Jump to content

Why Expansion has failed


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, steve oates said:

Ideally enough to be able to pay full salary cap and attract some quality players to provide the best chance of staying up.

But also a stay of execution for two years, which I would give Featherstone if their owner plans to invest further when in Superleague.   Does he??

You misunderstood me. I was querying the veracity of the figure quoted for how much Toronto spent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


22 hours ago, Eddie said:

The reason for expansion is that someone or a group of people want to set a club up in an area away from the Heartlands. There’s no strategy for the game from its leaders, that’s the only way a club can be set up, and the RFL then offer them no help at all. 

But that's just random and you may as well put a kabadi team in England, a gridiron team in Europe, or a table tennis team other than China. In easch caser they will get strangled by the lack of quality players and probably supporter indifference to an inferior product. 

If you are using the phrase "expansion" then it is not just about setting up a club is it? It needs the will from the top to support and develop it and as already said by wiser posters than me, I just don't see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stevecl said:

But that's just random and you may as well put a kabadi team in England, a gridiron team in Europe, or a table tennis team other than China. In easch caser they will get strangled by the lack of quality players and probably supporter indifference to an inferior product. 

If you are using the phrase "expansion" then it is not just about setting up a club is it? It needs the will from the top to support and develop it and as already said by wiser posters than me, I just don't see it.

I know, but the point I’m making is that there are people who want to do it where they live, and that’s why it happens in those places. There are new clubs in Cambridge and Norfolk this year, I expect few on this forum would pick those locations for new clubs but they’re happening because people there want to give it a go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello all.

I'm from Cornwall and watched League for years on Sky Sports; I'm from a Union background but enjoy the game and, in the late 1990's, the Friday night games on Sky were lightyears ahead in terms of presentation and rivalry than most sports. I believe you can enjoy both codes of Rugby, Cricket, Football, AFL or hopscotch without one having to be an abrasive to the other.

I'm not going to go into arguments for and against expansion or whether it's been well executed, as I am too new to the scene to comment, but since Cornwall RLFC has launched there has been a definite positive upsurge in what Rugby League is down here and seeing it at a decent level. There's been good coverage on BBC Radio Cornwall especially, and people who are new to the sport are generally keen to learn.

Any sport that provides pathways for people to excel at a higher level is always welcome, particularly down here. I watched the first game at Penryn and it was good fun.

I totally get the logic of growing stronger roots around the M62, but equally you'd miss out on the opportunities to see how the game can develop and grow organically.

Cheers 👍

  • Like 21
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Stein said:

I don't know. I'm not the one suggesting that the sport should just support what it's got. To turn it around if it's so wonderful why do some appear to think that it is impossible for people outside its heartlands to want to participate in and enjoy it?

You'll have to ask those people. I don't think anybody believes it is impossible for people to enjoy it, but things cost money, and we aren't' awash with that.

The reality is always somewhere in the middle, RL isn't a dying, failing sport, nor is it one that is maximising its potential.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, gingerjon said:

The RL Conference was massive. It covered pretty much all of England.

The either/or, when it came, wasn't between backing outpost professional clubs (because they received very little backing) or grassroots but between holding the line and continuing to fund development officers across the country ... or not doing that.

And we chose, as a sport, to not to do that.

We backed contraction. And so we contracted.

For the spread of the game the RLC was far better than what we have now, once the RFL got it's hands on the NCL and most of the regional league the baby was discarded with the washing water along with all the promises to Bramley Buffalos, scrapping development officers has to be the most damaging decision to expansion ever.

  • Like 6

Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.

http://www.pitchero....hornemarauders/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Marauder said:

For the spread of the game the RLC was far better than what we have now, once the RFL got it's hands on the NCL and most of the regional league the baby was discarded with the washing water along with all the promises to Bramley Buffalos, scrapping development officers has to be the most damaging decision to expansion ever.

Yes. There have been plenty of contenders for the most damaging decision to expansion ever, but the loss of development officers, albeit based in funding cuts and economic hardship, was expansion suicide.

The loss of the RLC has been a huge blow in that respect. There were some fly-by-night outfits there, but so much potential for growth.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dave T said:

You'll have to ask those people. I don't think anybody believes it is impossible for people to enjoy it, but things cost money, and we aren't' awash with that.

