The 1895 Cup. Respect it or bin it.

[paulwalker71]

1 hour ago, Scubby said:

How would people feel if the Challenge Cup was changed to 16 teams - SL clubs plus top 4/5 clubs from Championship (Toulouse not in it of course) - final at Wembley

1895 Cup for all remaining professional league clubs - final at Wembley

You increase cup prize money to top 4/5 Championship clubs so it is worth their while to be part of the big CC competition. The 1895 Cup is a real genuine competition for lower league clubs with a meaningful structure to get you to Wembley.

I was just thinking about that very concept

Challenge Cup for 12 SL clubs plus four semi-finalists from previous year 1895 Cup.

1895 Cup for the rest - with groups run as pre-season competition for L1 and Amateur Teams. Then you could run Round of 16 and Quarters, Semis on existing cup weekends without the need for midweek games.

I know there will now be howls from lower league teams supporters about how they are being denied their chance to play 'a big team'. But that hardly ever happens anyway under the current structure where only the top 5 qualifiers got to the round where the SL clubs came in.

[Scubby]

7 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

I was just thinking about that very concept

Challenge Cup for 12 SL clubs plus four semi-finalists from previous year 1895 Cup.

1895 Cup for the rest - with groups run as pre-season competition for L1 and Amateur Teams. Then you could run Round of 16 and Quarters, Semis on existing cup weekends without the need for midweek games.

I know there will now be howls from lower league teams supporters about how they are being denied their chance to play 'a big team'. But that hardly ever happens anyway under the current structure where only the top 5 qualifiers got to the round where the SL clubs came in.

Put some solid prize money into the competition £100k to the winners and £50k to the losers. The clubs can also get to benefit from the run in the competition and the build up to Wembley. It is either a genuine tribute to historic and community clubs or just a lazy assed way of getting 6k tickets for the final.

I watched the build up in the week and both games at Barrow and Whitehaven. Not once did they mention that either would be 1895 cup semi finalists and potentially one game from Spurs even if they didn't win. I genuinely believe fans of a large number of Championship and League 1 clubs didn't even know they were participating in this competition. The RFL's 1895 Cup dedicated page got its first update (March 27) for 8 months this week. That is not a competition it's a fudge.

[Griff]

4 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

I was just thinking about that very concept

Challenge Cup for 12 SL clubs plus four semi-finalists from previous year 1895 Cup.

1895 Cup for the rest - with groups run as pre-season competition for L1 and Amateur Teams. Then you could run Round of 16 and Quarters, Semis on existing cup weekends without the need for midweek games.

I know there will now be howls from lower league teams supporters about how they are being denied their chance to play 'a big team'. But that hardly ever happens anyway under the current structure where only the top 5 qualifiers got to the round where the SL clubs came in.

That's not all that different from what we have now.  Except you're running it over two seasons rather than one.  Is thatg an improvement ?  I vote no.

But the main weakness of your idea is actually the scenario we have this year with Toulouse not playing.   You'd need a fifth 1895 Cup side so would your plan be for the four quarter finalists to play off ?  Or what ?

[Griff]

1 minute ago, Scubby said:

The RFL's 1895 Cup dedicate page got its first update (March 27) for 8 months this week. That is not a competition it's a fudge.

I'm fond of fudge.

[Jughead]

8 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

I was just thinking about that very concept

Challenge Cup for 12 SL clubs plus four semi-finalists from previous year 1895 Cup.

1895 Cup for the rest - with groups run as pre-season competition for L1 and Amateur Teams. Then you could run Round of 16 and Quarters, Semis on existing cup weekends without the need for midweek games.

I know there will now be howls from lower league teams supporters about how they are being denied their chance to play 'a big team'. But that hardly ever happens anyway under the current structure where only the top 5 qualifiers got to the round where the SL clubs came in.

So ten Championship clubs have to play approximately 30 games and others don’t. I don’t see how it can be done with a twenty-six game league season. 

