive and deemed “different”. 

Those clubs I mention are clubs with a purpose. They’re more than seventeen blokes on a Sunday and a result in the small print of the few nationals that print them. They’re hugely important community outlets, they have pathways, they have multiple sides, they have Academies. But yeah, let’s keep giving clubs like Swinton £75,000 a year. They’ve had well over £1m in the summer era and have what to show for it? They’re Swinton in name only. They own nothing, they have no pathways, no community ties (how many different grounds have they played at?), no real purpose or right being in the “professional game”. I say that as someone whose had a relative play for Swinton in finals and someone who spent a year of their time at Uni watching Swinton play out of Salford Red Devils’ Willows stadium in front of an ageing and declining support base. Now, Swinton aren’t the only club in that boat, there’s plenty of others and we’ve wasted millions on these clubs in 25+ years of summer rugby. 

Good businesses evolve. Rugby League doesn’t. I dare say, look at the makeup of Rugby Unions “elite”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, steve oates said:

Leighs struggles this year tell us otherwise, they were and have remained a Championship level side, As would TO, and Broncos be if promoted. Nobody relegated means no SL players available from that source.

There's enough quality for a 10 clubs SL, not what people may want but it's a fact.

SKY won't want many of the games from the strugglers. 10 clubs means loop fixtures but SKY will take a third Wigan.v.Saints over a first London.v.Toulouse.

There's enough quality for 14 teams, or 18 or what ever number.

The spread of ability is a different point, every good youngster wants to sign for the top clubs.

If reducing teams is the answer, then going from 14 to 12 would have seen an improvement, it's possibly had the opposite affect.

A team will finish bottom even with a ten team league, is that proof that they are not up to it and there's not enough quality, do we go to 8 teams because if quality ? 

I think the lack of quality argument is a fallacy, we mention it in the show.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

They were given half the money and about two months notice. Has zero bearing on Toulouse with full funding and more time to prepare. 

I imagine if TO go up the SL clubs (sorry independent SL board) will think of a reason not to give them any funding, like they did Toronto and (in part) Leigh. It’s pathetic really, sometimes I find it hard to rationalise why I still watch and love super league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

There's enough quality for 14 teams, or 18 or what ever number.

The spread of ability is a different point, every good youngster wants to sign for the top clubs.

If reducing teams is the answer, then going from 14 to 12 would have seen an improvement, it's possibly had the opposite affect.

A team will finish bottom even with a ten team league, is that proof that they are not up to it and there's not enough quality, do we go to 8 teams because if quality ? 

I think the lack of quality argument is a fallacy, we mention it in the show.

 

 

What evidence is there that 12 is “worse” than 14? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said:

What evidence is there that 12 is “worse” than 14? 

It was in reference to the same issue of "not enough talent" apparently existing but now we have fewer teams, hence the situation is 'worse'.

Previously there was only enough talent for 12 teams but we had 14.

Now we only have enough talent for 10, but we have 12.

I don't agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Eddie said:

I imagine if TO go up the SL clubs (sorry independent SL board) will think of a reason not to give them any funding, like they did Toronto and (in part) Leigh. It’s pathetic really, sometimes I find it hard to rationalise why I still watch and love super league. 

They didn't think if a way not to give Toronto funding, they said when they entered the league they wouldn't take it, if I recall correctly it's because they wanted their own TV deal, but this didn't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

They didn't think if a way not to give Toronto funding, they said when they entered the league they wouldn't take it, if I recall correctly it's because they wanted their own TV deal, but this didn't happen.

Are you saying that when TWP got promoted they refused their 1/12th share of the Sky money? I can’t remember that but fair enough if they did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.