Jump to content

Toulouse imploding


Recommended Posts

Did Swiss football do an average over 2 seasons for relegation a few years back? Or I might be making it up.

Either way I think that it is a halfway house between P and R and licences but probably takes the worst of each as opposed to the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


5 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

Did Swiss football do an average over 2 seasons for relegation a few years back? Or I might be making it up.

Either way I think that it is a halfway house between P and R and licences but probably takes the worst of each as opposed to the best.

I think Swiss football had the Super 8s system. I know in Argentina relegation was decided over a three year points average but I’m not sure that still happens.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Liverpool Rover said:

I think Swiss football had the Super 8s system. I know in Argentina relegation was decided over a three year points average but I’m not sure that still happens.

Thanks. Now you say it, it is Argentina I'm thinking of. I don't think it went down well if my obviously very blurry memory is correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, glossop saint said:

Thanks. Now you say it, it is Argentina I'm thinking of. I don't think it went down well if my obviously very blurry memory is correct.

I think it was changed in Argentina after a couple of the big clubs ended up being relegated.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Liverpool Rover said:

I think Swiss football had the Super 8s system. I know in Argentina relegation was decided over a three year points average but I’m not sure that still happens.

Yes, a team had to be proven to be consistently struggling over a few seasons to be considered for relegation. Finishing bottom for one season didn't bring the axe to fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the highlights of the Toulouse v. Wigan game yesterday. Five and a half thousand in and the crowd roared each time Toulouse scored and I`m sure I recall them being cheering off at half-time. There is a team who could easily go to 8 - 10 000 crowds ( I`m deliberately being conservative) if they could start to match it regularly with the big sides.

And then of course you have that invaluable promotional tool of a neighbouring team that is already doing well and grabbing plenty of headlines, the potential for that derby to promote the game over there can`t be underestimated..

This is an opportunity not to be missed, if the Super League authorities allow that team to slip back to the Championship after one year they need their heads read, I`d put it up there with the NRL sacrificing Perth. A strategic blunder. What I witnessed on that highlights reel revealed there is a very real appetite for a Rugby League team in Toulouse, grab it.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What to do? 

One: P & r as it is now.

Two: Ditch p & r for licencing.

Three: Have the top team from the Championship play the bottom of SL to decide if P & r takes place. Some years an up and down shuffle, others not. 

Four: Exemption from relegation for any new team into SL for a period or make an exception for a new French based side. 

I also think when it comes to Toulouse, is this part of a plan to strengthen the game in France or simply a commercial decision to include them? It seems a bit of both but shouldn't it be one or the other? To improve the game in France, Toulouse being relegated after one season is a backward step. If it's about each side earning a place in SL with on field performance, then helping the game in France isn't the priority.  

The fact that RL grapples with this sort of issue reflects the financial situation the game is in. Continuity of any format or structure is all but impossible.

  • Like 1

My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/

It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course.

It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Davo5 said:

Never mentioned either.if a club doesn’t meet the criteria after 2,3  or 4 yrs and a club applying for a place does,they get replaced,it won’t happen but it’s better than the yo-yo rubbish we have now.

So again you're giving clubs 3/4 years , been there , done that , didn't work 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scubby said:

1 up and 1 down.

And then leave it for another 3 years ? , Clubs would save cash for year 3 , then lump it all on 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Number 16 said:

I've always believed a three year cycle for promotion and relegation is the best option for Rugby League. We're a sport suffering geographic, demographic and structural problems that don't hit most other sports.

However, I'd tweak your suggestion so that in the third year it's not simply the top and bottom that are promoted and relegated. Rather, I'd make it cumulative over the three years. Yes, in theory a team could finish bottom twice then win the GF in year three. It's highly unlikely, but you could apply conditions such as if a club has reached either the GF or CC final they are secure. Then it's the next worst. As for promotion, if a club comes up from L1 in year one, then tops the Championship in 2 and 3 but amasses sufficient points for promotion, then so be it. 

I think this will give clubs the opportunity to develop their own.

 

And clubs with no fans ? , Crappy stadiums ? , No academies ? , Location ? 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LlanWests said:

I'm generally in agreement with this. Suppose in an ideal world we would have P&R, but as you know we don't like in a perfect world. I've always been in favour of a license or franchise system. Teams can still get chucked out. 

So why didn't any last time ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Pigeon Lofter said:

Yes, a team had to be proven to be consistently struggling over a few seasons to be considered for relegation. Finishing bottom for one season didn't bring the axe to fall.

And how did the 2nd tier go on ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

I watched the highlights of the Toulouse v. Wigan game yesterday. Five and a half thousand in and the crowd roared each time Toulouse scored and I`m sure I recall them being cheering off at half-time. There is a team who could easily go to 8 - 10 000 crowds ( I`m deliberately being conservative) if they could start to match it regularly with the big sides.

And then of course you have that invaluable promotional tool of a neighbouring team that is already doing well and grabbing plenty of headlines, the potential for that derby to promote the game over there can`t be underestimated..

This is an opportunity not to be missed, if the Super League authorities allow that team to slip back to the Championship after one year they need their heads read, I`d put it up there with the NRL sacrificing Perth. A strategic blunder. What I witnessed on that highlights reel revealed there is a very real appetite for a Rugby League team in Toulouse, grab it.

By doing what ?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Liverpool Rover said:

I think it was changed in Argentina after a couple of the big clubs ended up being relegated.

