Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

They weren't awarded a licence. They scored terribly for their financials. They still were able to score better than Bradford and Toulouse. The indictment there is on the latter two. 

They were able to do that because that is how the clubs wanted the system to be designed so it wasn't just off field measures. No previous system, especially P&R, would prevent this situation either.

That the RFL have from a governing body perspective totally failed in being decisive isn't an IMG Criteria for that matter.

Perhaps your one eyed view on this topic repeated ad nauseum prevents you from comprehending the above.

You were the one suggesting that Salford’s problems are not a demonstrative of a flaw in the system. As to the RFL being decisive, at this stage that is neither here nor there. There was an evaluation process and that process selected Salford.

And we can all form our own judgments as to how that has turned out. 

Someone above suggested that we would be much better if Toulouse were in SL. I concur with that view. 
 

  • Like 3

Posted
RFL advance Salford more money to pay players
New

29 minutes ago

BY JOHN DAVIDSON

The Salford Red Devils crisis has hit a new low with the RFL advancing them more central distribution so the club could pay their players and face Castleford yesterday.

According to several sources, the RFL has given Salford an advance of around £130,000 so the club could pay its players on Friday. The fixture against the Tigers was in severe doubt if the players were not paid.

rugbyleaguehub.com Long Reads approached the RFL about the matter today, with a spokesperson replying with "No comment".

It is believed the RFL has given the Red Devils its monthly central distribution 10 days early to ensure the players turn out, but the club's staff have still not been paid this month.

rugbyleaguehub.com Long Reads understands the new owners of Salford have yet to clear the millions in debt that was sat with the club when they took it over in February, or pay back the £500,000 in central distribution that the Red Devils received from the governing body in December.

A new payment deadline of March 13 is believed to have now been set for the new Salford owners.

Last month rugbyleaguehub.com Long Reads revealed that the members of the consortium that now owns the Super League club include New Zealanders Curtis Brown and Sosaia (also known as Isiosaia) Kailahi, and Englishman Kurt Graver.

None of Brown, Kailahi, Graver or consortium head Dario Berta have commented publicly or conducted an interview since taking control several weeks ago. New CEO Chris Irwin has also not responded to repeated requests for interview.

On March 4 Salford posted on X: "Salford Red Devils can confirm that the Club will be under the restriction of a sustainability cap for this weekend's Betfred Super League fixture against Castleford Tigers on Friday 7th March.

"This is due to the delay of funding following the takeover with funds currently pending regulatory clearance. CEO Chris Irwin and the new ownership will meet with the Special Measures Committee and RL Commercial tomorrow morning.

"To our fans, we sincerely apologise, we know this is not an easy time to be a Salford Reds fan.

"We apologise to you on behalf of our new ownership who have assured the Club that the consortium is working to rectify the financial situation and there will be no further issues.  Thank you for your patience and support."

The RFL have claimed that the new owners have demonstrated proof of funds, but after weeks money has still yet to be transferred.

Salford and the RFL will now come under great scrutiny for their silence, lack of communication and their decision-making following this controversial move by the governing body to advance the club more money.

The RFL has been reeling from crisis after crisis in recent weeks. Apart from the Salford scandal, yesterday board director Sandy Lindsay resigned after months of pressure.

A group of clubs are also trying to oust chairman Simon Johnson, along with Lindsay, to force change at the governing body. At the same time RFL director Rob Hicks remains suspended, with no outcome into the investigation into him after six months.

Kerry Simmons, who worked under Hicks, was also suspended in September and last month quietly departed the organisation.

Yesterday Sky Sports presenter Brian Carney slammed the RFL for its lack of explanation over its handling of the Salford issue.

He said: "There's been, in my opinion, a distinct lack of communication from the leadership of this game. I haven't heard from any significant figure to explain to people what exactly is going on.

"So when the salary cap restrictions are re-imposed and dispensations are then offered to cover for suspended players, everybody else, including Martin Jepson for example, the Castleford Tigers joint-owner, is going: 'what's going on here?'

"I'm doing my best to try and follow this situation and I am really struggling. They're delivered in silence. You cannot find me an interview, a significant interview, with a figure of note that has got a leadership role in this game.

"Has Tony Sutton (RFL CEO) spoken to anybody publicly? Has he addressed this issue with the fans that follow the game of not just Castleford and Salford but all the other clubs?

"There's silence. Leaders stand up."

  • Sad 4
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I hope Toulouse make it into SL, but make more of a stab of it than they did last time, where they were really underwhelming.

You mean the time when they got promoted during a global pandemic and French citizens couldn't leave the house or attend a sports venue without having a vaccine passport? 

