Sylvain Houles says Toulouse should be exempt from relegation

[Oxford]

31 minutes ago, DEANO said:

but you can’t change the rules mid season

I'm sure you've been watching RL for more than five minutes so you can't really think that's how it works.

 

[GUBRATS]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

In the early days of Licencing about 1200.

The 2500 for London and Sheffield games is quite rightly as you are intimating terrible, but are Leigh a victim of the push for promotion and having assembled a squad that is proving to be far too good for seemingly all bar one of the opposition, the last 4 games has seen 174 points for and only 12 against, I for one think twice before attending these days as I get no pleasure in one sided affairs even when my team is winning.

Harry , we were at around 2,500 at the start of licencing , down to around 1,300 by the end of it , and back up to around 3,400 pre pandemic 

[GUBRATS]

6 hours ago, Davo5 said:

No just the realistic ones.

Yeah but most of those supporters are probably either dead or have no memory of saying it.

Were Leigh getting much fewer fans than the 2.500 they are getting now ? 
 

Pre licencing Leigh were hovering around 2400 , by the end of licencing we'd lost a thousand of those , dropping down to 1200 for some games , middle 8s and a return to P and R and we were up around 3400 pre pandemic , so work to be done ATM 

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, Davo5 said:

I bet it’s fun in there tonight.

Just got back, yes was good thank you.

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Just got back, yes was good thank you.

Bobbin ? 

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Bobbin ? 

No the Burke, good selection of real ales all very reasonably priced at £2.10 a pint.

[Tommygilf]

13 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

No the Burke, good selection of real ales all very reasonably priced at £2.10 a pint.

Spoons' are unfairly underated for their real ale offerings by many beer snobs. As you say its very reasonably priced.

[Oxford]

17 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Harry , we were at around 2,500 at the start of licencing , down to around 1,300 by the end of it , and back up to around 3,400 pre pandemic 

Although, on the face of it those numbers seem quite conclusive, and damn licensing there are many other factors and things that will have influenced those figures. The shilly shallying of the RFL not the least among these things the idea that marketing a game is totally the responsibility of the home side etc etc

 

The post covid numbers might be used in a similar way. Is it RL or just the chance to be outside?

As dkw as already pointed out the posts above are redundant.

 

Edited May 7, 2022 by Oxford

[GUBRATS]

5 hours ago, Oxford said:

Although, on the face of it those numbers seem quite conclusive, and damn licensing there are many other factors and things that will have influenced those figures. The shilly shallying of the RFL not the least among these things the idea that marketing a game is totally the responsibility of the home side etc etc

 

They are conclusive , so what other factors are you suggesting ? 

No idea what you're on about with the rest of your post 

[ckn]

17 posts removed.

[Oxford]

20 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

They are conclusive , so what other factors are you suggesting ? 

No idea what you're on about with the rest of your post 

They are possibly related and you've drawn conclusions. Things that happen at the same time or even roughly are not always connected, no matter how much you'd like them to be.

There was a general decline in support and not just RL.

Those things may be RL specific but people might just as easily been more swayed by disillusion with the RFL and or lack of success of their sides.

I can't help what you don't understand, especially if you don't refer to specifics.

Edited May 8, 2022 by Oxford

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, ckn said:

17 posts removed.

Apologies 

[GUBRATS]

23 minutes ago, Oxford said:

They are possibly related and you've drawn conclusions. Things that happen at the same time or even roughly are not always connected, no matter how much you'd like them to be.

There was a general decline in support and not just RL.

Those things may be RL specific but people might just as easily been more swayed by disillusion with the RFL and or lack of success of their sides.

I can't help what you don't understand, especially if you don't refer to specifics.

