Latest on development of BV Wakefield

[dboy]

8 minutes ago, Dallas Mead said:

He said 10th-11th, not bottom tbf.

So despite Wakey never finishing bottom, the league was rigged to stop Wakey going down! That's what he said. It makes no sense.

"Artificial protection" he calls it in his latest post.

How is that protecting Wakey, when they have not finished bottom?

It's anti-Wakey tripe. It's baseless and factually incorrect.

I repeat - if you create a single table covering all 25 years of SL, Wakefield are 9th!

That's with 3 year's fewer games than the clubs above them.

 

[meast]

57 minutes ago, dboy said:

So you were talking ###### all along and when your lies are pointed out, you change the narrative.

Wakey haven't been the worst team in SL and have managed not to go bust 3 times in 5 years.

Unlike your club.

Wait until he/she claims you don't deserve to be 4th in the league because you don't fill every 24,000 seats at your oversized stadium

[dboy]

5 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Yes but that requires reading the response. 

But that's your nonsensical contradiction - how is the league rigged to protect the club who didn't even finish bottom???

In fact, in 22 years they have only finished next to bottom 3 times.

 

[dboy]

1 minute ago, meast said:

Wait until he/she claims you don't deserve to be 4th in the league because you don't fill every 24,000 seats at your oversized stadium

Why would you post that?

Please explain.

[meast]

 

I guess these would be some of the last images of and from the East stand?

[meast]

4 minutes ago, dboy said:

Why would you post that?

Please explain.

They have an unhealthy obsession with the amount of empty seats at Huddersfield and claim that Fartown are leeching off the other clubs and don't deserve to be in SL because we don't fill our ground.

[dboy]

2 minutes ago, meast said:

They have an unhealthy obsession with the amount of empty seats at Huddersfield and claim that Fartown are leeching off the other clubs and don't deserve to be in SL because we don't fill our ground.

They?

So why direct your comment at me? "Wait until he/she claims..."

In fact, why make it all? It has nothing to do with the thread.

It's true what they say, for Hudds fans there's only one thing worse than Giants being talked about - Giants not being talked about.

[meast]

3 minutes ago, dboy said:

They?

So why direct your comment at me? "Wait until he/she claims..."

In fact, why make it all? It has nothing to do with the thread.

It's true what they say, for Hudds fans there's only one thing worse than Giants being talked about - Giants not being talked about.

I was referring to Shropshire Bull and quoted you referencing he or her as talking ######

[Josef K]

I look forward to visiting BV again when it’s done i haven’t been for six years. 

[Wholly Trinity]

10 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

No you dont understand a counterfactual.  The year Hull KR came bottom everyone knew you couldnt be relegated,  so the way and recruitment Hull KR would have made wouldve been completely different.  To say otherwise is to be braindead. 

I didnt realize I said Bulls should take Waleys spot?  Oh wait I didnt,  its just you building a straw man to deflect that Wakefield have taken more from the sport than they have contributed in pretty much a decade. 

I hope Wakefield's new stand changes that. Next year Wakey's artificial protection ends  (if they stay up)

If you were to suggest that Wakefield have made little contribution to SL during their stay, you would have a fair point (only finished in the top half of the table 4 times in 23 years), but to imply that they have been protected artificially is a bit of a stretch.

In the last 6 years they've finished 8,5,5,9,10,10 (avg.7.3) - so never 11th. Last year, had they won just one of the many close games that they lost (e.g. Leeds away 15-13 to a dodgy last minute penalty), they would have finished 8th. 2019 they were 3rd in the table until a devastating series of injuries effectively ended their season. Smaller clubs have decide on quality over quantity when assembling a squad and are much more susceptible to the impact of injuries. Even this year, the concentration of long-term injuries to their backline has been impactful. At times having 6 centres and 5 wingers unavailable.

The implication, elsewhere, that they somehow conned the powers that be by producing 'watercolours' as required to stave off relegation is also wide of the mark. Each of those stadium projects was a viable solution at the time. That each subsequently failed, for various reasons, is applying hindsight. The concept of developing the current site was never a consideration until March 2019 when the freehold was purchased. Despite Covid delays, this is the first project which has been under the control of the club and is now progressing. 

Licensing was a farce. How can you set minimum standards when there are not enough teams meeting those standards to form a meaningful league? On each occasion, Wakefield were adjudged to be in the top 12/14 clubs in the northern hemisphere based on the criteria laid down. Hanging on / Lucky - I guess so, but nothing underhand as far as I can see. 

People on the outside only see the culmination of the last 6/7 years of hard work the current regime has put in, with the beginning of ground works. In reality, the value of the clubs assets has gone from nothing to something measurable, possibly sustainable, in that time. They now own the freehold of the stadium and surrounding land and are currently building assets which can generate income.