Add to the fact that they were told after winning promotion that they had to stump up 300-500,000 Euros to pay every clubs transport and accommodation fees for playing in the city which is a significant sum to stump up within weeks of preparing to start a new league.

You're being very ignorant about TO in this thread. You've also claimed that the club had financial problems last year. Care to substantiate any facts about that? 

Edited by The Daddy
  • Like 9
  • Thanks 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, The Daddy said:

You mean the time when they got promoted during a global pandemic and French citizens couldn't leave the house or attend a sports venue without having a vaccine passport? 

Add to the fact that they were told after winning promotion that they had to stump up 300-500,000 Euros to pay every clubs transport and accommodation fees for playing in the city which is a significant sum to stump up within weeks of preparing to start a new league.

You're being very ignorant about TO in this thread. You've also claimed that the club had financial problems last year. Care to substantiate any facts about that? 

As mentioned earlier, they also lost their best (Australian) players just before the season started. To average almost 5,000 in the circumstances was fair going. I would venture that two or three normal seasons in SL would see that figure increase substantially. Without Covid both Toulouse and Toronto might still be there at the expense of Salford and Huddersfield and maybe both approaching 9,000+ average gates. How much stronger a league would that have been than what is currently ?

  • Like 5
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, preid said:

As mentioned earlier, they also lost their best (Australian) players just before the season started. To average almost 5,000 in the circumstances was fair going. I would venture that two or three normal seasons in SL would see that figure increase substantially. Without Covid both Toulouse and Toronto might still be there at the expense of Salford and Huddersfield and maybe both approaching 9,000+ average gates. How much stronger a league would that have been than what is currently ?

They lost Khreillah and Ford due to disagreements around the vaccine passport and Lloyd White and Latrell Schaumkel both couldn't play due to injury and had to retire due. The 300-500,000 Euros requested at short notice had to come from somewhere and it came out of the playing budget. 

Add to the fact they had no home games in the season they got promoted due to covid restrictions which also has a financial impact. 

 

Edited by The Daddy
  • Like 5
Posted
10 hours ago, Damien said:

I'd say Warrington, Hull KR and Leigh have all grown tremendously too

I wouldn’t disagree but the three have done it on the back of considerable investment on their squads by backers to increase their on field success. 

  • Like 1
Posted

If the RFL have genuinely got comfortable with the information provided, this takeover happens, the cash comes in and all advances repaid then with hindsight this will look like the right thing to do.

if it all falls apart the serious questions that clearly exist will need to be answered properly and transparently (for once).

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, RS said:

I wouldn’t disagree but the three have done it on the back of considerable investment on their squads by backers to increase their on field success. 

So did Bradford and Keighley.

Posted
9 hours ago, The Daddy said:

You mean the time when they got promoted during a global pandemic and French citizens couldn't leave the house or attend a sports venue without having a vaccine passport? 

Add to the fact that they were told after winning promotion that they had to stump up 300-500,000 Euros to pay every clubs transport and accommodation fees for playing in the city which is a significant sum to stump up within weeks of preparing to start a new league.

You're being very ignorant about TO in this thread. You've also claimed that the club had financial problems last year. Care to substantiate any facts about that? 

Hmm. As usual, people get over sensitive as soon as there is any kind of criticism. 

There has been plenty of media about financial difficulties, I do accept that some of this is posturing to get council investment (sound familiar), as Catalans do this regularly to, so perfectly happy to acknowledge if there was never any financial issues at Toulouse, but media did claim there were.

And we don't need to make too many excuses for their maiden season. They didn't do it well. The 2022 season was a full season with 27 rounds and a World Cup in it, so we don't need to go down the route of being so defensive.

I'd handpick Toulouse for a SL any day of the week, I think they have the potential to be a major SL club, but we don't need to be so insecure that we can't accept their season in SL was lacklustre at best.

  • Haha 1
Posted
13 hours ago, Damien said:

I'd say Warrington, Hull KR and Leigh have all grown tremendously too

Looking at where they were and where they are today, Warrington have grown over decades, under careful stewardship and HKR grew because their owner hit the jackpot with defending people from the evil Post Office. Leigh are a case of local boy who loves the game coming good. FC have also grown since moving into the KC (a by product of the council’s wildly successful telecoms business I would say), and Huddersfield are huge compared to their 80s low points. Overall, since the inception of SL, many clubs have been transformed. 

  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Damien said:

So did Bradford and Keighley.

They did but to be fair there was a good element of marketing too

Posted (edited)

I’ll stay consistent to my viewpoint that I have held for years, the game in the UK cannot afford another french team in Super League currently. Clubs are in a perilous financial position as it is with the odd exception as we are currently seeing.