[Scubby]

Just now, Griff said:

I'm fond of fudge.

Bonfire toffee man myself.

[Scubby]

Just now, Jughead said:

So ten Championship clubs have to play approximately 30 games and others don’t. I don’t see how it can be done with a twenty-six game league season. 

One would be same weekend as last 16 in the cup and another last 8. There is a chance Championship clubs could draw each other in the last 16 of the CC. They could be free weekends of league fixtures so you are left with one midweek game at most. 

[Griff]

1 minute ago, Scubby said:

One would be same weekend as last 16 in the cup and another last 8. There is a chance Championship clubs could draw each other in the last 16 of the CC. They could be free weekends of league fixtures so you are left with one midweek game at most. 

Aye right.

I'm not seeing any spare weekends in our fixture list as things stand.   We'll end up playing Batley in this rearranged game in midweek.

[Scubby]

2 minutes ago, Griff said:

Aye right.

I'm not seeing any spare weekends in our fixture list as things stand.   We'll end up playing Batley in this rearranged game in midweek.

That's how it starts and then it's all downhill from there.

[paulwalker71]

16 minutes ago, Griff said:

That's not all that different from what we have now.  Except you're running it over two seasons rather than one.  Is thatg an improvement ?  I vote no.

But the main weakness of your idea is actually the scenario we have this year with Toulouse not playing.   You'd need a fifth 1895 Cup side so would your plan be for the four quarter finalists to play off ?  Or what ?

Well, first I think Toulouse not playing has got to be nipped in the bud. It was fine when we had COVID restrictions, but not as a long term plan.

I do think there's a difference in that, in my scenario, the 1895 is a genuine stand alone competition rather than, as it is now, a 'lucky losers' plate competition.

Put some prize money behind it, and a higher profile from the RFL and I think it could have legs.

[RigbyLuger]

Is Degsy paying enough to pay out £100k to the winner? (How much do the Challenge Cup winners get anyway?)

[sweaty craiq]

RFL dream, Fev play Leigh sell 10k between em and the CCF is a sell out.

[Scubby]

14 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said:

Is Degsy paying enough to pay out £100k to the winner? (How much do the Challenge Cup winners get anyway?)

No cash changing hands.

RFL HQ getting new decking, patio doors and handrails

[Scubby]

1 hour ago, sweaty craiq said:

RFL dream, Fev play Leigh sell 10k between em and the CCF is a sell out.

Don't forget AB Sundecks - it's a solid platform for them too!

[Griff]

2 hours ago, Scubby said:

That's how it starts and then it's all downhill from there.

I wish it was 

[Griff]

2 hours ago, paulwalker71 said:

Well, first I think Toulouse not playing has got to be nipped in the bud. It was fine when we had COVID restrictions, but not as a long term plan.

I do think there's a difference in that, in my scenario, the 1895 is a genuine stand alone competition rather than, as it is now, a 'lucky losers' plate competition.

Put some prize money behind it, and a higher profile from the RFL and I think it could have legs.

Would prize money increase the likelihood of folk attending games in the early rounds ?

I vote no.

[Griff]

2 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

Is Degsy paying enough to pay out £100k to the winner? 

  No - it's all his fault.

[GUBRATS]

7 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

The whole premise of the 1895 just seemed to be another unimaginative approach to try and arrest the falling attendances at the CC Final. I think that the RFL hoped that if they had a reason for fans of clubs like Bradford, Featherstone or Leigh to go to Wembley, they wouldn't have to come up with more creative ideas to make the CC, and the CC Final, an event that people are clamouring to see. 

This is the entire problem with the CC for me. Any discussion around how we get fans to attend seems to revolve around double headers (see the 1895 / semi-finals day), cheaper tickets and bundling it into season tickets, rather than making it something people actually want to spend money on. At this point, it seems like the only reason we're playing the CC is because "it's what we've always done". 

How do you suggest the RFL convince me to attend the CC final ?