Testing their luck - probably, getting away with it - absolutely. As you say, relegation this season would be so Wakefield, so near yet no cigar. A few years ago, it would have been the end of the club, now they could probably survive and who knows what the structure will be in 2024.

[dboy]

10 hours ago, meast said:

I was referring to Shropshire Bull and quoted you referencing he or her as talking ######

Doh! Why didn't I see that.

My apologies!

[RP London]

11 hours ago, dboy said:

So despite Wakey never finishing bottom, the league was rigged to stop Wakey going down! That's what he said. It makes no sense.

"Artificial protection" he calls it in his latest post.

How is that protecting Wakey, when they have not finished bottom?

It's anti-Wakey tripe. It's baseless and factually incorrect.

I repeat - if you create a single table covering all 25 years of SL, Wakefield are 9th!

That's with 3 year's fewer games than the clubs above them.

 

Whilst I dont agree with what is being said about Wakefield being poor in general or the league being rigged in their favour (though i would argue it is very much rigged against those coming up, of which Wakefield was one) I'd be careful of using the combined table.. 

of all the teams that have been in for as many season as Wakefield only Salford are  below you. the next closest in length of tenure below you is London who have 2 years less and 23 points less. Other than that below you the next closest team in tenure is Catalans with 7 years less, Hull KR with 9, Widnes 11, Halifax 13 and then your into the likes of Sheffield.... 

If you were to use average points per season competing you'd be 13th out of 22.. but for sense we should take out any team that hasn't played more than 5 season really (Gateshead finish top of the table for a start otherwise!) at which point you finish 12th of 15 teams with only Salford, Widnes and Halifax behind you.

As I say I don't agree with the argument that Wakefield add nothing and I am very glad BV is getting upgraded but I don't think your performance in the league is particularly good and the way you frame the stats is very much putting a positive spin on something that is not so positive. (Lies, damn lies and statistics etc)

Edited July 6, 2022 by RP London

[Dallas Mead]

Let me sum up this thread to save you all time.  Wakefield are poo.  Isn’t it.

[RP London]

12 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

people will never go to a rugby league match to park their azz on the latest fold down plastic chair for no reason  - they will go though to see a winning exiting team out on the field even if they have to stand in a blizzard with no socks on 

Whilst your first bit is true your second bit is not.. a good team will get more people in, in a nice stadium. There is also more chance of someone going to watch a poor team in a nice ground than they will in a poor ground. From experience I went once to see Eagles when they we "at home" at BV, I did not go again as I couldn't be bothered to travel that far to sit in that and watch a team that was "ok". However, in a nice stadium I would have and went to away matches for the novelty. 

BV has needed doing up for a long time, i dont think anyone would deny that. It will undoubtedly help their attendance (and the knock on of that).. of course a better performing team would do more for that but with more money coming in from just being a better ground to go to (and therefore more people going, more money spent etc) they will hopefully then be able to get a better team. 

[dboy]

17 minutes ago, RP London said:

Whilst I dont agree with what is being said about Wakefield being poor in general or the league being rigged in their favour (though i would argue it is very much rigged against those coming up, of which Wakefield was one) I'd be careful of using the combined table.. 

of all the teams that have been in for as many season as Wakefield only Salford are  below you. the next closest in length of tenure below you is London who have 2 years less and 23 points less. Other than that below you the next closest team in tenure is Catalans with 7 years less, Hull KR with 9, Widnes 11, Halifax 13 and then your into the likes of Sheffield.... 

If you were to use average points per season competing you'd be 13th out of 22.. but for sense we should take out any team that hasn't played more than 5 season really (Gateshead finish top of the table for a start otherwise!) at which point you finish 12th of 15 teams with only Salford, Widnes and Halifax behind you.

As I say I don't agree with the argument that Wakefield add nothing and I am very glad BV is getting upgraded but I don't think your performance in the league is particularly good and the way you frame the stats is very much putting a positive spin on something that is not so positive. (Lies, damn lies and statistics etc)

Some good alternative analysis there, but it's a nonsense to remove clubs from the list with an arbitrary 5-year qualification.

As you say, even using average points per season, Wfd are 13th from 22 - still far from the worst team, with other current clubs still below them.

 

[Barry Badrinath]

how bad is belle vue? i've not been since 2011 the first time you were leaving(well not the first first time) this was the week that the scoreboard got stolen.

 

i said my goodbyes then, haven't been back since.

[Ragingbull]

Came hear to read about peoples thoughts over the BV stadium development.  

