The Goole Vikings Thread

[Tommygilf]

6 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Fine. But there are lots of 'holes' for new clubs all around the country.

Whatever the case, there is no money to spend it seems and so the idea of a strategy is moot.

Ultimately the RFL don't dictate where a lot of the new money coming into the sport is spent.

What it does need to do is provide a framework for clubs to enter and thrive in. Tbh the whole semi-pro/amateur pyramid needs a rethink.

[Archie Gordon]

10 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Ultimately the RFL don't dictate where a lot of the new money coming into the sport is spent.

What it does need to do is provide a framework for clubs to enter and thrive in. Tbh the whole semi-pro/amateur pyramid needs a rethink.

Yes.

There is a L1 review document somewhere, prepared prior to opening up the 12th spot for bidders. I wish I could take a look because L1 seems to have no purpose - if it didn't exist, we probably wouldn't invent it.

[Barley Mow]

1 hour ago, Griff said:

We've had Whitehaven and Wigan Warriors before. We've had two sets of Rovers for the last century.

I don't recall any issue with West Wales and Barrow both being Raiders either.

[Just Browny]

17 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Yes.

There is a L1 review document somewhere, prepared prior to opening up the 12th spot for bidders. I wish I could take a look because L1 seems to have no purpose - if it didn't exist, we probably wouldn't invent it.

I think we have invented it a couple of times. Remember when we had all the non-Super League pro clubs in one division, the old NFP? It didn't work so we went to two divisions.

In slightly depressing but realistic terms, it acts a holding pen for teams who might have Championship ambitions in the future. Some of those are 'traditional' teams at a low ebb, some of them are new teams who hold out hope for a bigger future. Few of them strong enough to be put in front of the Featherstones and the Bradfords week after week, with the listlessness that would involve.

It offers those teams the chance of a bit of glory every few years, and maybe a chance to build momentum in a way they wouldn't if they were getting hammered most weeks. You could look at Oldham and perhaps Keighley as positive examples. There are of course plenty of examples where it hasn't worked out, so I would stop short of saying it is a successful model. But think it is a necessary one.

[Archie Gordon]

10 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

I think we have invented it a couple of times. Remember when we had all the non-Super League pro clubs in one division, the old NFP? It didn't work so we went to two divisions.

In slightly depressing but realistic terms, it acts a holding pen for teams who might have Championship ambitions in the future. Some of those are 'traditional' teams at a low ebb, some of them are new teams who hold out hope for a bigger future. Few of them strong enough to be put in front of the Featherstones and the Bradfords week after week, with the listlessness that would involve.

It offers those teams the chance of a bit of glory every few years, and maybe a chance to build momentum in a way they wouldn't if they were getting hammered most weeks. You could look at Oldham and perhaps Keighley as positive examples. There are of course plenty of examples where it hasn't worked out, so I would stop short of saying it is a successful model. But think it is a necessary one.

Good points.

My view is that if something does serve a purpose then it needs funding to a level that it can not only operate at but potentially grow. I guess I'm saying I'd favour a better-funded L1 with a clear set of objectives but am not so enamoured by the current iteration that doesn't seem to work very well for clubs in the bottom half, including those no longer taking part.

[RBKnight]

19 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

In slightly depressing but realistic terms, it acts a holding pen for teams who might have Championship ambitions in the future. Some of those are 'traditional' teams at a low ebb, some of them are new teams who hold out hope for a bigger future. Few of them strong enough to be put in front of the Featherstones and the Bradfords week after week, with the listlessness that would involve.

It offers those teams the chance of a bit of glory every few years, and maybe a chance to build momentum in a way they wouldn't if they were getting hammered most weeks. You could look at Oldham and perhaps Keighley as positive examples. There are of course plenty of examples where it hasn't worked out, so I would stop short of saying it is a successful model. But think it is a necessary one.

Yes, the "holding pen" is a good description. Clubs that hit rock bottom can recover there, rather than disappearing altogether.

Bradford and York both came out of L1 in 2018 - Barrow have also made the Championship play-offs after a fairly ignominious relegation in 2019.

 

[RBKnight]

On 19/09/2024 at 08:20, sam4731 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe there is just 1 pairing of teams with the same moniker in the pro ranks (Widnes and Goole) which sets up the mouth watering potential Viking derby.

 

Yes, they should play it in York - we're big on Vikings here . Then York Valkyrie could decide which of the losers gets taken to Valhalla.....

