Toulouse out of pocket again

[glossop saint]

25 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Fans of the ' sport ' = supporter's of those clubs not at risk or those who don't follow any specific club , conveniently 

The problem with that? 

Is the head of the FA seen week in week out chanting in the Kop? Does the head of the RFU spend his Saturdays at Welford Road? Does the head of the ECB have a Somerset tattoo on his arm?

Edited August 29, 2022 by glossop saint

[Harry Stottle]

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

The only way to prevent any club from being relegated is licensing, which you have made it quite clear that you don't want either.

Yes I do not want licensing at any cost not even if my team was included in it, but licensing would not matter in your prorect the French clubs from relegation scheme, well especially for the French clubs.

[Harry Stottle]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

In a 14 team SL, it's 2 more spots for English clubs than we have seen this season. To me it's a good compromise if P&R is so sacred that it must be retained.

Keep fishing Damien, now you know it will not happen to move to 14 teams, for a start your Chairman will not vote for a funding drop which will effect him, and who knows what further reduction we will get in the next TV contract, it will surely come.

[Damien]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes I do not want licensing at any cost not even if my team was included in it, but licensing would not matter in your prorect the French clubs from relegation scheme, well especially for the French clubs.

I know it wouldn't. I was stating that the only way to protect any club from being relegated, Warrington in your example, is licencing. If that is not in place then of course the said club would be relegated.

[GUBRATS]

12 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

The problem with that? 

Is the head of the FA seen week in week out chanting in the Kop? Does the head of the RFU spend his Saturdays at Welford Road? Does the head of the ECB have a Somerset tattoo on his arm?

We weren't discussing the people running the sport , it was put as " I'd hope enough of them ( discussing Saints and Wigan ' supporters ' at the game ) would be fans of the sport " , but we know where their final allegiance would be if it came to the crunch ?

[GUBRATS]

49 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

In honesty I suspect not. They've just been lucky that their clubs are the biggest in the game. I hope there are enough fans of all clubs who are fans of the sport as opposed to just their local team.

I think that those attitudes from those fans, and more worryingly administrators, are holding back the game from achieving its true potential.

This one Glossop " I hope there are enough fans of all clubs who are fans of the sport as opposed to just their local team " , I'd answer that as " no , there isn't , not really " 

[glossop saint]

4 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

We weren't discussing the people running the sport , it was put as " I'd hope enough of them ( discussing Saints and Wigan ' supporters ' at the game ) would be fans of the sport " , but we know where their final allegiance would be if it came to the crunch ?

No. I said all clubs, specifically I think, not just Saints and Wigan.

What crunch is coming? I'm sorry you have lost me slightly. I'm agreeing that all clubs have a section (majority?) of selfish fans. IMHO that is sad and holds the game back.

[glossop saint]

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

This one Glossop " I hope there are enough fans of all clubs who are fans of the sport as opposed to just their local team " , I'd answer that as " no , there isn't , not really " 

You may be right. I hope not, I really do. Though there are enough people on here expressing the opposite to give me hope.

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

You may be right. I hope not, I really do. Though there are enough people on here expressing the opposite to give me hope.

He's talking nonsense. More people turn up for matches against expansion teams. Anecdotally, more people accept the game needs more money and more exposure to continue and thrive.

Fans have a pretty minimal influence beyond providing a few two bob millionaires a bit of confidence when proclaiming they are the future of the sport.

[Fevrover]

14 hours ago, Tubby said:

To me, the argument isn’t that Leigh or Featherstone provide more than Toulouse to the other SL teams, it’s just that the transverse isn’t true either. 

The clamour for more french teams is generally accompanied by what they will ‘bring to SL’ and it’s my contention that it is no more or less than any other team. 

it is indisputable that TO bring a more cosmopolitan look to SL, but a new English team in SL would bring higher crowds.

Both offer positives and negatives. As far as I can see, neither is materially ‘better’ than the other, it’s just personal preference. 

Well put.

[Adelaide Tiger]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

All very well and good Tiger, but please tell me in the last closed shop process what did it actually achieve, did it improve the quality of the sport? 

I know it nearly decimated the game below SL, that is why in my opinion the closed shop was recinded as the writing was on the wall and the powers that be could not allow it to drop any further, if it returns I will say it will achieve it this time and get the job well and truly done. Fans of Championship club's will turn away from the sport, Owners and sponsors will walk if there is nothing to play for even as you suggest  locking them out for 3 seasons.

Good evening Harry.  Since the 1970’s RL has tried one division, two divisions, three divisions, two divisions, super league and northern ford premiership, world club championship, three divisions, licensing, non P&R, three leagues, middle 8’s, P&R and now the game is subject to another review.

So to answer your question it is difficult to quantify what licensing actually achieved because like every other ‘latest idea’ to fix the game it wasn’t given sufficient time.  

I could ask you to tell me what the other structures tried over the last 50 years that included P&R have done to improve the quality of the sport and you too would have great difficulty in answering that.