The reality is always somewhere in the middle, RL isn't a dying, failing sport, nor is it one that is maximising its potential.

Generally I would agree, but then speedway wasn't a dying, failing sport in the UK until it started being a failing sport (and possibly dying).

I have written elsewhere that growing up I couldn't imagine amateur rugby league teams in my county let alone one which is by most standards very successful having produced a number of professionals including one just signed to a NRL club and two internationals. Yet I have fears going forward as no matter how strong that club is the junior leagues in which it plays appear to be struggling and the response from the RFL, as it appears to be for most things in the South, seems to be no more than a shrug of the shoulders. 

42 years after the foundation of Fulham, there is still no strategic plan in place for London and the south. Not many businesses nowadays avoid planning or suggest the plan is inertia. The lack of money point only goes so far when the increase in employees at the RFL has been substantial from the two or three in the Oxley/Howes era when I started watching. The issue is whether there is real desire to assist the outposts or are they too easily forgotten. If half the effort (and of late monies) involved in the infighting we have seen for a number of years had gone into developing the game both in the heartlands and outposts we might not be discussing this

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot depends on what you class as expansion is it lots of new people playing the game or is having a SL club, ideally both but which needs to come first. For me it’s about getting the game going in the community closely followed by a decent level amateur/semi professional club and building from next there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly I have to say Red Rooster that's one off the best constructed OPs I've seen for a while.

My two penneth is boring though. Generally RFL don't plan mid and long term. Toronto were entered into the comp with no idea what the final target was. 

We have the most frustrating sport going. Apologies the most frustrating board of a sport going. It's been like this for decades. 

If Cats and Toulouse are in our comp (which I completely don't mind) at least state it's to enhance our competition, help revenue streams etc. What we don't know is are there plans for to be included? Plus if so what is the eventual target/plan?

Been pondering this for a few days. As some may know from my posts I am against constant structure change but I look at League One with hand firmly on chin.

Cornwall, Skokars, WWR. They should be there and anyone who thinks likewise should give their head a tiny shake. Roots need to be taken. (I'm aware Skokars are  20 year old in the League now). Do we let them continue or do we encourage clubs to come forward to feed League One with the aforementioned added. 

  • Like 2

Like poor jokes? Thejoketeller@mullymessiah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Cardypaul said:

A lot depends on what you class as expansion is it lots of new people playing the game or is having a SL club, ideally both but which needs to come first. For me it’s about getting the game going in the community closely followed by a decent level amateur/semi professional club and building from next there.

And how do you get a number of community clubs to organically appear out of nothing? With respect people like to say this, but it never happens. The one area of success is probably the North East but those clubs don't pre-date Thunder. The two clubs that came out of the amateur game in the South, Skolars and Hurricanes, clearly both have had their own issues of late and, lest we forget, Keighley last year put forward that they should be thrown out of the league with WWR

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Cardypaul said:

A lot depends on what you class as expansion is it lots of new people playing the game or is having a SL club, ideally both but which needs to come first. For me it’s about getting the game going in the community closely followed by a decent level amateur/semi professional club and building from next there.

If we had a Hemel Stags style club in every town with 100k people and over the game would be doing absolutely fantastically. Expansion isn't just about professional clubs at the highest level, though they can both help with or be a sign of successful expansion. 

One of our major failings, and one that continually plagues us, is that because we have failed to expand at all into many cities and urban areas, most people are either not aware of the sport or are dismissive of it based on prejudice towards what little of the game they have seen ("northern", "uncool" etc.). If you are introduced to a sport at a local level, either through a professional club, a school team, or an amateur club, those preconceptions start to break down almost automatically.

In some places it might be easier to lead with the top first model, others will be entirely unsuited to that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

Firstly I have to say Red Rooster that's one off the best constructed OPs I've seen for a while.

My two penneth is boring though. Generally RFL don't plan mid and long term. Toronto were entered into the comp with no idea what the final target was. 

We have the most frustrating sport going. Apologies the most frustrating board of a sport going. It's been like this for decades. 

If Cats and Toulouse are in our comp (which I completely don't mind) at least state it's to enhance our competition, help revenue streams etc. What we don't know is are there plans for to be included? Plus if so what is the eventual target/plan?

