Jump to content

Toulouse imploding


Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Tubby said:

Small sample... The basis for many an assertion.  The small group I spoke with said they'd prefer to see Huyton; I don't beliere this to be true either.

So do you think most neutral RL fans in England would rather watch Wakefield Trinity or Catalans Dragons, given the choice? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 07/03/2022 at 22:55, 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. 

Sorry for the late reply, but you are so correct in what you say, it is very easy for some just to say lock in the French Teams without having any consideration whatsoever of the  consequences that it will have on other teams some new some as old as the Northern Union itself, there can only be one set of rules to suit all club's as far as grading to which system they play in, any other considerations would have to be employed by adhering to a set of criteria, like stadium condition for example, I am sure that being in another country would/could not the a condition that may just have a contradiction on trade laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think RL should ever protect any team or remove P&R........ sport is survival of the fittest.........otherwise what's the point of any of it really. Licensing may work in other countries but not in the uk with over 100 years of promotion and relegation being part of the sporting culture.

Personally (aside from sorting out International RL) I think the best way to boost the sport would be to remove the salary cap.  The salary cap has never lead to a more even competition anyway.

In a sport with no money why limit what clubs can spend? How many genuinely wealthy clubs are in SL?

That way a newly promoted club that is well backed can just spend more to make sure they stay up.

Dropping the cap would set SL apart from Union and the NRL and we may get some more wealthy investors.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 2

england_identity2.jpg1921_button.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Sorry for the late reply, but you are so correct in what you say, it is very easy for some just to say lock in the French Teams without having any consideration whatsoever of the  consequences that it will have on other teams some new some as old as the Northern Union itself, there can only be one set of rules to suit all club's as far as grading to which system they play in, any other considerations would have to be employed by adhering to a set of criteria, like stadium condition for example, I am sure that being in another country would/could not the a condition that may just have a contradiction on trade laws.

It wouldnt have any consequences on uk teams trying to make It to SL, bar not travelling to France. 

 

Edited by ShropshireBull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

It wouldnt have any consequences on uk teams trying to make It to SL, bar not travelling to France. 

Off course it would, when there are points at stake every game to be won that over the season eventuates in a teams position in the league ladder, sorry Salop but if you are a team that finishes in a relegation spot you are relegated no matter who you are and where you come from, can you not understand how that can be manipulated if it matters not what the results of games are when results have no bearing on relegation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Eddie said:

So do you think most neutral RL fans in England would rather watch Wakefield Trinity or Catalans Dragons, given the choice? 

Honestly?  I don't think they care, either can produce a good game.  I find it bizarre that anyone thinks the name of a team has any effect on the majority of sports fans, their own local fans yes, but casual TV viewers?  Why would they care?  All anyone wants to see is a good compatitive game. Over the years, sometimes that's been more likely to be Catalan, other times it's been Wakefield, or Salford, or Wigan, or Leeds, or Hull KR, or whoever.

I have no issue with expanding the game, I think it's a necessary and helful aim.  But why that must be protected to the detriment of anyone else, I can't agree with.

Do you think casual ovservers would prefer to watch Featherstone, or Newcastle, now, as both are playing?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tubby said:

Honestly?  I don't think they care, either can produce a good game.  I find it bizarre that anyone thinks the name of a team has any effect on the majority of sports fans, their own local fans yes, but casual TV viewers?  Why would they care?  All anyone wants to see is a good compatitive game. Over the years, sometimes that's been more likely to be Catalan, other times it's been Wakefield, or Salford, or Wigan, or Leeds, or Hull KR, or whoever.

I have no issue with expanding the game, I think it's a necessary and helful aim.  But why that must be protected to the detriment of anyone else, I can't agree with.

Do you think casual ovservers would prefer to watch Featherstone, or Newcastle, now, as both are playing?

I’d say people who don’t know anything about RL would rather watch Newcastle, those that do would rather watch Fev. 
 

We’ll have to agree to disagree about it not mattering who’s playing though, in all sports people are more likely to want to watch the better teams, Man City v Chelsea for example will draw more neutrals than Norwich v Burnley. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Eddie said:

I’d say people who don’t know anything about RL would rather watch Newcastle, those that do would rather watch Fev. 
 

We’ll have to agree to disagree about it not mattering who’s playing though, in all sports people are more likely to want to watch the better teams, Man City v Chelsea for example will draw more neutrals than Norwich v Burnley. 

But my point is, 'better' is very subjective.  I honestly believe having a big city named club in a TV contest has little bearing, when it's a minority sport.  Watching Catalan play Newcastle, dropping every ball and tripping over their own feet would be less of a draw than Batley playing Widnes and throwing the ball around and entertaining the crowd.  And vice versa.

