The Gap

[up the robins]

I am a big fan of some kind of promotion/relegation, for me the middle 8s with the million pound game were very entertaining giving some teams there best attendances of the season and a money earner at least for all clubs involved. Where is the incentive for the likes of fc to strengthen with no threat of relegation they will just limp to end of season and start again next year.

You can guarantee if there was a threat of relegation through a 8s comp fc would be snapping up new signings instead Pearson will save his money to pay off loans.

Been a fan of a team that has seen promotion and the heartache of relegation I look at how the new img setup would of affected us when in the championship, very few people would have backed Rovers to get where we are today competing for the top four with sell out crowds.

We got comments  like Hull won't be able to  sustain two super league clubs the ground isn't good enough amongst other naysayers.

Because of making our way into super league we where than in a position to build a new north stand invest in second team setups and take the next steps into building what he have. No championship club can achieve this with out achieving super league even yo yoing for several seasons while building there club.

It would be very easy for us as a club to say we've made it now let's protect our position and bring up the drawbridge but think that would be wrong.   We need to encourage teams to challenge for super league status while also competing in a  strong championship.

[glossop saint]

1 minute ago, Archie Gordon said:

I think your final sentence is a good point.

However, it has been at least hinted at a couple of times now that the middle 8s somehow took funding away from the top of the game. This isn't true. The game sold the 8s to a broadcaster who paid more to the top 8 because of that. There was more funding for everyone. 

Maybe. And if that is the case then I'm wrong. But I feel that that again just reinforces the point that the focus was on the wrong part (for me) of the sport. Put it this way, do we really want to see more of Hull v London v Cas this year. Is this what we should be using to sell the sport?

[PREPOSTEROUS]

For interdivisional ties, I've no issue with the cup been expanded into groups stages early on. For deciding a league structure, it was a terrible concept. Short term thinking and all.

[Damien]

7 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

I think your final sentence is a good point.

However, it has been at least hinted at a couple of times now that the middle 8s somehow took funding away from the top of the game. This isn't true. The game sold the 8s to a broadcaster who paid more to the top 8 because of that. There was more funding for everyone. 

That's if you believe the Nigel Wood narrative. The game got a TV deal and Nigel Wood pushed this as part of it to solidify his powerbase with lower league clubs. I certainly don't believe the TV deal was dependent on having middle 8s.

[Archie Gordon]

3 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

Maybe. And if that is the case then I'm wrong. But I feel that that again just reinforces the point that the focus was on the wrong part (for me) of the sport. Put it this way, do we really want to see more of Hull v London v Cas this year. Is this what we should be using to sell the sport?

I don't see it as zero sum.

Ideally, for me, I'd love a weekend in September with Catalan playing Wigan for top spot, Warrington playing Saints to hold onto a play-off spot, with Wakefield hosting Cas and Toulouse travelling to Hull to see whether in each case the former can prise a SL place off the latter. 

As it happens, the very fixtures you don't want to see - London/Hull/Cas battling to stay relevant week-after-week - will be the ones that we are stuck with.

[Archie Gordon]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

That's if you believe the Nigel Wood narrative. The game got a TV deal and Nigel Wood pushed this as part of it to solidify his powerbase with lower league clubs. I certainly don't believe the TV deal was dependent on having middle 8s.

That doesn't particularly make a difference to the point that the game was richer during the 8s, including the teams at the top.

[glossop saint]

5 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

That doesn't particularly make a difference to the point that the game was richer during the 8s, including the teams at the top.

And it isn't necessarily due to the 8s. Lots of factors make up a TV deal.

[Damien]

17 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

That doesn't particularly make a difference to the point that the game was richer during the 8s, including the teams at the top.

And it doesn't change the fact the 8s resulted in a huge drop in the next TV deal.

Money was diverted to prop up full time championship teams. That is a fact. That money also destroyed that competition for many teams and created a 2 tier Championship. 

That was money that should have been used to enhance Super League and the value of the next TV deal for the betterment of everyone. Instead it was wasted on journeyman lower league players.

Edited April 7 by Damien

[The Blues Ox]

33 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

Maybe. And if that is the case then I'm wrong. But I feel that that again just reinforces the point that the focus was on the wrong part (for me) of the sport. Put it this way, do we really want to see more of Hull v London v Cas this year. Is this what we should be using to sell the sport?

For me personally I would want to see more of those games if relegation were at stake. I know now every game is televised so we can pick and choose but if they were not then I would not bother tuning in for half of the games with the bottom teams from around this point of the season with nothing at stake. Its just watching teams happy to collect their money and get by knowing they are in no real danger.