Been pondering this for a few days. As some may know from my posts I am against constant structure change but I look at League One with hand firmly on chin.

Cornwall, Skokars, WWR. They should be there and anyone who thinks likewise should give their head a tiny shake. Roots need to be taken. (I'm aware Skokars are  20 year old in the League now). Do we let them continue or do we encourage clubs to come forward to feed League One with the aforementioned added. 

I agree with all this but just to pick up on your point in bold. I think there is a major disconnect between what the RFL want to achieve in growing the game and what SL, ruled by clubs that are interested in self preservation, want. That for me creates a huge issue and I think we saw that with Toronto and are probably seeing it with Toulouse too.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

The £18m is the exchange from the $30m Canadian dollars into real money.

Have you ever looked at RU and the huge losses being covered by rich backers?

FYI Canadian dollars are real money too.

I just looked and I see that the RU Premiership's 13 shareholder clubs lost a cumulative 88,726,373 £ in 2017 and 2018, though Exeter turned profits totalling 2,053,108 £ in that same period making the average loss for the other 12 clubs 7,564,956.75 £ or 3,782,478.38 £ per club per year.  The report I read also stated that many of those club owners were not concerned by their losses, so they're clearly very rich men.

I note that their salary cap has been reduced by 2 million £ since then and in the three year extension to their TV rights deal with BT sports they only took a modest hit so those changes should help improve their bottom line.  I see too that they voted to "stabilize" things by not having any P & R this season and basing future P & R on the results of a playoff between the bottom club in the Premiership and the champions of their second tier from 2023-24 onward, so they clearly see problems with soccer's P & R model which they're trying to solve.

All that said, the RFU Premiership is one league among many, so the particular problems they face are not indicative of the general financial position of major pro sports leagues.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jeff Stein said:

And how do you get a number of community clubs to organically appear out of nothing? With respect people like to say this, but it never happens. The one area of success is probably the North East but those clubs don't pre-date Thunder. The two clubs that came out of the amateur game in the South, Skolars and Hurricanes, clearly both have had their own issues of late and, lest we forget, Keighley last year put forward that they should be thrown out of the league with WWR

Development officers would have been a brilliant way to introduce kids to rugby league whilst at school, get 9 or 10 schools in a local competition and you have a foundation, get 6 teams from those schools playing out of school rugby league and you have league, which  is the next rung up the ladder, once those kids leave school try to funnel them into 3 or 4 open-aged clubs, if this foot print is copied in other areas you may just develop a competition - If development officers hadn't been culled, who knows how many players we may have had by now, my own town of Doncaster had every school but two playing rugby league and they were about to go into one of those, big, big loss when you consider Doncaster & District has a population of around 300,000.

  • Like 1

Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.

http://www.pitchero....hornemarauders/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

FYI Canadian dollars are real money too.

I just looked and I see that the RU Premiership's 13 shareholder clubs lost a cumulative 88,726,373 £ in 2017 and 2018, though Exeter turned profits totalling 2,053,108 £ in that same period making the average loss for the other 12 clubs 7,564,956.75 £ or 3,782,478.38 £ per club per year.  The report I read also stated that many of those club owners were not concerned by their losses, so they're clearly very rich men.

I note that their salary cap has been reduced by 2 million £ since then and in the three year extension to their TV rights deal with BT sports they only took a modest hit so those changes should help improve their bottom line.  I see too that they voted to "stabilize" things by not having any P & R this season and basing future P & R on the results of a playoff between the bottom club in the Premiership and the champions of their second tier from 2023-24 onward, so they clearly see problems with soccer's P & R model which they're trying to solve.

All that said, the RFU Premiership is one league among many, so the particular problems they face are not indicative of the general financial position of major pro sports leagues.

The P & R problem in union is exactly the same as ours, the quality of players in the pool are not high enough to overflow down into the lower tier and the bottom v top format should always favour the bottom club

Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.

http://www.pitchero....hornemarauders/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

FYI Canadian dollars are real money too.

I just looked and I see that the RU Premiership's 13 shareholder clubs lost a cumulative 88,726,373 £ in 2017 and 2018, though Exeter turned profits totalling 2,053,108 £ in that same period making the average loss for the other 12 clubs 7,564,956.75 £ or 3,782,478.38 £ per club per year.  The report I read also stated that many of those club owners were not concerned by their losses, so they're clearly very rich men.