[Jughead]

I’m not sure there is a way for the Championship to have a Grand Final early enough in the year to support the promoted side and give them the best chance of survival the following year and have an 1895 cup final between the months of May to July. 

[Griff]

15 hours ago, paulwalker71 said:

Well, first I think Toulouse not playing has got to be nipped in the bud. It was fine when we had COVID restrictions, but not as a long term plan.

I do think there's a difference in that, in my scenario, the 1895 is a genuine stand alone competition rather than, as it is now, a 'lucky losers' plate competition.

What you're saying is that a Championship team can't play in the Challenge Cup two years in a row as they wouldn't be in the 1895 Cup to qualify for one of the four Championship places. If you change your plan so that the qualifiers play in both, their fixture list is littered with Cup games and becomes unworkable.

[paulwalker71]

1 hour ago, Griff said:

What you're saying is that a Championship team can't play in the Challenge Cup two years in a row as they wouldn't be in the 1895 Cup to qualify for one of the four Championship places. If you change your plan so that the qualifiers play in both, their fixture list is littered with Cup games and becomes unworkable.

What I meant, although I accept I might not have explained it well, was for the Top 4 teams in the Championship to be in the following year's Challenge Cup

OK, maybe the format needs a bit of finessing, I accept that. The real question is whether we want or have the capacity to have a secondary Cup competition at all? If not, then just bin it off and be done with it. If we do, then surely we have to find a better solution than the half assed botch we have this year, where the vast majority of the non SL clubs didn't even get to compete in it.

[Tubby]

2 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

What I meant, although I accept I might not have explained it well, was for the Top 4 teams in the Championship to be in the following year's Challenge Cup

OK, maybe the format needs a bit of finessing, I accept that. The real question is whether we want or have the capacity to have a secondary Cup competition at all? If not, then just bin it off and be done with it. If we do, then surely we have to find a better solution than the half assed botch we have this year, where the vast majority of the non SL clubs didn't even get to compete in it.

It depends how you look at it though.  You could infer that those non-SL team 'only' competed in the 1895 cup, not the challenge cup.  If you simply say that the pre-SL rounds are the 1895 cup and those that get to the semis qualify to join SL in the Challenge cup...  Semantics I know, but it's such a hash, you can look at it either way.

[whatmichaelsays]

17 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

How do you suggest the RFL convince me to attend the CC final ?

It's not about how it gets you to attend the CC Final, but about how it makes the CC Final something that more people want to attend - how it makes the CC Final something that merits it's "blue ribboned", "protected event" status. 

The CC Final that Grubrats wants to attend is not necessarily the CC Final that might convince other audiences and other demographics to attend, but what I think is clear is that relying on the same audience that the RFL always relies on is not sustainable if it is serious about making the Challenge Cup relevant again. I mean, people still comment on the lack of "pub and club" trips as a reason for the CC Final attendances falling - that "pub and club" culture hasn't existed for a generation so we can't possibly be still using that as a legitimate reason. 

We've been over this ground many times before, but I think that the sport does need to look at the "event" it puts on throughout the whole day, invest more in matchday experience and, frankly, I think the season needs to be shortened to elevate the importance of the CC. Some of those things you might agree with, some you might not. But the point is that we can't just cater to the same segment of people that the game always caters for - because the evidence shows that they aren't prepared to pay good money to watch the Challenge Cup, 

[Mumby Magic]

19 hours ago, Styx said:

Two threads on the same them with posts being added to both.. Be great if folk read the menu first rather than just jump in for their moment of fame!

Moment if fame. . I've been on here 20 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And still never had it.

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

A few of us from Oldham had been hoping that a trophy would be named after a home grown administrator rather than some overseas administrator. Renaming the the cup the Joseph Platt 1895 trophy would go a way to further commemorating that son of Oldham, father of rugby league. But looks like we'll just have to be satisfied with him being in the Roll of honour.