[ricky]

I would like to go to their first game, I hope they get something like Dewsbury at home rather than Midlands away.

[ricky]

3 hours ago, RBKnight said:

Yes, they should play it in York - we're big on Vikings here . Then York Valkyrie could decide which of the losers gets taken to Valhalla.....

That pub with the late licence on Patrick Pool?

[RBKnight]

18 minutes ago, ricky said:

That pub with the late licence on Patrick Pool?

Valiant losers get an escort to the home of the Gods ...... winners join the Valkyrie in the Bootham Tavern

[RayCee]

4 hours ago, RBKnight said:

Yes, they should play it in York - we're big on Vikings here . Then York Valkyrie could decide which of the losers gets taken to Valhalla.....

I did a tour of the Jorvik Viking Centre some years back when visiting the Old Country and really enjoyed it. For some reason, Knights was chosen instead.

[Eddie]

6 hours ago, ricky said:

Goole Dockers would have been nice, but I suppose they would have felt that Hull Dockers got there first.

Goole Ees? 

[Eddie]

4 hours ago, RBKnight said:

Yes, the "holding pen" is a good description. Clubs that hit rock bottom can recover there, rather than disappearing altogether.

Bradford and York both came out of L1 in 2018 - Barrow have also made the Championship play-offs after a fairly ignominious relegation in 2019.

 

Toulouse also. 

[Odsal Outlaw]

16 hours ago, Eddie said:

Why would Widnes object? I doubt they’ll ever cross paths and certainly won’t ever compete for fans. 

Just a personal opinion, but if I were Widnes I’d have wanted to protect my IP within RL and not dilute it. 
 

I remember when Leeds Akademiks had to change their name because a US brand objected (clothing from memory) … also their paths would not have have crossed but they didn’t want any risk to their brand. Now clearly different but same principle. I also think having unique monikers helps distinguish teams in the league. 

But also understand that it is maybe a minor issue. Just don’t understand why it wouldn’t have been fixed.

[Gav Wilson]

14 minutes ago, RayCee said:

I did a tour of the Jorvik Viking Centre some years back when visiting the Old Country and really enjoyed it. For some reason, Knights was chosen instead.

York wanted to switch from Wasps to Vikings when summer rugby kicked off in the 90's, but were apparently told that Widnes beat them to it.

[Dave W]

17 hours ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

Surprised they’ve been allowed to retain the Vikings moniker. Surely wouldn’t have been hard for RFL to say ‘you’re in but you need a unique moniker’.  Also surprised Widnes didn’t object.

There are a several chemical companies dotted around Goole. Goole Chemics?

[Ullman]

7 hours ago, ricky said:

Goole Dockers would have been nice, but I suppose they would have felt that Hull Dockers got there first.

If we're going really local they should have gone for The Tom Puddings as a nickname but I guess it's not going to strike terror into the hearts of their opponents.

[ricky]

23 minutes ago, Ullman said:

If we're going really local they should have gone for The Tom Puddings as a nickname but I guess it's not going to strike terror into the hearts of their opponents.

Learning something new

[Ullman]

11 minutes ago, ricky said:

Learning something new

It was an absolutely ingenious system.

[ricky]

I'm going to have trouble thinking of them as anything other thanThe Puddings, now

[Ullman]

2 hours ago, ricky said:

I'm going to have trouble thinking of them as anything other thanThe Puddings, now

Sorry 

[Griff]

3 hours ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

Just a personal opinion, but if I were Widnes I’d have wanted to protect my IP within RL and not dilute it. 

Even a Trade Mark would probably only protect Widnes Vikings, as opposed to any other Vikings.

[northamptoncougar]

Of the other two applications that didn’t make it I’d be interested to know how close they felt they were to being the successful one?

[Odsal Outlaw]

38 minutes ago, Griff said:

Even a Trade Mark would probably only protect Widnes Vikings, as opposed to any other Vikings.

Fully agree. But they could have raised opposition and sure it would have been dealt with. Anyway, it’s done I guess!

[Griff]

8 minutes ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

Fully agree. But they could have raised opposition and sure it would have been dealt with. Anyway, it’s done I guess!

Just as an aside, I recall that a few years ago, the Thomas the Tank Engine franchise sent a cease and desist to the Bluebell Railway, complaining that they had "branded" one of their locos "Stepney" which was the name of a character in the Rev Awdry's books.   The response was that "Stepney" had been called Stepney since it was built in late Victorian times and it was actually Awdry who had stolen the name in the 1950s!

Case discontinued.