I appreciate the point you're making about someone who knows nothing about the sport seeing Paris v Barcelona and thinking that would be better to watch than Huyton v Thatto Heath, but how many people who have never heard of the game are going to be attracted anyway?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tubby said:

But my point is, 'better' is very subjective.  I honestly believe having a big city named club in a TV contest has little bearing, when it's a minority sport.  Watching Catalan play Newcastle, dropping every ball and tripping over their own feet would be less of a draw than Batley playing Widnes and throwing the ball around and entertaining the crowd.  And vice versa.

I appreciate the point you're making about someone who knows nothing about the sport seeing Paris v Barcelona and thinking that would be better to watch than Huyton v Thatto Heath, but how many people who have never heard of the game are going to be attracted anyway?

Well yeah totally agree on your last point. I was thinking more Catalans v Wire being more of a draw than Wakey v Wire, but who knows I may well be wrong (often am!). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tubby said:

But my point is, 'better' is very subjective.  I honestly believe having a big city named club in a TV contest has little bearing, when it's a minority sport.  Watching Catalan play Newcastle, dropping every ball and tripping over their own feet would be less of a draw than Batley playing Widnes and throwing the ball around and entertaining the crowd.  And vice versa.

I appreciate the point you're making about someone who knows nothing about the sport seeing Paris v Barcelona and thinking that would be better to watch than Huyton v Thatto Heath, but how many people who have never heard of the game are going to be attracted anyway?

I think both of you are right. It is much more nuanced and complex than just one or the other.

There is little doubt that Toronto appearing on the scene caused a huge uptick in interest. People who never spoke about RL before were asking about it and I'm sure that was enticing for casual viewers - big city non-UK team.

However, a great match with a great atmosphere between two good teams (e.g. Castleford v Salford) can also catch the eye because our game is an exceptional TV sport.

There is little doubt that Toulouse and Catalans does entice viewers on a casual level. But as I say, there is room for everyone.

Edited by Scubby
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Off course it would, when there are points at stake every game to be won that over the season eventuates in a teams position in the league ladder, sorry Salop but if you are a team that finishes in a relegation spot you are relegated no matter who you are and where you come from, can you not understand how that can be manipulated if it matters not what the results of games are when results have no bearing on relegation?

Just like how Saints rested players if they qualified for the playoffs against London? Why would Toulouse or Catalan not want to win games or give a toss about who gets relegated? When clubs are safe from relegation or have nowt on the game they play their kids and down tools anyway in every competition that has promotion and relegation. So your point makes no sense because it´s still an issue in systems where everyone can go up and down. 

Edited by ShropshireBull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I think both of you are right. It is much more nuanced and complex than just one or the other.

There is little doubt that Toronto appearing on the scene caused a huge uptick in interest. People who never spoke about RL before were asking about it and I'm sure that was enticing for casual viewers - big city non-UK team.

However, a great match with a great atmosphere between two good teams (e.g. Castleford v Salford) can also catch the eye because our game is an exceptional TV sport.

There is little doubt that Toulouse and Catalans does entice viewers on a casual level. But as I say, there is room for everyone.

One of my mates in Norwich who has zero interest in RL before Toronto even bought their jersey, I know this thread isn’t about them but (as you mentioned it) that was such a missed opportunity. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Eddie said:

One of my mates in Norwich who has zero interest in RL before Toronto even bought their jersey, I know this thread isn’t about them but (as you mentioned it) that was such a missed opportunity. 

The NRL want the Warriors at all costs and have spent millions and millions to secure that market in horrendous adversity. Had they not, there would be no Warriors now. Super League showed exactly what they thought of Toronto. As you say, another RL history quiz question now

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s no professional club out there that does not care about results and gives up. It’s simply a poor scare tactic. The intensity may not be as evident at the end of the season as it would be at the beginning if the game doesn’t not affect the table too much but that’s very different from not caring and/or giving up. 

Results and performances continue to have a bearing on a club even without relegation. Hull KR in 2020 are the prime example of that. They finished eleventh, bottom of Super League in that truncated year, winning three of their seventeen games. That year was the breakthrough of Mikey Lewis, a player as exciting as any other young English player in the game, and saw KR progress to within eighty minutes of Old Trafford less than a year later, have seen the club make some impressive signings and have seen them create a matchday event in a previously unused space of their stadium that is far better than most clubs’ offerings. Is all of this born out of them giving up on 2020

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Catalans 

Put Barrow into the equation after the performance on Monday most probably the most enjoyable/entertaining televised game of the season INCLUDING SL GAMES, sorry forgot the Championship is below you keV you will not have watched it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tuutaisrambo said:

I don't think RL should ever protect any team or remove P&R........ sport is survival of the fittest.........otherwise what's the point of any of it really. Licensing may work in other countries but not in the uk with over 100 years of promotion and relegation being part of the sporting culture.

