London (Merged Threads)

[Barley Mow]

Just now, Leonard said:

Hopefully.

But realistically we would be looking at finishing above Cas - so unless we beat them home and away would be difficult.

If you are talking about staying up - you would need to finish above Cas, but on IMG grading points rather than match points. You would also need to get more IMG points than Wakefield and Toulouse, etc. And all measured over a three year period (2022-2024).

Considering the year you had in 2022, plus crowds in 2022 & 23, the low ground utilisation, etc - I think it would be incredibly difficult for London to stay up if promoted.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

If you are talking about staying up - you would need to finish above Cas, but on IMG grading points rather than match points. You would also need to get more IMG points than Wakefield and Toulouse, etc. And all measured over a three year period (2022-2024).

Considering the year you had in 2022, plus crowds in 2022 & 23, the low ground utilisation, etc - I think it would be incredibly difficult for London to stay up if promoted.

To get promoted and then stay up based upon the fragrances in the gents wouldn't be right for me. 

I get licensing and the such - but to get pumped and then to be left in above Cas, say, just because their ground is a dump would be odd.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

If you are talking about staying up - you would need to finish above Cas, but on IMG grading points rather than match points. You would also need to get more IMG points than Wakefield and Toulouse, etc. And all measured over a three year period (2022-2024).

Considering the year you had in 2022, plus crowds in 2022 & 23, the low ground utilisation, etc - I think it would be incredibly difficult for London to stay up if promoted.

We should play in a 500 capacity ground - would have excellent utilisation points then. lol

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

Could London become the first casualty of IMG's spreadsheet?

Not sure that was the plan.

Still, sacrifices have to be made.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

Could London become the first casualty of IMG's spreadsheet?

Not sure that was the plan.

Still, sacrifices have to be made.

I don't think you can be a casualty if you are not in the top league or if you are and finish bottom.

[Toby Chopra]

Just now, Leonard said:

I don't think you can be a casualty if you are not in the top league or if you are and finish bottom.

However if London finish 11th, Cas 12th and Wakey win the Championship, it's almost certain London will still be the one to go down - unless they pull 7,500+ crowds and the corporate goes bananas. 

But 2024 was always going to be a volatile year in terms of the gradings, we knew what we were signing up for. 

For London, they could look at promotion in two ways: 1/ The criteria will almost certainly send them back down, so don't overspend and think long-term. Or 2/Throw everything you can possibly spend at 2024 and aim for something like top 9, because it'll be EVEN HARDER to go up from 2025 onwards. I hope they choose the latter.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

However if London finish 11th, Cas 12th and Wakey win the Championship, it's almost certain London will still be the one to go down - unless they pull 7,500+ crowds and the corporate goes bananas. 

But 2024 was always going to be a volatile year in terms of the gradings, we knew what we were signing up for. 

For London, they could look at promotion in two ways: 1/ The criteria will almost certainly send them back down, so don't overspend and think long-term. Or 2/Throw everything you can possibly spend at 2024 and aim for something like top 9, because it'll be EVEN HARDER to go up from 2025 onwards. I hope they choose the latter.

I think if somehow we finish 11th and pull in 2k for games, inflated by away fans, then I don't have a massive issue.

As I have said a few times today, a 14 teams league solves a lot of issues that way and makes grading irrelevant. It seems a self imposed system to cut the same cake less ways and assume having less people to a party is a way to make is more attractive.

DH going bonkers with the cheque book would be cool though.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Leonard

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

15 hours ago, Phil said:

A few years ago the RFL had (I think) 10 development officers in London. It then withdrew their funding just as players like LMS and Tony Clubb were breaking through.

A huge own goal

The development officers I feel have the biggest impact in terms of money

...might be wrong though 

Think the RFU have pulled a lot their development stuff countrywide 

 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

The development officers I feel have the biggest impact in terms of money

...might be wrong though 

Think the RFU have pulled a lot their development stuff countrywide 

 

They clearly haven't been value for money or doing much given the absolute state of that team.

[crashmon]

1 hour ago, londonrlfan said:

Usually clubs relay the pitches in the summer. 

If we did go up, hopefully we don't play in the North any of our 'home' games. The dream would be a game or two at Fulham, probably never happen, but there are plenty of stadiums in London. But I would try the odd 'on the road' game in Colchester, MK or Woking perhaps. 

Most clubs only need a gap of 4-5 weeks for the relaying?  Wimbledon need 12 for some reason. 

When we played at Charlton, Griffon Park, The Stoop, Barnet we only had about 5 weeks away not 12.

Why should we pay extra to play in July when pretty much every other scooer stadium which is shared by a RL club does not have to and can get their pitched relayed in time?

PL is a huge rip off for what we get from it.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

14 minutes ago, Leonard said:

They clearly haven't been value for money or doing much given the absolute state of that team.