As a team we weren't as successful during that period , due to our owner ( Arthur Thomas ) having business issues , I myself dropped off attending , especially home games , preceding a ' day out ' at Batley,Barrow and Fax , but the ' feel ' just wasn't there , the discussions in the pub were , " what's the point " by both regular and occasional attendee's 

A return to licencing/Franchising would IMO result in a similar malaise again 

[GUBRATS]

30 minutes ago, Oxford said:

They are possibly related and you've drawn conclusions. Things that happen at the same time or even roughly are not always connected, no matter how much you'd like them to be.

There was a general decline in support and not just RL.

Those things may be RL specific but people might just as easily been more swayed by disillusion with the RFL and or lack of success of their sides.

I can't help what you don't understand, especially if you don't refer to specifics.

It's interesting with the current discussions about the Challenge Cup , I had attended my first finals at Murrayfield,Cardiff and the new Wembley , but the disappointment of being Locked out ended my interest in attending those as a neutral , many others stated similar at the time , it split the sports fan base for many lower tier clubs 

[Niels]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

As a team we weren't as successful during that period , due to our owner ( Arthur Thomas ) having business issues , I myself dropped off attending , especially home games , preceding a ' day out ' at Batley,Barrow and Fax , but the ' feel ' just wasn't there , the discussions in the pub were , " what's the point " by both regular and occasional attendee's 

A return to licencing/Franchising would IMO result in a similar malaise again 

As a football fan, I notice other sports are envious of the excitement of promotion and relegation. 

Yesterday the league 2 game at Bristol Rovers made national news. 

We are one of the few other sports that have it and I think we should see it as a real positive.

[Oxford]

5 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

As a team we weren't as successful during that period , due to our owner ( Arthur Thomas ) having business issues , I myself dropped off attending , especially home games , preceding a ' day out ' at Batley,Barrow and Fax , but the ' feel ' just wasn't there , the discussions in the pub were , " what's the point " by both regular and occasional attendee's 

A return to licencing/Franchising would IMO result in a similar malaise again 

 

5 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

It's interesting with the current discussions about the Challenge Cup , I had attended my first finals at Murrayfield,Cardiff and the new Wembley , but the disappointment of being Locked out ended my interest in attending those as a neutral , many others stated similar at the time , it split the sports fan base for many lower tier clubs 

The trouble with anecdotal eveidence is that it could be 100% correct and might be just as false. Our chat and feelings can marry up especially when we are in poorer or unhappy  times. The blame can be placed at the door of something or someone so easily. This is becoming more and more normal as times pass.

The decline in support could be entirely down to Sky or bear no relation to it at all, but it could be argued very strongly.

It might argued that profesionalism in kick and clap has taken away numbers from the game or that the overarching influence of soccer however unmerited that might be.

It might simply be that RL folk are no longer true believers and there is no one to fight the good fight on its behalf except on safe social media sights of like minded individuals. Especially true where controversy and argument is frowned upon or brings out the worst in folk.

My own pet thing is the Beeb treatment of RL before Sky which did actually make into the laughing stock everyone claims we are to suit their argument; and when people criticise Sky it should be said that they never treated us as appalingly as Aunty did.

Or just seeing the same teams win the trophies again and again and again might have done the damage.

Very nice if you're one of them though.

It could also be a direct result of all the false dawns and unrealised promise that RL seems eternally dogged by.

 

[ckn]

7 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Apologies 

Wasn’t you. Your posts were fine albeit you were frustrated with what you were replying to. 

[Oxford]

In the meantime , although the thread lost it's way slightly, there would seem to be concensus that : a) Sylvain was wrong to ask now, b) it would be wronger to change the rules now, c) that still doesn't mean it won't happen and d) P&R is a contentious issue that is unlikely to go away.

For a TGG forum that's a huge amount of agreement and maybe we should see if it's a world record for Guiness!

[fighting irish]

1 hour ago, Oxford said:

In the meantime , although the thread lost it's way slightly, there would seem to be concensus that : a) Sylvain was wrong to ask now, b) it would be wronger to change the rules now, c) that still doesn't mean it won't happen and d) P&R is a contentious issue that is unlikely to go away.