Personally (aside from sorting out International RL) I think the best way to boost the sport would be to remove the salary cap.  The salary cap has never lead to a more even competition anyway.

In a sport with no money why limit what clubs can spend? How many genuinely wealthy clubs are in SL?

That way a newly promoted club that is well backed can just spend more to make sure they stay up.

Dropping the cap would set SL apart from Union and the NRL and we may get some more wealthy investors.

The promoted club would have to spend a whole lot more to give themselves a chance of staying up and it would probably do no good, as the established SL clubs would spend a lot more than they can now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a thought today when I read that Wakefield have a problem with the full back position and have brought in Escaré for two weeks on loan to cover the position (I feel sorry for the No3 choice for full back at Wakefield who thought...briefly... he had a sniff of a game).

Why bother assembling a squad at all? When you can just "buy in" players as and when you need them. 

NB: I have no problem with the concept of players on loan per se. I just think that 2-weeks is taking the p***, 1 month should be the minimum. It takes me back to the middle-8's when teams managed to refresh their squad with a completely new line up just to get themselves over the line.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, kiggy said:

I had a thought today when I read that Wakefield have a problem with the full back position and have brought in Escaré for two weeks on loan to cover the position (I feel sorry for the No3 choice for full back at Wakefield who thought...briefly... he had a sniff of a game).

Why bother assembling a squad at all? When you can just "buy in" players as and when you need them. 

NB: I have no problem with the concept of players on loan per se. I just think that 2-weeks is taking the p***, 1 month should be the minimum. It takes me back to the middle-8's when teams managed to refresh their squad with a completely new line up just to get themselves over the line.

I've seen the Toulouse / Catalans guy moaning about this on twitter earlier, ignoring the fact that Toulouse have just signed loan players and it's just part of the game. Dealing with bans, injuries, squad depletion, managing your cap etc is all part of the challenge. 

I really don't see an issue here. Its not like the best players in the league are being passed around, it's fringe players who are moving. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I've seen the Toulouse / Catalans guy moaning about this on twitter earlier, ignoring the fact that Toulouse have just signed loan players and it's just part of the game. Dealing with bans, injuries, squad depletion, managing your cap etc is all part of the challenge. 

I really don't see an issue here. Its not like the best players in the league are being passed around, it's fringe players who are moving. 

I don't disagree with loan players , but getting players in for 1 or two games is just farcical. You could run a team completely on that premis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, kiggy said:

I had a thought today when I read that Wakefield have a problem with the full back position and have brought in Escaré for two weeks on loan to cover the position (I feel sorry for the No3 choice for full back at Wakefield who thought...briefly... he had a sniff of a game).

Why bother assembling a squad at all? When you can just "buy in" players as and when you need them. 

NB: I have no problem with the concept of players on loan per se. I just think that 2-weeks is taking the p***, 1 month should be the minimum. It takes me back to the middle-8's when teams managed to refresh their squad with a completely new line up just to get themselves over the line.

Second choice FB would be Lee Gaskell - injured.

Third choice would be to reshuffle a threequarter, but Tupou is injured, Lyneham is injured, Lee Kershaw is injured, Croft is only just back from injury, Davetanivalu is injured, Murphy needs a breather, Minns is injured.

Fourth choice would be reshuffle a halfback - but Miller is injured.

Fifth choice would be out of the U18s.

Escare is proven and needs game time. 

Why wouldn't Wakefield use the loan system that the clubs themselves devised?

Given Wakefield's injuries, I'm surprised they haven't dipped in sooner.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, kiggy said:

I don't disagree with loan players , but getting players in for 1 or two games is just farcical. You could run a team completely on that premis.

You could, but you'd likely be rubbish. It isn't a good way to run a squad, it is out of necessity. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

You could, but you'd likely be rubbish. It isn't a good way to run a squad, it is out of necessity. 

 

Escare, Robson and Ashall-Bott getting first team game time has to be a good thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scubby said:

Escare, Robson and Ashall-Bott getting first team game time has to be a good thing?

Indeed, but some people just want to constantly moan about RL no matter what. It was interesting seeing the Toulouse/Catalans twitter guy moan about this when they have just taken loan players. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Indeed, but some people just want to constantly moan about RL no matter what. It was interesting seeing the Toulouse/Catalans twitter guy moan about this when they have just taken loan players. 

Loans have been around for as long as I've watched the game.

DR is a different beast IMO because it is far too fluid and artificially inflates the strength of some Championship clubs.

  • 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...