BTW in both my previous posts on this I have said that I hope both the Closed Shop (Licensing) option AND a P&R option are closely examined and the option that provides the best opportunity for the future growth of the game is recommended.

[Adelaide Tiger]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Your post only references SL 

Mr Shepard watches as I do a non SL club 

So is it only SL you are interested in ?

Errrr No, I know and no!

My post to Dave Shepherd was in response to his comment that he would not watch games he classed as ‘dead rubbers’ I.e. a closed shop.  I provided examples of six of the top eight highest average attendance leagues in the world that were closed shops.  I also spoke about how RL/SL had the same issues that those six leagues had and I added that I hoped IMG would look at the Closed Shop option AND P&R option to determine the best model for the future of the game.

Now, the comment that you responded to above was in fact my reply to Big Picture when he in turn had commented about my response to Dave Shepherd.  However Big Picture slightly changed the narrative by asking that ‘You could not compare SL to those six leagues’.  Therefore I responded to Big Picture by commenting how SL should look closely at the processes used by those successful leagues and see if some of those processes could benefit a new model for the game.

You omitted my final comment to Big Picture where I stated that I did not mind if a Closed Shop model or P&R model was chosen provided it was the best model for the future of the game.

P.S. I know Dave Shepherd follows Fev as we used to have banter with each other when we worked together for a few years.

P.P.S. I am interested in the whole of the game thriving.  Some of you believe that only P&R can deliver this as it gives clubs in lower divisions the opportunity for progression.  But as we have seen since 1974 that nearly 50 years with P&R - excluding 6 years of licensing - the whole game from under 9’s to the professional game has not thrived. So as a matter of process it is only right that other options have to be reviewed.
 

 

[Harry Stottle]

58 minutes ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

You omitted my final comment to Big Picture where I stated that I did not mind if a Closed Shop model or P&R model was chosen provided it was the best model for the future of the game. 

P.S. I know Dave Shepherd follows Fev as we used to have banter with each other when we worked together for a few years.

P.P.S. I am interested in the whole of the game thriving.  Some of you believe that only P&R can deliver this as it gives clubs in lower divisions the opportunity for progression.  But as we have seen since 1974 that nearly 50 years with P&R - excluding 6 years of licensing - the whole game from under 9’s to the professional game has not thrived. So as a matter of process it is only right that other options have to be reviewed.
 

Hi Tiger, if you don't mind me saying (about the bit in bold) who ever adjudicates on being the best model for the future of our game it will be open to conjecture. You have taken time and listed loads of System tweaks and indeed about turns over the past 50 years, I will put it to you everyone of those was employed at the time as being the best model for the future of our game, I shouldn't imagine any of them were set up to fail, and we don't need to go back 50 years the last 13 years will do nicely, from 2009 - 2014 Licencing first time tried then rejected, 2015 to 2018 Middle 8's first time tried and then rejected now we are at one up one down, will this get rejected?

Also not for one moment that whatever IMG come up with I doubt it will get 100% acceptance, it may very well not even be accepted by all member clubs of SL,  anything new that gets accepted as the best model for the future of our game will be formed of an opinion without proof or sufficient evidence it will work, it will in fact be borne from summise or best guesswork, just as all those previous systems were.

It may turn out that the next system will be the best model for the future of our game, then again it may very well not be and in a short few years we are once again saying "this is not working", after all this is Rugby League with a track record to continually change the system as you have pointed out.

Edited August 29, 2022 by Harry Stottle

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

Errrr No, I know and no!

My post to Dave Shepherd was in response to his comment that he would not watch games he classed as ‘dead rubbers’ I.e. a closed shop.  I provided examples of six of the top eight highest average attendance leagues in the world that were closed shops.  I also spoke about how RL/SL had the same issues that those six leagues had and I added that I hoped IMG would look at the Closed Shop option AND P&R option to determine the best model for the future of the game.

Now, the comment that you responded to above was in fact my reply to Big Picture when he in turn had commented about my response to Dave Shepherd.  However Big Picture slightly changed the narrative by asking that ‘You could not compare SL to those six leagues’.  Therefore I responded to Big Picture by commenting how SL should look closely at the processes used by those successful leagues and see if some of those processes could benefit a new model for the game.

You omitted my final comment to Big Picture where I stated that I did not mind if a Closed Shop model or P&R model was chosen provided it was the best model for the future of the game.

P.S. I know Dave Shepherd follows Fev as we used to have banter with each other when we worked together for a few years.

P.P.S. I am interested in the whole of the game thriving.  Some of you believe that only P&R can deliver this as it gives clubs in lower divisions the opportunity for progression.  But as we have seen since 1974 that nearly 50 years with P&R - excluding 6 years of licensing - the whole game from under 9’s to the professional game has not thrived. So as a matter of process it is only right that other options have to be reviewed.
 

 

In those 6 examples , how do things work below them ?

