Interesting news

[The Phantom Horseman]

1 minute ago, Jimmy DoNut said:

As an Oldham fan, i'm chuckling at you bracketing Rochdale with Cornwall & Midlands . 

  I literally checked the L1 table to find the bottom 3 teams (barring Skolars) so as not to offend the wrong fans!

[Sidi Fidi Gold]

50 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

If that's how it worked it's no wonder they got rid, it sounds nuts. Under that system, if Fev finished outside the best 16 teams one year (which has happened a few times in recent years) and then they brought that rule in with Fev playing no games against SL teams other than say Cas or Wakefield  and the remainder of our league games against other bottom 16 teams I'd fancy us to finish just about top of the table whilst Wigan, St Helens, Catalans etc were beating each other.

I mean people get upset about loop fixtures, summer bash etc "distorting the table", can you imagine two teams fighting for the title, one has been playing against Saints/Wigan/Catalans all year and the other has been playing against Rochdale/Cornwall/Midlands?

I'm far too young to remember how it worked but I'm sure I read that if Fev finished in the bottom half the previous season, they would play all the teams East of the Pennines home and away and the bottom half of the teams West of the Pennines home and away. I'm sure somebody like MLP could confirm that all of Fevs good seasons, particularly in the 1950s were when they finished in the bottom half the previous season resulting in an easier fixture list. Anyway, there's absolutely no chance of this system coming back.

[marklaspalmas]

9 minutes ago, Sidi Fidi Gold said:

I'm far too young to remember how it worked but I'm sure I read that if Fev finished in the bottom half the previous season, they would play all the teams East of the Pennines home and away and the bottom half of the teams West of the Pennines home and away. I'm sure somebody like MLP could confirm that all of Fevs good seasons, particularly in the 1950s were when they finished in the bottom half the previous season resulting in an easier fixture list. Anyway, there's absolutely no chance of this system coming back.

I will be happy to post up Rovers season by season finish during the one-league period (up until 1973 with a two year trial for 2 divisions in the early sixties), but that's not how fixtures were organised.

Originally, it was that clubs in Yorkshire, say for example Featherstone Rovers, played every other Yorkshire club home and away every year. The number of Lancashire opposition was set at whatever (4 or 5 clubs say) it took at achieve the acquired number of fixtures per year, say 38. The Lancs. opposition varied from year to year but of course the Yorkshire clubs were always the same (unless sometimes, this was jigged about, with the odd Yorkshire team needing to go into the Lancashire section because there were always more Yorkshire clubs than Lancashire clubs).

It was a system for its times and two divisions should have been introduced long before they were. The 60s and 70s, although successful for Rovers and of course cherished times for those of us who grew up then, were disastrous for rugby league in general as crowds reached terrible levels, far worse than we have now. The Challenge Cup was always an exception to this.

 

[marklaspalmas]

45-6	Rovers position:	13	Total number of clubs:	27
46-7	Rovers position:	26	Total number of clubs:	28
47-8	Rovers position:	27	Total number of clubs:	28
48-9	Rovers position:	26	Total number of clubs:	29
49-50	Rovers position:	25	Total number of clubs:	29
50-1	Rovers position:	26	Total number of clubs:	29
51-2	Rovers position:	22	Total number of clubs:	31
52-3	Rovers position:	24	Total number of clubs:	30
53-4	Rovers position:	14	Total number of clubs:	30
54-5	Rovers position:	9	Total number of clubs:	31
55-6	Rovers position:	6	Total number of clubs:	30
56-7	Rovers position:	15	Total number of clubs:	30
57-8	Rovers position:	8	Total number of clubs:	30
58-9	Rovers position:	13	Total number of clubs:	30
59-60	Rovers position:	5	Total number of clubs:	30
60-1	Rovers position:	11	Total number of clubs:	30
61-2	Rovers position:	3	Total number of clubs:	30
62-3	Rovers position:	11	Total number of clubs:	16
63-4	Rovers position:	4	Total number of clubs:	16
64-5	Rovers position:	15	Total number of clubs:	30
65-6	Rovers position:	15	Total number of clubs:	30
66-7	Rovers position:	20	Total number of clubs:	30
67-8	Rovers position:	18	Total number of clubs:	30
68-9	Rovers position:	7	Total number of clubs:	30
69-70	Rovers position:	8	Total number of clubs:	30
70-1	Rovers position:	20	Total number of clubs:	30
71-2	Rovers position:	7	Total number of clubs:	30
72-3	Rovers position:	2	Total number of clubs:	30

Edited September 27, 2023 by marklaspalmas
Reformatted

[spanishknight]

If I remember right Huddersfield played in the Lancashire fixtures a lot of the time, think they got extra money for doing so.

[marklaspalmas]

5 minutes ago, spanishknight said:

If I remember right Huddersfield played in the Lancashire fixtures a lot of the time, think they got extra money for doing so.

Yes. Halifax were often the Yorkshire side that switched too.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

1 hour ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

If that's how it worked it's no wonder they got rid, it sounds nuts. Under that system, if Fev finished outside the best 16 teams one year (which has happened a few times in recent years) and then they brought that rule in with Fev playing no games against SL teams other than say Cas or Wakefield  and the remainder of our league games against other bottom 16 teams I'd fancy us to finish just about top of the table whilst Wigan, St Helens, Catalans etc were beating each other.

I mean people get upset about loop fixtures, summer bash etc "distorting the table", can you imagine two teams fighting for the title, one has been playing against Saints/Wigan/Catalans all year and the other has been playing against Rochdale/Cornwall/Midlands?

Not sure it worked quite like that (more an east/west split + cross county games dependent on previous season's league position?) but teams playing others once, twice or not at all was why there were (top 4, 8 or 16 over the period) play offs back then to decide the 'Champions'. 

eg in the '68-69 season Wigan finished 3rd but only played against 8 of the other clubs finishing in the top 16 that year - with only Hull of those being from outside of Lancashire.

[jamescolin]

7 hours ago, sentoffagain2 said:

    James how do you feel about heritage clubs like Hunslet Oldham Keighley and Workington having to play in a  no better than the Conference.Do you think we should welcome them into the Championship.I still miss Bramley and Blackpool not being helped but left to amateur level.

A positive YES SOA

[The Phantom Horseman]

One thing I will say, it's very late in the day to be contemplating changes for lots of reasons, not the least of which is that a plenty of clubs, including ours, have been selling season tickets for a number of weeks now on the basis of there being 13 home games next season.