Featherstone - Boom or Bust by the looks of it

[The Masked Poster]

14 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So who will it be ?

Read my lips...there won't be any strong new clubs challenging for trophies.

None. 

[The Masked Poster]

25 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Pray tell me , Harry and Steve exactly what you want us to do differently to what we currently do ? 

It doesn't matter now, the time has passed. 

[David Shepherd]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

I'm considering moving to the Wakey area in a few years. Is it any good? I've been out there obviously but what's it like to live there? 

Oops thread drift.

Think of a low rent version of Pripyat and you won’t go far wrong.

[The Masked Poster]

Just now, David Shepherd said:

Think of a low rent version of Pripyat and you won’t go far wrong.

It has seemed not too bad the times I've driven through various areas. 

[David Shepherd]

6 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

It has seemed not too bad the times I've driven through various areas. 

Worked there for a few years in the 90s & 00s. The outbound side of the A638 was the best part of the city. 

[Fevrover]

9 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

It has seemed not too bad the times I've driven through various areas. 

It's like anywhere in UK good and not so good area's.

[haskey]

Bradford bring 1500 approx on Monday night. and we post a crowd of 4809 |Yes our Chief Exec said so in an 

email to true Rovers supporters.

We own our ground, there are some in the souper league who dont .So whats the problem with poor little Rovers.

 

[LeeF]

2 hours ago, Snowys Backside said:

Yep

wigan, saints , Leeds Warrington etc… all struggling to get 5k in the 80s

Most teams held their own and supported their local teams. 
 

Only the two Hull clubs stood out in the 80s really. 
 

Now is the time for the game to really make a stand. We either pay and assist growth or let it die. 
 

I find it funny though that 100k used to turn up for the CC final though. Now, the comp is more of a hindrance

But that was the 20th century which is what the poster wanted when the rest of us probably want the 21st

[LeeF]

1 hour ago, Fevrover said:

Yeah i always forget about Dewsbury and Batley lol.

The centre of Kirklees

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

Rugby League was formed in 1895, just for your information. 

At that point, Manchester United didn't exist, neither did the Premier League.  It didn't pop out from behind the bushes one day, it worked at development - and it worked massively. 

In fact at one point, association football did not exist. Strange really. 

Woosh 

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

Read my lips...there won't be any strong new clubs challenging for trophies.

None. 

So what are you actually moaning about ? 

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

It doesn't matter now, the time has passed. 

Again , so what are you moaning about ? 

[bigbaldnmad]

I find it all so amusing when we go through yet another discussion on expansion, and the we said, you said, arguments.

For 27 years, SL, RFL and Sky have had chance to grow the game.... 27 years out of the 128 years the game has existed, well over the last 20% of the sports existence. They are no nearer now, than when they first started.

As long as the powers that be insist that the way to develop the game is from throwing 95% of the income to 12 teams, then expect the rest of the sport below to develop and grow on the scraps is ludicrous. If you want to develop into the Midlands, Wales, South East or South West, you need to throw some money in, not do it on the cheap.

Invest in the grass roots. The RL clubs that are in a better position to generate any amount of income are the top level, SL  sides... don't give them an easy ride to squander TV money. I would halve the money they get, let them work to generate income to stay at the top.

I know from being the treasurer at a local community club just how much it costs to run teams, and I packed in 10 years ago, so that will have increased sharply. 

If we don't invest, in 20 years time there will be even less, top quality, British players and eventually the NRL reserve league will be based in the UK.

As a Fev fan, I don't see why we shouldn't aim for SL. They are willing to put in the hard work to get there so why not. But have a level playing field and help grow the grass roots, if the top 12 change, they change.

Chucking money at the chosen top 12 has failed, time tells you that.

 

[bigbaldnmad]

As an aside to my previous post, should British RL be responsible for developing the sport in other counties, shall we ask the NRL if they are willing to put 66% into developing French RL, and we will put in 33%... no I don't think so.

[Snowys Backside]

2 hours ago, LeeF said:

But that was the 20th century which is what the poster wanted when the rest of us probably want the 21st

But, is the sport any more popular ?

No intention of doing any number crunching but have SL clubs simply absorbed the support from the outer suburbs teams ?

I am just hoping this season IS the season for growth and as a spectator sport, attendances rise in all divisions of professional Rugby League.

[The Masked Poster]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

Again , so what are you moaning about ? 

Not moaning whatsoever. Just sad to see what might have been. 

[The Masked Poster]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Woosh 

The biggest whoosh is in your direction friend. You seem to think opposing views are moaning. 

I've already said I've argued about this for too long to care anymore, what will be will be. 

Edited March 9, 2023 by The Masked Poster

[gittinsfan]

4 hours ago, Fevrover said:

Yeah i always forget about Dewsbury and Batley lol.

I,m sure you will never forget about Batley. LOL

[Fevrover]

6 hours ago, gittinsfan said:

I,m sure you will never forget about Batley. LOL

Certainly not ,Fev fans favourite away day .

[phiggins]

17 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

But pretty true?

I wouldn't limit their ambition myself, good luck to them, give it a shot. But honestly the idea that given other choices this sport's footprint needs 1/4 of its elite comp based in Wakefield, or that a club in a Wigan suburb is really part of some exciting. growing future is really for the birds. Nothing dreadful about someone being honest about how they think about it.  

My issue with it is the desire to judge clubs based on who and where they are, and not what they are doing. My opinion is that that thinking would lead to a drop in quality of the competition itself, when what we need to do is the opposite. Make sure there are lots of good games, and full or close to full stadia. Produce something worth watching, that can be sold to various broadcasters / producers. The quote I commented on was disrespectful (as was your "suburb in Wigan", just say Leigh) and doesn't help the debate at all.