For a TGG forum that's a huge amount of agreement and maybe we should see if it's a world record for Guiness!

At risk of causing a collective yawn, I'm going to say it anyway.

My earlier proposal (which does involve changing the rules mid season), doesn't have any casualties.

Everyone is a winner.

No-one is relegated (for the next two years), no-one is locked out and (the vitally important change is that) newcomers, get 2-3 seasons to settle in to the rigour of Super League.

Loop fixtures are eradicated and (if nothing else) two more clubs should get their memberships/crowds boosted simply by being promoted to SL status.

Finally (Harry), the door is always open to new teams, climbing the ladder through the ranks.  

[Tubby]

27 minutes ago, fighting irish said:

At risk of causing a collective yawn, I'm going to say it anyway.

My earlier proposal (which does involve changing the rules mid season), doesn't have any casualties.

Everyone is a winner.

No-one is relegated (for the next two years), no-one is locked out and (the vitally important change is that) newcomers, get 2-3 seasons to settle in to the rigour of Super League.

Loop fixtures are eradicated and (if nothing else) two more clubs should get their memberships/crowds boosted simply by being promoted to SL status.

Finally (Harry), the door is always open to new teams, climbing the ladder through the ranks.  

The casualties would be the team being relegated who doesn't finish bottom, also all existing SL clubs have their distribution reduced.  I can't imagine they woudl see this as winning.

That's not so say that I don't agree with the idea, I think it has much to commend it, but I'm not the CEO of a club losing a portion of our central funding.

[Harry Stottle]

19 minutes ago, Tubby said:

The casualties would be the team being relegated who doesn't finish bottom, also all existing SL clubs have their distribution reduced.  I can't imagine they woudl see this as winning.

That's not so say that I don't agree with the idea, I think it has much to commend it, but I'm not the CEO of a club losing a portion of our central funding.

That is RL in a nutshell, what you have never had you never miss, but once you've had it you will do everthing to maintain it, there are some SL clubs who simply could not lose any funding, and those that it would make little to no difference would vote against it.

Edited May 9, 2022 by Harry Stottle

[fighting irish]

2 hours ago, Tubby said:

The casualties would be the team being relegated who doesn't finish bottom, also all existing SL clubs have their distribution reduced.  I can't imagine they woudl see this as winning.

That's not so say that I don't agree with the idea, I think it has much to commend it, but I'm not the CEO of a club losing a portion of our central funding.

Yes you are right, of course.

The only thing I can say in mitigation is that they would all have 3 years to get their heads around it, before it (relegation) happens to them.

With regard to the changes in funding, that too will take place over a 2 and a half year period (starting now) before the Sky money is shared 14 ways.

This means they have some time, to re-jig the finances.

I personally believe that a 14 team European league (with 2 French teams in it) is a more attractive proposition, to TV and sponsors alike, so additional monies might come in as a consequence. 

 

[Tubby]

17 minutes ago, fighting irish said:

Yes you are right, of course.

The only thing I can say in mitigation is that they would all have 3 years to get their heads around it, before it (relegation) happens to them.

With regard to the changes in funding, that too will take place over a 2 and a half year period (starting now) before the Sky money is shared 14 ways.

This means they have some time, to re-jig the finances.

I personally believe that a 14 team European league (with 2 French teams in it) is a more attractive proposition, to TV and sponsors alike, so additional monies might come in as a consequence. 

 

I agree that at the moment it would seem to be a good idea, but the self-preservation in SL would, I believe, be far too strong to allow it.

[Oxford]

4 hours ago, fighting irish said:

doesn't have any casualties.

For those that like P&R and don't see the alternatives as sensible the car crash and the casualties are the drama and the excitement.

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

there are some SL clubs who simply could not lose any funding, and those that it would make little to no difference would vote against it.

Self interest has become the stock in trade of those who are largely unaffected by P&R and we only need to look at the difference in salary cap punishments to come to a jaundiced conclusion about the reasoning behind them.