[Tommygilf]

5 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

I don't know why you conceive that 4 or 6 clubs would be severely impacted Tommy in an 8's situation, in the 4 years it was played '15 to '18 out of 16 SL clubs only on 3 occasions did SL and Championship clubs change divisions and two of those involved were HKR and Leigh who swapped places twice

Realistically no SL club should be losing to Championship clubs in those mini leagues with the difference there was in funding in those years, and most definitely not now, I just don't see the fear that those fans of SL clubs have they would still posses the ability to buy themselves out of 'bother' as happend previously, didn't Wakey do it on a couple of occasions and indeed your own club with the acquisition of James Segeyaro in '16.

I feel like you've just made a point in support of what I'd said? Panic buys (usually from Australia) and short termism helps no-one.

[glossop saint]

6 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

For me personally I would want to see more of those games if relegation were at stake. I know now every game is televised so we can pick and choose but if they were not then I would not bother tuning in for half of the games with the bottom teams from around this point of the season with nothing at stake. Its just watching teams happy to collect their money and get by knowing they are in no real danger.

I meant in terms of quality. There is the odd gem of a game but do we not want to be trying to show off the game at it's best? I wonder if the same argument would be there that people want to showcase Doncaster v Swinton, or Dewsbury v Keighley if we want interdivisional, as opposed to Fev v Toulouse etc.

[Tommygilf]

People have some really rose tinted glasses on when talking about the middle 8s (sorry the qualifiers).

There were a few, a handful tbh, really good games each year, but they were bloated to 28 games plus the million pound game.

Yes Salford vs KR in 2016 was amazing, but does anyone recall the classic that was Fev vs Leeds finishing 6-62, or Hull KR vs Batley in the same round finishing 58-18. Perhaps the all championship clashes might have been closer but hang on London beat Batley 76-16... Those are results from just 2 rounds that year - Batley would go on to average fewer than 16 points a game in the 8s that year and Fev fewer than 14, both with points differences of worse than -205.

In 2015 just 5 out of 28 games finished with a score difference of 8 points or below. 16 (or 57%) of matches finished with a difference of 20 or more.

2017 saw some real close classics but alongside them were 0-68, 58-10, 52-24 and 40-6 for example

2018 likewise had some close games, but also a fair number of blowouts too.

From having an admittedly massive procrastinating side track looking at these, it seems that the Qualifiers were generally at least 4 teams (2 at the top and 2 at the bottom) too large. These sides were either clearly too good or too bad for the rest.

[up the robins]

38 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

People have some really rose tinted glasses on when talking about the middle 8s (sorry the qualifiers).

There were a few, a handful tbh, really good games each year, but they were bloated to 28 games plus the million pound game.

Yes Salford vs KR in 2016 was amazing, but does anyone recall the classic that was Fev vs Leeds finishing 6-62, or Hull KR vs Batley in the same round finishing 58-18. Perhaps the all championship clashes might have been closer but hang on London beat Batley 76-16... Those are results from just 2 rounds that year - Batley would go on to average fewer than 16 points a game in the 8s that year and Fev fewer than 14, both with points differences of worse than -205.

In 2015 just 5 out of 28 games finished with a score difference of 8 points or below. 16 (or 57%) of matches finished with a difference of 20 or more.

2017 saw some real close classics but alongside them were 0-68, 58-10, 52-24 and 40-6 for example

2018 likewise had some close games, but also a fair number of blowouts too.

From having an admittedly massive procrastinating side track looking at these, it seems that the Qualifiers were generally at least 4 teams (2 at the top and 2 at the bottom) too large. These sides were either clearly too good or too bad for the rest.

I get what you say about some blow out scores, but it kept the super league teams on their toes fighting to be competitive for the whole season because there was always that risk of relegation and gave the championship teams that dream of big time rugby and a welcome boost of money from fixtures with super League teams.

While not been ideal for me two teams ourselves and Leigh have transitioned from yoyo clubs to challenging for honours in top flight and have proven promotion and relegation can work.

London earned their place in sl this year and do seem to be moving forward as a club. Promotion probably came a year or two  earlier than they expected but the team that faced us this weekend had 13 homegrown players in their squad that is amazing   not one other team in sl can come close to that and shows London are obviously doing something very right down their, to have that many homegrown players in a place that is not renowned for been a hotbed of rugby league talent.

I think London will find it hard under img to get a A grade to get back in sl which is a shame because this is the sort of Team we need to build into a supervleague team.

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I feel like you've just made a point in support of what I'd said? Panic buys (usually from Australia) and short termism helps no-one.

That wasn't the point you was making though was it,now be honest.

