Jump to content

IMG - Vote on Wednesday


gingerjon
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

They mentioned the "rhythm of the season" and big events, and this being moved seems to be a key part of that. Take it Wembley is still a given.

Arguably, Wembley as a venue isn’t a given. May Bank Holiday is Football League Play-Offs normally and the FA Cup Final is historically a May final, so that’s two weekends out of 4/5 that are filled straight away. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I might have missed anything on hard numbers, but in all this fevered excitement about who gets to be A or B or whatever, is there a small possibility that the number of A clubs announced next year might 'accidentally' tally with and match up to the Super League clubs? I.e. it won't matter if a B finishes above an A, because there won't be any Bs in the top flight, or any As a level down....

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jughead said:

Arguably, Wembley as a venue isn’t a given. May Bank Holiday is Football League Play-Offs normally and the FA Cup Final is historically a May final, so that’s two weekends out of 4/5 that are filled straight away. 

Start of May those though. The end of May is a better fit for our season anyway.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Damien said:

This is something I have alluded to in other threads and it is badly needed. I have been critical of the way the sport has put all its eggs in one basket and loaded everything towards the Grand Final and a late Challenge Cup final. The sport did used to have much more of a rhythm with more peaks, whether that was cup tournaments or proper mid-season internationals and hopefully we are getting back to that.

Yeah I think we will see more focus on Summer generally.

Is it a return to "every minute matters"? I joke but a lot of this stuff has been done before, either just not very well or not together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jughead said:

Can you fairly judge most of the Championship sides likely to be a B against the current Super League clubs likely to be a B when the Super League clubs have an academy and most of the Championship sides don’t? Will they open academy licences to more teams?

You don´t have an academy, (but we don´t let you have one). You have low crowds (but you play the smallest teams). No counterfactuals taken into consideration there. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, iffleyox said:

I might have missed anything on hard numbers, but in all this fevered excitement about who gets to be A or B or whatever, is there a small possibility that the number of A clubs announced next year might 'accidentally' tally with and match up to the Super League clubs? I.e. it won't matter if a B finishes above an A, because there won't be any Bs in the top flight, or any As a level down....

If they all make A then yes, if there are more As than super league places it should expand the league. 

Chances of that are slim though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't  THINK we will see annual changes to the makeup of Super League, and I SUSPECT the B licences will have some improvement targets associated with them

Tommy lad, you have made many replies and contributions to this topic. However like others you are arguing on your own interpretations and presumptions.  The whole report is Bull and not one fact. When you know what a Grade A is and a Grade B is etc and the full workable practicalities send me a pm  as I wouldnt mind knowing myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, yipyee said:

The point is to win, not to avoid bottom place.

No one gets relegated from horse races or tennis comps etc..

Yet the next tournament everyone re-enters to get as deep into the contest as possible.

Tennis is not a great analogy as the team competitions (Davis Cup and  Billie Jean King Cup) have tiered levels from the World Group to the Regional Zones.  Promotion and relegation exists between these tiers and as far as I know this is based exclusively on results.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Damien said:

Start of May those though. The end of May is a better fit for our season anyway.

The Cup Final is. The second May Bank Holiday is normally the Football League play-offs. There’s also the FA Trophy/Vase double header that’s May and has been at Wembley for years. 

Wembley availability in May isn’t the greatest, which isn’t a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tommygilf said:

Yeah I think we will see more focus on Summer generally.

Is it a return to "every minute matters"? I joke but a lot of this stuff has been done before, either just not very well or not together.

We are meant to be a summer sport! A long season starting in winter and finishing well into the autumn aren't really the best times to showcase summer rugby.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

A: Wigan,, Saints, Wire, Leeds, Hull, Catalan

B: Toulouse (absolute no brainer from a commercial standpoint, gives us French derby and growth in France knowing they cant go down, a real chance to become a dominant force) London (massive population and now playing in a stadium that isn´t woeful but probably needs a new owner who hasn´t alienated everyone), Hull KR (Solid crowds, own ground, really improved the product and derby). Wakey (Odd one but with ground redevelopement, genuine prospects for growth here in terms of rev.)

B-: Giants (Woeful ground, no tv marketable) Cas (similar reason but actually good crowds) Newcastle (have an academy and stadium, might be worth giving it a go. York(No academy but commercially possible and modern ground to make money, not competing with FL team as of yet) Widnes, Fev and Barrow. Leigh only because derek spends. Salford 

C : The rest of us. 

Toulouse could still go down in the future under the proposed system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gomersall said:

Toulouse could still go down in the future under the proposed system.

Yeah think they just announced they are getting an A license because they are forcing them to play a certain amount of french players. I think Toulouse will take that as they can go to sponsors and just bring in a ferw superstars to compliment the french talent via elite 1 . 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Yeah I think we will see more focus on Summer generally.

