Two Legged Challenge Cup Ties

[Jughead]

I find this odd. IMG made clear yesterday that they weren’t interested in “the game” (laws, onfield matters, league structure) but more about the product in terms of matchday experience and content. It, therefore, seems unusual that they’re proposing a structure change to the Challenge Cup.

There is a need, certainly in the short-term, to replace the loop fixtures they’ve suggested removing with an alternate product and it appears this is one kind of proposal to do that. 

[DavidM]

If it’s 86-86 on aggregate after two legs is it a penalty shoot out 

[Gomersall]

30 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

It compensates for the loss of home games from going to 22 rounds a season.

Does it? The SL team may be away for the first leg, win easily and then lose money on the second leg when only a percentage of season ticket holders attend. Strange compensation if you ask me.

[Gomersall]

4 minutes ago, DavidM said:

If it’s 86-86 on aggregate after two legs is it a penalty shoot out 

A replay as compensation for only having a 22 game season.

[gingerjon]

So, in debates until we all die, this will be held up as something that was definitely proposed but then didn't happen and was thus dropped.

Despite ... well, read the words in the link ...

[Agbrigg]

well if this is the type of 'blue sky thinking' (IMG style cliche) from the powers that be, dont be suprised to hear far more utter tripe when the IMG masterplan gets fleshed out. 

[Dave W]

I think I'd like to hear what was said in the actual podcast first before taking anything Steve Mascord writes as fact. Journalists like to spin a sensationalist angle.

[Tommygilf]

22 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

Does it? The SL team may be away for the first leg, win easily and then lose money on the second leg when only a percentage of season ticket holders attend. Strange compensation if you ask me.

Agreed completely, but its almost certainly a consideration 

[dboy]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

yuck.

I suspect this is all about trying to guarantee season ticket holders at least one more game after scrapping the loops. 

It won't work.

First mistep. 

It's not because STs don't cover cup games (not at the moment anyway...).

[dboy]

34 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

A replay as compensation for only having a 22 game season.

Two replays surely?

[wiganermike]

6 minutes ago, Dave W said:

I think I'd like to hear what was said in the actual podcast first before taking anything Steve Mascord writes as fact. Journalists like to spin a sensationalist angle.

Reported on LoveRugbyLeague.com now with quotes of what Simon Johnson said on the BBC podcast. It's one of many proposals, and is such a poor idea that it may just be there to make a different proposal look better by comparison (e.g a hypothetical Challenge Cup group phase proposal).

They (IMG) are proposing to cut three home fixtures for each SL club and so need to propose ways to replace them (to get club owners on board with cutting league fixtures) until such time as the SL expands the number of clubs and the fixture numbers increase again. I think it far more likely that we will see the loop fixtures retained with these reducing in number as the SL expands over time so we keep the same number of home league fixtures per club (13).

[Gomersall]

1 minute ago, dboy said:

Two replays surely?

 

I like it but stop calling me Shirley.

[Toby Chopra]

38 minutes ago, dboy said:

It's not because STs don't cover cup games (not at the moment anyway...).

I know, the point would be that by guaranteeing every team at least one home cup game, they could include it in the season ticket to soften the blow of reducing league fixtures. 

[Gerrumonside ref]

They’re not the Messiahs, they’re very naughty boys!

[Davo5]

Trying to stay positive with IMG’s initial outline for the game,but on this one I’m a Go Forth & Multiply.

[Dave W]

If it's to compensate season ticket holders for the loss of a game, why not just reduce the cost of the season ticket? 

[Dave T]

13 minutes ago, Dave W said:

If it's to compensate season ticket holders for the loss of a game, why not just reduce the cost of the season ticket? 

Because that reduces revenues. 

In reality, the realisation will soon come that if we want a certain amount of fixtures, loop fixtures do the job almost perfectly.

[wiganermike]

9 minutes ago, Dave W said:

If it's to compensate season ticket holders for the loss of a game, why not just reduce the cost of the season ticket? 

Any effort to replace home games cut from SL with other games would be to allow clubs to maintain the same income level from tickets over the season, not to compensate season ticket holders. The reason we have the loop fixtures is that club owners said when two teams were cut from SL that they needed at least 13 home games to be financially viable.

[Jughead]

I’m guessing another proposal will likely be a group stage, which I’m not mad about either. 

[Gomersall]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Because that reduces revenues. 

In reality, the realisation will soon come that if we want a certain amount of fixtures, loop fixtures do the job almost perfectly.

So does a larger division but it also spreads the money a bit thinner too. Loop fixtures to remain for the time being?

[wiganermike]

1 minute ago, Gomersall said:

So does a larger division but it also spreads the money a bit thinner too. Loop fixtures to remain for the time being?

That's what I expect will happen so that the clubs don't lose income from home league fixtures. Then as the number of clubs in SL begins to increase each extra club means that two loop fixtures can be dropped until we get to a point where we don't have any loop fixtures anymore.

[paulwalker71]

Keep in mind that 12 clubs are already guaranteed to be in this round - and they are looking (it seems) to get to 14 top-flight clubs soon.

At that stage, there are only going to be two Championship teams even making it to that stage. If they are competitive Championship Grade B clubs like Fev or Halifax or whatever - teams aiming actually to get to Grade A level then they ought to be at least competitive.

It's not like every SL club is going to play a low-level team

TL: DR There wouldn't be that many blowouts.

 

 

[Griff]

We ditched replays but are now proposing a mandatory second game.

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Griff said:

We ditched replays but are now proposing a mandatory second game.

Nobody is proposing anything.

[Dave T]

17 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

So does a larger division but it also spreads the money a bit thinner too. Loop fixtures to remain for the time being?

They do seem to have made some noise about fewer loop fixtures and more scarcity. I'm not sure scarcity usually leads to a better TV deal, so it'll be interesting to see how they will fill the gap of a few hundred grand from playing fewer games.