This is only my opinion and I know I will get the same old responses that it’s upto clubs to grow their own home attendances however, we (Leigh) have played 2 home games this season, Huddersfield Att 8500, Catalans 8000, if we had got Toulouse game 3 then that would have been 3 home games with a combined away attendance of around 300ish and that’s not sustainable for Rugby League.

The game is not strong enough to support it currently but Toulouse are in the IMG gradings so if they earn it they are in, I just fear that there will be a lot of noise around the costs involved. 

 

Edited by binosh
  • Like 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, binosh said:

I’ll stay consistent to my viewpoint that I have held for years, the game in the UK cannot afford another french team in Super League currently. Clubs are in a perilous financial position as it is with the odd exception as we are currently seeing.

This is only my opinion and I know I will get the same old responses that it’s upto clubs to grow their own home attendances however, we (Leigh) have played 2 home games this season, Huddersfield Att 8500, Catalans 8000, if we had got Toulouse game 3 then that would have been 3 home games with a combined away attendance of around 300ish and that’s not sustainable for Rugby League.

The game is not strong enough to support it currently but Toulouse are in the IMG gradings so if they earn it they are in, I just fear that there will be a lot of noise around the costs involved. 

 

But how much does it cost clubs? Realistically? I'd say that the club with the biggest potential fanbase currently playing outside of SL is Bradford. If they bring 1000 fans to an away game that's worth £25,000, and that's being generous. 

Are teams really so hard up that £25,000 per year is make or break? If it is we all might aswell just pack up and go home.

  • Like 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, binosh said:

I’ll stay consistent to my viewpoint that I have held for years, the game in the UK cannot afford another french team in Super League currently. Clubs are in a perilous financial position as it is with the odd exception as we are currently seeing.

This is only my opinion and I know I will get the same old responses that it’s upto clubs to grow their own home attendances however, we (Leigh) have played 2 home games this season, Huddersfield Att 8500, Catalans 8000, if we had got Toulouse game 3 then that would have been 3 home games with a combined away attendance of around 300ish and that’s not sustainable for Rugby League.

The game is not strong enough to support it currently but Toulouse are in the IMG gradings so if they earn it they are in, I just fear that there will be a lot of noise around the costs involved. 

 

I just don't get this. Toulouse (and Catalans) both have to pay all teams expenses when travelling to France. In terms of their away matches, obviously they have no fans but how many did London bring (next on the list) and for that matter Huddersfield and Salford bring hundreds at best so minimal financial gain from them in reality. Which replacement club from 13th down would bring more than 500 ? Bradford, maybe Widnes. How many away fans did Toronto get but they didn't moan about it. With total respect to you, the sport will just regress if it confines itself to the core areas. IMG and the NFL know this and like it or not Toulouse will be in next year. At least 4 of their tries yesterday were outstanding.

  • Like 2
Posted
11 minutes ago, MZH said:

But how much does it cost clubs? Realistically? I'd say that the club with the biggest potential fanbase currently playing outside of SL is Bradford. If they bring 1000 fans to an away game that's worth £25,000, and that's being generous. 

Are teams really so hard up that £25,000 per year is make or break? If it is we all might aswell just pack up and go home.

1000 fans would bring in around £15k as you have VAT to knock off plus a reduction as some will be £10 kids and some concessions. But yes I get your point 

Posted
1 minute ago, RS said:

1000 fans would bring in around £15k as you have VAT to knock off plus a reduction as some will be £10 kids and some concessions. But yes I get your point 

I did say I was being generous.

  • Like 1
Posted
54 minutes ago, binosh said:

I’ll stay consistent to my viewpoint that I have held for years, the game in the UK cannot afford another french team in Super League currently. Clubs are in a perilous financial position as it is with the odd exception as we are currently seeing.

This is only my opinion and I know I will get the same old responses that it’s upto clubs to grow their own home attendances however, we (Leigh) have played 2 home games this season, Huddersfield Att 8500, Catalans 8000, if we had got Toulouse game 3 then that would have been 3 home games with a combined away attendance of around 300ish and that’s not sustainable for Rugby League.

The game is not strong enough to support it currently but Toulouse are in the IMG gradings so if they earn it they are in, I just fear that there will be a lot of noise around the costs involved. 

 

When clubs start selling out home allocation every game, I'll have sympathy for them losing income due to poor away ticket sales. Want more income? Sell tickets to your own fans before worrying how many you can sell to others.

  • Like 10
Posted
59 minutes ago, binosh said:

I’ll stay consistent to my viewpoint that I have held for years, the game in the UK cannot afford another french team in Super League currently. Clubs are in a perilous financial position as it is with the odd exception as we are currently seeing.