17 hours ago, The Masked Poster said:

Is it really? You're probably taking it personally, which I get but it really isn't anti Fev. I like the club and what they are doing, they are moving forward. Good on 'em. 

But when do you envisage them moving stadium in order to facilitate the 15-20K regular crowds? They won't obviously, hence they will never be a big or 'glamorous' club capable of helping RL compete with the modern day leisure market. This doesn't mean they are bad, just not the tool to drive the sport forward to fresh fields. 

Do you think the Premier League will use Bournemouth to promote their game? Or more likely would it be Man Utd or Liverpool etc etc? 

Yet Bournemouth were still given the opportunity to earn the right to play in the Premier League. By your reckoning, there should only be 6 clubs in the PL.

[steve oates]

11 hours ago, bigbaldnmad said:

I find it all so amusing when we go through yet another discussion on expansion, and the we said, you said, arguments. For 27 years, SL, RFL and Sky have had chance to grow the game.... 27 years out of the 128 years the game has existed, well over the last 20% of the sports existence. They are no nearer now, than when they first started.

As long as the powers that be insist that the way to develop the game is from throwing 95% of the income to 12 teams, then expect the rest of the sport below to develop and grow on the scraps is ludicrous.

Chucking money at the chosen top 12 has failed, time tells you that.

You got seven "likes" but unfortunately not from me. in 1897 the game was set up with the top clubs being Hull, HKR, Leigh, Wigan, Bradford, Leeds, Warrington, St,Helens Widnes, Wakefield and Huddersfield 

Today in 2023 the Superleague clubs include Hull, HKR, Leigh, Wigan, Leeds, Warrington, St.Helens  Wakefield and Huddersfield. Also Featherstone and Castleford who have been in the League since the 1920's  . Widnes and Bradford were SL clubs for a long time but slipped out and are looking to get promoted back in.

You find it "amusing" that the RFL and and SKY have not "grown the game". However growth was not the point. Survival was and remains the point in the new age of televised sport. We have over a hundred years of experience that tell us Soccer are the kings, and Union rules outside the M62. Chucking SKY money at our top clubs is exactly what has saved the game. So over to you to tell us what will "succeed" in terms of chucking SKY money at developing the game instead, and keep a mind of the fact that not many kids nowadays are bothered about any any code of football...... 

[Kayakman]

nd stay positive

23 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Morning K'man, hope you are keeping well.

I suppose in your eyes I fall into the catagory of "others of your ilk" but please tell me how we cause the game to struggle? We turn up week after week to pay our dues to watch our teams, we can't influence supporters of other teams to do the same çan we? And what is a "self fulfilling prophecy"?

I am well Harry and the same back at ya.   Hopefully the Missus hasn't driven you nuts yet.  I took your advice and retired......I'm currently training long and hard and looking forward to a bountiful kayak season once the ice goes out.  I'm going to be doing alot of salmon fishing this spring since I am hungry.  I'm spending many hours in the weight room and I will be ready for the season but...the pain Harry....Oh!...the pain!

Now when salmon trolling out of the kayak is it not better to catch a 25 lb. Chinook than a small fry?  Is the larger fish not far better eating and a 'better catch' if you will....well of course it is.  And by catching the larger fish I have had a more successful outing and my belly will be fuller also!  Better all around plus I can give the odd fillet to an Old Bud like yourself Harry......

That is exactly what I am talking about Harry (and you know in your heart that I am right).

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

1 hour ago, phiggins said:

My issue with it is the desire to judge clubs based on who and where they are, and not what they are doing. My opinion is that that thinking would lead to a drop in quality of the competition itself, when what we need to do is the opposite. Make sure there are lots of good games, and full or close to full stadia. Produce something worth watching, that can be sold to various broadcasters / producers. The quote I commented on was disrespectful (as was your "suburb in Wigan", just say Leigh) and doesn't help the debate at all.

We're fans of opposing teams, discussing stuff in a light-hearted way. These things are pretty mild jokes, we all have to put up with something along those lines from time to time. I think sometimes people are too sensitive. 

I've always held the view that challenger sports like ours need to evaluate elite competition membership on a wider basket of criteria than just on-field performance. Especially when playing budgets in tier 2 are such that it only takes one wealthy bloke's lifestyle choice for a couple of years to almost guarantee promotion. I see no greater "sporting validity" in that. That's not an argument for parachuting in non-clubs in random areas with no platform (the straw man thrown at us sometimes), just an argument for being a little more nuanced in how we grow in future. 

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, phiggins said:

Yet Bournemouth were still given the opportunity to earn the right to play in the Premier League. By your reckoning, there should only be 6 clubs in the PL.

Rigidly enforced minimum standards combined with P&R (not automatic, dependent on meeting those standards as well as being in a promotion spot) is working well for football.

[The Masked Poster]

3 hours ago, phiggins said:

Yet Bournemouth were still given the opportunity to earn the right to play in the Premier League. By your reckoning, there should only be 6 clubs in the PL.

You’re literally just making things up here, I never said, nor do I think, any such thing. If, as expected, Fev get promoted this year, I will be very happy for them - they 100% will have deserved it, as would any other club.

But…..

The PL has room for the Bournemouths of this world but they also have a majority of big clubs and aren’t reliant on clubs like Bournemouth to drive their commercial arm. The PL could afford to have Man Utd or Liverpool relegated from it, it would still be fine. Can you imagine what a blow it would be to SL to lose a Saints or Leeds? Even for one season? 
 

So, no, I don’t think there should only be certain clubs in SL, just ones who either earn it on the pitch, or find an eccentric billionaire willing to throw squillions at them. But it all goes back to the lack of groundwork in RL historically anyway, it’s reaping what it has sown.