Jump to content

Two Legged Challenge Cup Ties


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

idea. Just get the super league clubs in at the last 32, make them all play away in the last 32 and give us these proper cup games that actually interest fans. Saints took a load to Haven, made for a great tv game. Giants vs Barrow looked good, let´s get them in earlier.  

Plus if we are going Cat B it will give champ clubs a game to market and promote against a bigger club to see if the interest is there. York vs Leeds on BBC , ok York, let´s see what you can do. 

Agreed . Seems a lot simpler 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 ...

Edited by gingerjon
typo

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

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.

Edited by Dave W
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Edited by Dave W
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

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...