Is it a return to "every minute matters"? I joke but a lot of this stuff has been done before, either just not very well or not together.

Applying discipline, patience and money could easily turn some bad ideas from our past into good ideas today.

  • Like 3

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I suppose the question is, is 23 guaranteed rounds enough for clubs?

Possibly an incentive for some clubs to remain in the 14 strong championship....and I only say that half tongue in cheek. 

But no you're right it's obviously a drop off in number of guaranteed home games, at least for the time being. Will be interesting to find out how that was explained to the clubs and any concerns they had around that. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Two teams playing in the same league.  One is guaranteed to be in it next year, the other isn't.  How is that competitive?

There may be winners and losers but it isn't about the teams and the results.

You mean to say that a club can be relegated? Isn't that competitive?

"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth."

JohnM - 17/01/2023

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

If they all make A then yes, if there are more As than super league places it should expand the league. 

Chances of that are slim though...

I don't think you're as cynical as I am.... how about whoever finishes last in SL next year gets relegated but as an A, and the promoted side comes up as a B, but the other 11 all get A. And the A definition is written (as it was last time licensing was around) to accidentally include who they wanted anyway? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hunsletgreenandgold said:

Possibly an incentive for some clubs to remain in the 14 strong championship....and I only say that half tongue in cheek. 

But no you're right it's obviously a drop off in number of guaranteed home games, at least for the time being. Will be interesting to find out how that was explained to the clubs and any concerns they had around that. 

I don't like the current 27 with loops but I dont like 22 league games either tbh as a fan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Agbrigg said:

Tommy lad, you have made many replies and contributions to this topic. However like others you are arguing on your own interpretations and presumptions.  The whole report is Bull and not one fact. When you know what a Grade A is and a Grade B is etc and the full workable practicalities send me a pm  as I wouldnt mind knowing myself.

In all honesty, give me a few days and once it has been digested by the clubs and I might have something for you.

At the end of the day these are only proposals after all, and are open to feedback. For example I think there will be a push to have guaranteed years associated with a Grade B licence in Super League, if the transition is as easy as postulated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

Well no, not really. I'm seeing this today for exactly what it is - proposals. I'm getting the impression you assumed today's announcement was going to be the fully fleshed documentation, including the finer details - it was never going to be that. But what I can say with some confidence is that these proposals aren't just pie in the sky objectives that will never be met - to me they read as the start of a journey to move RL into stronger more competitive and prosperous future. It's in nobodies interests for this to fail or fall by the wayside. 

HG I get that that,  But this report dosnt even have any credibility whatsoever. It might as well have said, " We are going to make changes to the game to make it stronger but havn't worked out the detail just yet, however here are a few vague ideas that we have thought about"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

'Category A’ clubs will be guaranteed participation in the top tier whilst ‘Category B' clubs will be re-assessed annually with the highest-ranking clubs occupying the remaining slots in the top tier.

So you can finish above a Category A team and still get removed from the top tier.

That is not what sport is about.  There have to be consequences and rewards for on field performances.

So Cat A clubs aren’t assessed annually? What if in real terms a Cat A club actually takes their eye off the ball and complacently slips into the top end of Cat B?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, iffleyox said:

I don't think you're as cynical as I am.... how about whoever finishes last in SL next year gets relegated but as an A, and the promoted side comes up as a B, but the other 11 all get A. And the A definition is written (as it was last time licensing was around) to accidentally include who they wanted anyway? 

Of course it could be done like that, but my cynicism doesn't extend that far.

Rather I see it as being honest about UK Rugby League (plus our French cousins):

5-8 Grade A clubs

A whole host of Grade Bs, some who will perennially be there, some who have potential to grow further. All with massively varying strengths and weaknesses.

A good number of Grade Cs who are solid community focused clubs.

As I have said before on here, the issues will come from choosing which grade Bs to back to be grade As, and which you say are more likely to end up closer to the Cs or no more than a B in the long run.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

They're upset because the result on field is not the sole arbiter of who is in what competition.

To feckin right, you keep harping back to Wendyball when it suits your argument but on field results matter in that game, I don't want to watch games that have no consequence of the result in respect of not mattering if you lose.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Agbrigg said:

HG I get that that,  But this report dosnt even have any credibility whatsoever. It might as well have said, " We are going to make changes to the game to make it stronger but havn't worked out the detail just yet, however here are a few vague ideas that we have thought about"

As I say mate you're looking for the who, what, why, where, when answers and I completely respect that to you this offers little without that level of detail attached to this announcement. I and others are just looking at this for an outline of what the previously even more vague 'changes' might eventually look like. I, like you am very much looking forward to seeing this all in detailed documentation that can be properly scrutinised in the near future. 

Edited by hunsletgreenandgold
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...