This is only my opinion and I know I will get the same old responses that it’s upto clubs to grow their own home attendances however, we (Leigh) have played 2 home games this season, Huddersfield Att 8500, Catalans 8000, if we had got Toulouse game 3 then that would have been 3 home games with a combined away attendance of around 300ish and that’s not sustainable for Rugby League.

The game is not strong enough to support it currently but Toulouse are in the IMG gradings so if they earn it they are in, I just fear that there will be a lot of noise around the costs involved. 

 

I totally understand this... My big counter would be how much could their successful inclusion bring in.. and successful is key... 2 major french teams in the league etc what is the upside, how big could it be.

I don't think its possible to really know. It's a risk but maybe one worth taking maybe not. Personally I'd take it but that is 100% a personal risk call and I understand that. I also understand your position. It's really tough to know the right way to go on Thai. 14 with 2 french IMHO would be the way forward but I think that 2-3 years down the line. 

Posted
2 hours ago, binosh said:

I’ll stay consistent to my viewpoint that I have held for years, the game in the UK cannot afford another french team in Super League currently. Clubs are in a perilous financial position as it is with the odd exception as we are currently seeing.

This is only my opinion and I know I will get the same old responses that it’s upto clubs to grow their own home attendances however, we (Leigh) have played 2 home games this season, Huddersfield Att 8500, Catalans 8000, if we had got Toulouse game 3 then that would have been 3 home games with a combined away attendance of around 300ish and that’s not sustainable for Rugby League.

The game is not strong enough to support it currently but Toulouse are in the IMG gradings so if they earn it they are in, I just fear that there will be a lot of noise around the costs involved. 

 

Seriously, if clubs need the £15-20k they get from the away fans at one match a season (yes, that’s all we’re talking about, at most), then they shouldn’t be in the top league. 

Salford brought about 50 fans to Hull KR the other week. That’s a grand. We’d get that from selling one more table in the restaurant to a local business. 

We should have the best clubs, most able to be competitive, regardless of how many travelling fans we bring. Having well-resourced clubs fighting out close games is how we grow our revenues properly. 

  • Like 5
Posted
17 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Seriously, if clubs need the £15-20k they get from the away fans at one match a season (yes, that’s all we’re talking about, at most), then they shouldn’t be in the top league. 

Salford brought about 50 fans to Hull KR the other week. That’s a grand. We’d get that from selling one more table in the restaurant to a local business. 

We should have the best clubs, most able to be competitive, regardless of how many travelling fans we bring. Having well-resourced clubs fighting out close games is how we grow our revenues properly. 

Spot on, "growing our revenues" is the rising tide lifting all ships... We have to look at what everyone brings to the table.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, MZH said:

But how much does it cost clubs? Realistically? I'd say that the club with the biggest potential fanbase currently playing outside of SL is Bradford. If they bring 1000 fans to an away game that's worth £25,000, and that's being generous. 

Are teams really so hard up that £25,000 per year is make or break? If it is we all might aswell just pack up and go home.

If clubs can't afford one or two trips to France a season they really shouldn't be in Super League.

I'm sure one or two clubs in the Championship would like that option

Edited by lucky 7
  • Like 4
Posted
1 hour ago, lucky 7 said:

If clubs can't afford one or two trips to France a season they really shouldn't be in Super League.

I'm sure one or two clubs in the Championship would like that option

With loop fixtures, an unlucky club might be looking at 4 trips just in the league with loop fixtures, 6 if you get an equally unfortunate cup draw.

Posted
54 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

With loop fixtures, an unlucky club might be looking at 4 trips just in the league with loop fixtures, 6 if you get an equally unfortunate cup draw.

But it wouldn’t cost the ‘unlucky’ club any more than travelling to a team in the UK, as the French teams ridiculously have to foot the bill, so what is the problem?

I could understand the French clubs moaning as they would be massively out of pocket, but they don’t.

 

  • Like 4
Posted
On 09/03/2025 at 06:18, RS said:

I wouldn’t disagree but the three have done it on the back of considerable investment on their squads by backers to increase their on field success. 

You are correct, but the fact is that without this backing those clubs wouldn't be where they are now. So clubs who don't have that amount of backing, or in some cases don't have any at all are at a huge disadvantage compared to them. 

I'm only sorry for Salford that Koukash was not a patient man really and wanted success virtually straight away. It takes years to build success and it  is cyclical in sport, unless you are careful it can disappear as quickly as it appears! If the Doc had been still around Salford might have been starting to emerge as a bit of a force in the game now with that level of backing. 

2009 Warrington 25 Hudderfield 16

2010 Warrington 30 Leeds 6

2011 League Leaders Shield Winners

2012 Warrington 35 Leeds 18

Challenge cups and league leaders shields everywhere! We need more silver polish!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.