 

Apologies i must be on the wrong thread

[dboy]

6 minutes ago, Ragingbull said:

Came hear to read about peoples thoughts over the BV stadium development.  

 

Apologies i must be on the wrong thread

Indeed.

Back on course - the stand is on it's way down and the construction team are on site - what could possibly go wrong now??

[RP London]

14 minutes ago, dboy said:

Some good alternative analysis there, but it's a nonsense to remove clubs from the list with an arbitrary 5-year qualification.

As you say, even using average points per season, Wfd are 13th from 22 - still far from the worst team, with other current clubs still below them.

 

In average comparisons it is normal to take out those that have not been in for long, in the same way as a batsman in cricket does not get an official average until a set number of innings.. 

in this example you have Workington bottom, 1 season right at the start for a team that could not compete in a fully professional age, Leigh who had 2 seasons but 1 where they were well and truly shafted by the teams and the RFL, PSG 2 experimental seasons, Oldham with 2 seasons, Crusaders with 3 seasons and Sheffield with 4 seasons.. then its a jump to 8 seasons for Halifax. Gateshead have the highest average points but only played 1 season... which shows why you dont include these types of teams. 

perhaps 4 games could be enough (which just adds in Sheffield) but i dont think anything below this can show a meaningful average. 

Anyway your big thing was how you were performing well and everyone above you (except Bradford [3 years less] and Huddersfield [the same number of seasons] had played more seasons (3).. when it is equally true that everyone (except Salford [the same number of season]) below you had played less seasons and all except London (2 seasons less) were by more than the 3 years those above had on you. 

IMHO its not a great stat for you.... and the only current club below you on the AVG points is Salford.. who get rounded on in a similar way by many.. 

Edited July 6, 2022 by RP London

[Forever Trinity]

15 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

When does the work get finished btw to the new stand? 

between July and October next year. The North Stand will be upgraded at the end of this season ready for next year

[idrewthehaggis]

Erm surely the analogy is rather the RL system is rigged against Leigh/Toulouse than for Wakey?

This benefited everyone from Wigan to SRD. 

The Academy system and Salary Cap dispensations, etc rigs it for the established big three and against the likes of Wakey though.

Tremendous news about Belle Vue. Worth a trip over when its done. 

Edited July 6, 2022 by idrewthehaggis

[RP London]

9 minutes ago, idrewthehaggis said:

Erm surely the analogy is rather the RL system is rigged against Leigh/Toulouse than for Wakey?

This benefited everyone from Wigan to SRD. 

The Academy system and Salary Cap dispensations, etc rigs it for the established big three and against the likes of Wakey though.

Tremendous news about Belle Vue. Worth a trip over when its done.

I'd agree with that way of looking at it.

[Ragingbull]

1 hour ago, Forever Trinity said:

between July and October next year. The North Stand will be upgraded at the end of this season ready for next year

What work is being done on the North Stand?

[Wholly Trinity]

33 minutes ago, Ragingbull said:

What work is being done on the North Stand?

Short answer:

tarting it up a bit

More detail:

resurfacing the concrete and refixing the barriers. (Increasing capacity)

Levelling to concourse the section nearest Doncaster Rd turnstiles 

Adding food/drink facilities at the back

New turnstiles 

Permanent big screen (same location)

Not sure what they're doing with the toilets

Roof remaining as is.

The capacity against Wigan was 1500? Which seemed sparse. An increased capacity there next season will be needed while the east stand is built.

[dboy]

6 hours ago, RP London said:

In average comparisons it is normal to take out those that have not been in for long, in the same way as a batsman in cricket does not get an official average until a set number of innings.. 

in this example you have Workington bottom, 1 season right at the start for a team that could not compete in a fully professional age, Leigh who had 2 seasons but 1 where they were well and truly shafted by the teams and the RFL, PSG 2 experimental seasons, Oldham with 2 seasons, Crusaders with 3 seasons and Sheffield with 4 seasons.. then its a jump to 8 seasons for Halifax. Gateshead have the highest average points but only played 1 season... which shows why you dont include these types of teams. 

perhaps 4 games could be enough (which just adds in Sheffield) but i dont think anything below this can show a meaningful average. 

Anyway your big thing was how you were performing well and everyone above you (except Bradford [3 years less] and Huddersfield [the same number of seasons] had played more seasons (3).. when it is equally true that everyone (except Salford [the same number of season]) below you had played less seasons and all except London (2 seasons less) were by more than the 3 years those above had on you. 

IMHO its not a great stat for you.... and the only current club below you on the AVG points is Salford.. who get rounded on in a similar way by many.. 

So you agree that the preposition that Wakey have been dodging relegation all these years is incorrect?

Edited July 6, 2022 by dboy