[Ant]

Super 8's

 

Are you people on drugs? Can you not remember what an unmitigated disaster it was? 

Return to P&R? We aren't even half a season in to the new model and folk want it changed.

 

I've seen just about every variation of how the league has been organised, messed about with, chopped and changed - and the only thing that brings competition AT THE TOP is scrapping P&R and not allowing 1 bad season to derail years of work 

It takes 3+ years to build a competative squad, It takes a generation to bring youth through an academy, it takes multiple generations to build a dynasty. None of that can be done with automatic P&R

That's why only 4 teams have won Super League, because no one else can recruit more than a year ahead 

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

In a league system, some games don't matter that much towards the end. 

So what? 

You showcase the 3 or 4 that do and the other 2 occur- which could be good, stress free matches for those watching 

[Harry Stottle]

10 hours ago, up the robins said:

I get what you say about some blow out scores, but it kept the super league teams on their toes fighting to be competitive for the whole season because there was always that risk of relegation and gave the championship teams that dream of big time rugby and a welcome boost of money from fixtures with super League teams.

While not been ideal for me two teams ourselves and Leigh have transitioned from yoyo clubs to challenging for honours in top flight and have proven promotion and relegation can work.

London earned their place in sl this year and do seem to be moving forward as a club. Promotion probably came a year or two  earlier than they expected but the team that faced us this weekend had 13 homegrown players in their squad that is amazing   not one other team in sl can come close to that and shows London are obviously doing something very right down their, to have that many homegrown players in a place that is not renowned for been a hotbed of rugby league talent.

I think London will find it hard under img to get a A grade to get back in sl which is a shame because this is the sort of Team we need to build into a supervleague team.

Yes, but it's not just London UTR, every team should be given the opportunity if they are ambitious enough, this system kind of quells that ambition.

I am personally going to watch how Toulouse are doing this coming season, I somewhat feel that the roles are reversed with how they and London are being treated.

[Harry Stottle]

20 minutes ago, Rugbyleaguesupporter said:

In a league system, some games don't matter that much towards the end. 

So what? 

You showcase the 3 or 4 that do and the other 2 occur- which could be good, stress free matches for those watching 

I want to feel all the emotions every match I attend, not come away shrugging my shoulders saying "it didn't matter anyway, win, lose or draw"

What you advocate is not sport for a spectator, it is a way of passing a couple of hours over.

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I want to feel all the emotions every match I attend, not come away shrugging my shoulders saying "it didn't matter anyway, win, lose or draw"

What you advocate is not sport for a spectator, it is a way of passing a couple of hours over.

Sport requires highs and lows. In any league system you sometimes have little to play for some seasons, in other seasons lots. 

In league one football, teams 8 to 18 have not much to play for. (Probably definitely nothing with 2 games to go)  That's sport- not every year will be exciting

[Chrispmartha]

12 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I want to feel all the emotions every match I attend, not come away shrugging my shoulders saying "it didn't matter anyway, win, lose or draw"

What you advocate is not sport for a spectator, it is a way of passing a couple of hours over.

What you want can’t be achieved in any league structure, there were plenty games in the middle 8s that didn’t matter

[Harry Stottle]

14 minutes ago, Rugbyleaguesupporter said:

In league one football, teams 8 to 18 have not much to play for. (Probably definitely nothing with 2 games to go)  That's sport- not every year will be exciting

Not a clue about football I find it abhorrent, don't watch, read or listen to anything about it.

 

[Harry Stottle]

15 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

What you want can’t be achieved in any league structure, there were plenty games in the middle 8s that didn’t matter

The groups were all level on points initially.

You personally have experienced games that mattered at both ends of the table, would you have preferred going to the jeopardy games knowing the result was of no consequence?

 

 

[glossop saint]

18 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

What you want can’t be achieved in any league structure, there were plenty games in the middle 8s that didn’t matter

I had a teacher at school who always did a quiz at the end of term. No matter what happened in the quiz it was always whoever got the last question right who won. It is virtually impossible to have a league where every minute matters. Do players/fans not just want to win a game because it is good to win a game? Is that not successful and enjoyable itself?

[Chrispmartha]

3 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

The groups were all level on points initially.

You personally have experienced games that mattered at both ends of the table, would you have preferred going to the jeopardy games knowing the result was of no consequence?

 

 

That doesn’t really answer my point.

 

you want every game to ‘matter’ it’s impossible really in any league structure 

Edited April 8 by Chrispmartha

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, Chrispmartha said:

That doesn’t really answer my point.

I get personal enjoyment/sadness at all games whatever the outcome and the consequence of the game mattering.

Please answer my question.