Agreed ......though I think it happened 6-7 years ago so the effects may be coming in now 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, crashmon said:

Most clubs only need a gap of 4-5 weeks for the relaying?  Wimbledon need 12 for some reason. 

When we played at Charlton, Griffon Park, The Stoop, Barnet we only had about 5 weeks away not 12.

Why should we pay extra to play in July when pretty much every other scooer stadium which is shared by a RL club does not have to and can get their pitched relayed in time?

PL is a huge rip off for what we get from it.

No - it's expensive because we cannot pull fans and which is on London.

A subtle difference.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Leonard

[sheddingswasus]

2 hours ago, İzmir Rugby League said:

 

One has to wonder if it is the promotions department and will to simply get a crowd. At present it would be better to get 5000 in the stadium through free tickets then little. Allow people some time and motivation to invest. 

 

But to me that sounds like failure. 
if they are only getting around 500 now, there just doesn’t sound like there is any real support base. 

Edited October 9, 2023 by sheddingswasus

[crashmon]

2 minutes ago, Leonard said:

No - it's expensive because we cannot pull fans and which is on London.

A subtle difference.

You not answering the point of why its closed for 12 weeks and every other soccer pitch is only closed for 5 or 6 weeks. 

[dealwithit]

2 hours ago, Leonard said:

I know a long time AFC Wimbledon fan.

They are ecstatic with £200k a year.

You throw them some more money and they will let London play in the off season. Money finds a way.

Whilst London are a championship club it will make sense to not bother - but when stakes and cash are higher they find a compromise.

Ebbsfleet has also had decent success for the one offs.

 

I made the counter point a few months back. Acccording to Steve Mascord, the £200k is a loan from David to the football club at above market interest rate. Is this true? No idea.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, crashmon said:

You not answering the point of why its closed for 12 weeks and every other soccer pitch is only closed for 5 or 6 weeks. 

Because those are the terms Wimbledon imposed and terms that might be open to change?

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, dealwithit said:

I made the counter point a few months back. Acccording to Steve Mascord, the £200k is a loan from David to the football club at above market interest rate. Is this true? No idea.

Sounds BS.

Why would DH loan money to AFC to use their crowd and AFC pay interest to him?

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, crashmon said:

You not answering the point of why its closed for 12 weeks and every other soccer pitch is only closed for 5 or 6 weeks. 

Also - there are plenty of CC and 1895 rounds in there and the Summer Bash. It's hardly as if that part of the season is back to back league games with 12 on the road.

So the 12 week thing you parrot is padded.

Probably factors into it, although London had a good run in the CC.

I assume that it is just not a massive issue.

[dealwithit]

1 hour ago, Leonard said:

If (and big if) we go up - we'll get a couple of bang average aussies, some of wakey's squad and convince a few of the PT players to go FT. The rest of the PT players will leave.

We'll get pumped week in and week out with crowds falling off and then be in a worse position than when we went up as half the squad we had will have left.

That's the fear and probable outcome.

 

Who are the current FT players?

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

7 hours ago, Colin James said:

London had 20 years in SL and we have nothing to show for it. What's potentially going to be different this time? I'd love a strong London team but it's hard to see how they could have come away with less after that level of investment and opportunity. I suppose the argument is that the threat of relegation is the reason they can't get 1000 home fans through the gate or settle in one location.

An expansion teams inability to build long-term plans because of the constant fear of relegation is indeed one of the arguments to remove "basic" P&R, yes.

Instead of paying Henry Paul £200k per year, the Broncos could have invested that in youth, or in marketing. That was just one player, in one season... but it happened countless times. With some security of tenure, the club could have stayed in one location for longer by building stronger partnerships. Or even investing in their own ground! David Hughes spent over £20m keeping Broncos in Super League. Imagine how differently that money could have been spent, and what different types of outcomes we might have seen?

There's no guarantee the outcome would have been any different, but what we do know is the way we did it before certainly didn't deliver a great one. 

[dealwithit]

5 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Sounds BS.

Why would DH loan money to AFC to use their crowd and AFC pay interest to him?

Apparently the loan was the sweetener for the ground share. 

[Guest]

Just now, dealwithit said:

Who are the current FT players?

None - I didn't say we had any. We might convince a few if we go up.

Some like Bienek might think I have a good job and decide it isn't worth jacking it in for a season.

[Guest]

Just now, dealwithit said:

Apparently the loan was the sweetener for the ground share. 

Still makes no sense.

it might be right - I just don't understand the rationale for that scenario.

[dealwithit]

1 minute ago, Leonard said:

None - I didn't say we had any. We might convince a few if we go up.

Some like Bienek might think I have a good job and decide it isn't worth jacking it in for a season.

Would have thought Albert, Waine, Natoli and Parata were FT. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, dealwithit said:

Would have thought Albert, Waine, Natoli and Parata were FT. 

That's fair.

Perhaps - not sure. I never thought of it but assumed they were all PT.

Palumbo was part time so just assumed someone like Natoli would be similar.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Leonard