I note that their salary cap has been reduced by 2 million £ since then and in the three year extension to their TV rights deal with BT sports they only took a modest hit so those changes should help improve their bottom line.  I see too that they voted to "stabilize" things by not having any P & R this season and basing future P & R on the results of a playoff between the bottom club in the Premiership and the champions of their second tier from 2023-24 onward, so they clearly see problems with soccer's P & R model which they're trying to solve.

All that said, the RFU Premiership is one league among many, so the particular problems they face are not indicative of the general financial position of major pro sports leagues.

There are many sports backers who throw money at sport and are not doing it for the financial return. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

There are many sports backers who throw money at sport and are not doing it for the financial return. 

Yeah but RL welcomes them, encourages them and treats them like kings.😉

 

Edited by Oxford

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:

"They're the say owt, do nowt Party!"

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think, again historically speaking, one thing we have to remember is that when we talk about the RFL, the sport, the powers that be, is that really all we are talking about is the collective self interest of the 30 odd member clubs. Our inability to build a strong, independent FA** style organistation separate from the interests of any particular group of member clubs has greatly hindered growth. It's logical for each club to look out for itself. Some 'bigger picture' organisation with the power to take decisions and move direction for the overall good of the sport seems vital, but has never really happened.

 

** I realise that body has its own set of failings too.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, marklaspalmas said:

Interesting thread so far, which concentrates mostly on expansion efforts post 1996 in the summer era.

Going right back to 1895, rugby league really missed a trick when a band of clubs broke away from the RFU to form a Northern Union. The name itself must have discouraged working class clubs in every other part of Britain (South Wales, North East, West country, Midlands) from joining the new union.

Rugby at that stage was ahead of soccer in many ways, despite a new Football League starting up in 1888. After the rugby schism, the coast was clear for soccer to emerge as the dominant code and put both union and league into the shade.

How differently could things have played out if those early NU leaders had had the nous to reach out and attract a much wider geographical spread of clubs, nurturing them and seeing the sport grow to the point where RL would have dominated the oval ball scene? Perhaps the Rugby League could have offered much more of a fight to soccer for the hearts and minds of the British sporting public in the period leading up to WW1?

After that date, the die was cast.

I know it's a What If but I wonder how things would of looked if the RFU brought leagues and knock out comps back in the mid 1880's and wonder how the landscape would look if that happened....thank you RFU for given Soccer a massive leg up.

Edited by EggFace
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

My own view is that in the present day there are perhaps too many expansion attempts all taking place simultaneously and not necessarily in a joined up fashion.

If you look at modern expansion in professional sport there tends to be a more targeted and patient approach where expansion has been successfully nurtured over a period of time.

Maybe rugby league in the U.K. can be accused of being weak everywhere outside its traditional bases and strong nowhere because of an unstructured, impatient approach.

 

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

It is all a matter of perspective.

You can hardly say the game has failed in expanding if the starting point is a relatively small number of English clubs in 1895. 

"There has never been a Challenge Cup semifinal of 65,000 either individually or combined" - Damien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, marklaspalmas said:

I think, again historically speaking, one thing we have to remember is that when we talk about the RFL, the sport, the powers that be, is that really all we are talking about is the collective self interest of the 30 odd member clubs. Our inability to build a strong, independent FA** style organistation separate from the interests of any particular group of member clubs has greatly hindered growth. It's logical for each club to look out for itself. Some 'bigger picture' organisation with the power to take decisions and move direction for the overall good of the sport seems vital, but has never really happened.

Come on Mark, both Rugby Union and Rugby League have their own governing bodies and they run a salary cap along with other responsible controls on their respective games....

The FA does absolutely nothing about the top soccer clubs spending as much as they want to around the world.

Superleague does a decent job of maintaining an even and competitive as possible league. How come you have got this so wrong?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, steve oates said:

Come on Mark, both Rugby Union and Rugby League have their own governing bodies and they run a salary cap along with other responsible controls on their respective games....

The FA does absolutely nothing about the top soccer clubs spending as much as they want to around the world.

Superleague does a decent job of maintaining an even and competitive as possible league. How come you have got this so wrong?

I assume this is just a wind up.

Otherwise, I don't know where to start...... 😉

  • 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...