[kiggy]

4 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

What makes my blood boil is, the lack of understanding by some posters on this forum, that expect Championship clubs to spend around a third of the central funding they receive for the season, travelling to France.

 

TO don't begrudge paying for the part-time teams - it has aways been so... it's the (SL) full time teams that they think should pay their own way.  

[Adelaide Tiger]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Hi Tiger, if you don't mind me saying (about the bit in bold) who ever adjudicates on being the best model for the future of our game it will be open to conjecture. You have taken time and listed loads of System tweaks and indeed about turns over the past 50 years, I will put it to you everyone of those was employed at the time as being the best model for the future of our game, I shouldn't imagine any of them were set up to fail, and we don't need to go back 50 years the last 13 years will do nicely, from 2009 - 2014 Licencing first time tried then rejected, 2015 to 2018 Middle 8's first time tried and then rejected now we are at one up one down, will this get rejected?

Also not for one moment that whatever IMG come up with I doubt it will get 100% acceptance, it may very well not even be accepted by all member clubs of SL,  anything new that gets accepted as the best model for the future of our game will be formed of an opinion without proof or sufficient evidence it will work, it will in fact be borne from summise or best guesswork, just as all those previous systems were.

It may turn out that the next system will be the best model for the future of our game, then again it may very well not be and in a short few years we are once again saying "this is not working", after all this is Rugby League with a track record to continually change the system as you have pointed out.

Totally agree with your post.  But it is my opinion that some of the systems employed over the years were more based on self interest than being genuinely for the good of the game.

And you are right that whatever IMG come up with will satisfy some people and infuriate others.

Your final comment truly encapsulates RL in the UK over the last 50 that if there is not immediate success then people panic and look for something else.

 

[Adelaide Tiger]

42 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

In those 6 examples , how do things work below them ?

The simple answer is that all those sports have sustainable leagues below them.

The NFL have 5 minor leagues beneath them plus the college system. The Indian Premier Cricket League - please tell me that you understand cricket is played across all of India. Aussie Rules you have State Competitions. Big Bash cricket (Australia) see IPL example. Japanese baseball have an Eastern and Western minor league.  Major League Baseball has many minor leagues, Independent leagues and College leagues.

In a nutshell all of the teams in the lower leagues understand the relationship with the predominant league.

[Tubby]

14 minutes ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

 

In a nutshell all of the teams in the lower leagues understand the relationship with the predominant league.

And that’s where it differs from RL in this country. The clubs in the lower leagues have mostly spent time in the top division and many still aspire to do so. 

The idea that an arbitrary decision be made to make that no longer possible would make it that those who just happen to be in the top division now get to stay there. How can that be considered just?

100 years of history is important to some of us. 
 

 

[yipyee]

6 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

First choice in what way ? , At what stage ? , Where does Golborne and Hindley fall into this ? , Ashton and Haydock? 

Ashton is in Wigan ad is hindley, Haydock is in St Helens, a quick look would help you with geography.

Its also the approach union take to ensure poaching doesn't occur.

Its a much fairer system.

[GUBRATS]

28 minutes ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

The simple answer is that all those sports have sustainable leagues below them.

The NFL have 5 minor leagues beneath them plus the college system. The Indian Premier Cricket League - please tell me that you understand cricket is played across all of India. Aussie Rules you have State Competitions. Big Bash cricket (Australia) see IPL example. Japanese baseball have an Eastern and Western minor league.  Major League Baseball has many minor leagues, Independent leagues and College leagues.

In a nutshell all of the teams in the lower leagues understand the relationship with the predominant league.

Are they full of independent clubs , or are they distinct feeder clubs ? 

Have any of the clubs in these lower tiers previously played in , and indeed won the top grades in their countries ? 

Are they paid as in part time , or strictly amateurs?

The college's are junior as in academies , so are not relevant 

The IPL and Big Bash are fairly recent franchise comps as I understand it 

Edited August 29, 2022 by GUBRATS

[yipyee]

6 hours ago, Tubby said:

Define ‘add to the top tier’. 

Add to the product, the product is a european super league. 

The old scoring system for licensing is a good start, looked at across the board

Edited August 29, 2022 by yipyee

[GUBRATS]

8 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Ashton is in Wigan ad is hindley, Haydock is in St Helens, a quick look would help you with geography.

Its also the approach union take to ensure poaching doesn't occur.

Its a much fairer system.

Leigh is in Wigan , CAS, Fev and every club near them is in Wakefield 

 

[GUBRATS]

6 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Add to the product, the product is a european super league. 

The old scoring system for licensing is a good start, looked at across the board

Seriously ? 

[yipyee]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

Leigh is in Wigan , CAS, Fev and every club near them is in Wakefield 

 

Well there we go, merge Leigh and Wigan (still called wigan)

Merge the other 3 and call them Calder...

Maybe they had a sensible plan back in the 90s....

[yipyee]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

Seriously ? 

Yep..

Because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it wasn't good.