I think they removed it after a side was relegated despite finishing 9th and winning the cup in the third year. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Liverpool Rover said:

I think Swiss football had the Super 8s system. I know in Argentina relegation was decided over a three year points average but I’m not sure that still happens.

 

55 minutes ago, Pigeon Lofter said:

Yes, a team had to be proven to be consistently struggling over a few seasons to be considered for relegation. Finishing bottom for one season didn't bring the axe to fall.

It’s a convoluted and confusing structure in Argentina. While relegation is based on a three year cycle, that doesn’t matter because clubs who have only been in their top flight for one year can and do go down based on one seasons coefficient. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, RayCee said:

What to do? 

One: P & r as it is now.

Two: Ditch p & r for licencing.

Three: Have the top team from the Championship play the bottom of SL to decide if P & r takes place. Some years an up and down shuffle, others not. 

Four: Exemption from relegation for any new team into SL for a period or make an exception for a new French based side. 

I also think when it comes to Toulouse, is this part of a plan to strengthen the game in France or simply a commercial decision to include them? It seems a bit of both but shouldn't it be one or the other? To improve the game in France, Toulouse being relegated after one season is a backward step. If it's about each side earning a place in SL with on field performance, then helping the game in France isn't the priority.  

The fact that RL grapples with this sort of issue reflects the financial situation the game is in. Continuity of any format or structure is all but impossible.

Or the most obvious.  French teams locked in  1 up 1 down for uk teams.  Done.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Or the most obvious.  French teams locked in  1 up 1 down for uk teams.  Done.

Hmmmm. No, not for me sorry. 

  • Thanks 1

Kangaroos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Or the most obvious.  French teams locked in  1 up 1 down for uk teams.  Done.

Why should we ring-fence Toulouse Olympique but not Newcastle Thunder and/or York City Knights? Growth exists within the UK, too, and if we are ring-fencing certain clubs based on geography and the potential of certain clubs, why would we not do that for others based in the UK? And if we were too, how do you justify potentially relegating mid-table clubs based upon their face not fitting because of something like geographical location? 

Personally, I don’t see a way in which we can have a very loose form of licencing on certain clubs and not others and then still attempt to keep a handful of relatively small, limited clubs happy by still offering them the carrot of promotion, in which the odds are stacked even further against them by treating others differently. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Why should we ring-fence Toulouse Olympique but not Newcastle Thunder and/or York City Knights? Growth exists within the UK, too, and if we are ring-fencing certain clubs based on geography and the potential of certain clubs, why would we not do that for others based in the UK? And if we were too, how do you justify potentially relegating mid-table clubs based upon their face not fitting because of something like geographical location? 

Personally, I don’t see a way in which we can have a very loose form of licencing on certain clubs and not others and then still attempt to keep a handful of relatively small, limited clubs happy by still offering them the carrot of promotion, in which the odds are stacked even further against them by treating others differently. 

Go back through my last few comments here and these questions are answered. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Go back through my last few comments here and these questions are answered. 

So a mixture of unnecessary moves to continue a cycle that doesn’t work so that we don’t annoy a handful of the smaller clubs in the game and some past names that are light years away from their former glories? It’s a no, from me. 

If you are ring-fencing two, ring-fence twelve, fourteen, sixteen or however many the top league is going to have in it and hold all clubs accountable for what the game’s governing bodies, it’s partners and broadcasters and its stakeholders want from it and where they, collectively, want the game to be. Ring-fencing French clubs does little to detract the Super League clubs from having 25-30 weekly rounds, a play-off series and a Challenge Cup competition (albeit one that seems to get shorter and shorter). Your intention to grow the international game is a correct one and a stance I support but clubs’ purposes are not to make international teams more competitive, they’re to achieve their own goals, whether they are relegation threatened or not and your proposal also appears to be brushing UK growth through Newcastle Thunder, for one example, to the side.

Keeping promotion and relegation satisfies maybe six clubs, at the very most, it seems quite a bold move to continue something that doesn’t work in its current format.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, dkw said:

I think we're one of the only sports where a club endeavouring to better itself and the sport are actually held back by rules created on the fly by the very institution tasked with helping clubs and the sport better themselves....

To be fair, many saying things like this are the ones championing rules to be changed. Including yourself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think TO are anywhere near as far on in their journey to becoming a big club with a solid support base as many others do. But I still feel they have that potential. I'd hoped to see the squad strengthened. I wish there'd been a way to open their season with a home match against Catalans in a post-Covid world.

However, if they finish bottom in 2022, it will be as much their responsibility as anyone else's. We ought to be thinking how to make the 2023 Championship into a better place to land (for any relegated club) rather than continuing with this strategy of Super League or bust.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

I don't think TO are anywhere near as far on in their journey to becoming a big club with a solid support base as many others do. But I still feel they have that potential. I'd hoped to see the squad strengthened. I wish there'd been a way to open their season with a home match against Catalans in a post-Covid world.

However, if they finish bottom in 2022, it will be as much their responsibility as anyone else's. We ought to be thinking how to make the 2023 Championship into a better place to land (for any relegated club) rather than continuing with this strategy of Super League or bust.

We don’t really know the truths about Houles recruitment plans but it did appear to me that it was tentative.  
 

Bottom lines are that the P&R system we have doesn’t allow enough time to recruit and Clubs don’t have enough money to pay the going rate for sufficient players to ensure remaining in SL.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

And then leave it for another 3 years ? , Clubs would save cash for year 3 , then lump it all on 

No, 1 up 1 down every year from that point. In that time you will have moved the Championship to finish end of August. Super League to start beginning of March.

Edited by Scubby
  • 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...