Agreed today.
Club sent a document on Friday that stated in this scenario "that the 12th club would be selected jointly by the RLF and SLE" (Gareth Walker).
Would do you want then?
I think Toulouse should be given a crack, a French derby.
Agreed today.
Club sent a document on Friday that stated in this scenario "that the 12th club would be selected jointly by the RLF and SLE" (Gareth Walker).
Would do you want then?
I think Toulouse should be given a crack, a French derby.
If they are going to look at expansion Toulouse would be a good shout and at least it generates some domestic rivalry for Catalans.
Toulouse is sensible expansion. A proven club in an RL area, should add more to the international game in developing France, should increase commercial/TV revenue from France and adds more local interest for Catalans.
"If you're going to strive for a change then you have to keep going upwards,"
Keiron Cunningham, 2016
Toulouse for me but I wish they had opted for a 14 team competition. I wonder how they will decide
I'm in the same camp. We should go back to a 14 team competition.
It’s totally pointless promoting Toulouse. Without a proper business plan between them, The RFL, Super League and the French Federation, they’ll be set up to fail as Toronto were. Given the late addition, they’d need a far bigger cap, relaxing of quota places, a guarantee against relegation and a space in the league for a minimum of 5 years.
That said, that sounds like too much hard work, so promote them anyway. It’s better than a day saver trip to Leigh.
St Helens Rugby League Football Club
I thought I remembered that the new TV contracts were split between SL and the rest, ie the Cup and internationals. I assume that the second and third tiers will get some revenue from that part of the contract, albeit a far lower amount. If Sky do offer around £30m and the 12 SL clubs take the lot that’ll be more per club than they’re getting now, so IMO they’ll take a lower deal if the money isn’t going to anyone but themselves. Sky will have worked that out and know what they’re doing in such discussions.
I assume the BBC will keep the Cup for £2m a year or something, and they’ve already signed a deal for the World Cup. How much of that money filters down to the lower leagues I’m not sure, but it won’t be a great deal.
Given the players Toulouse have been signing I’m wondering if they already know that they’re in.
"The great fallacy is that the game is first and last about winning. It is nothing of the kind. The game is about glory, it is about doing things in style and with a flourish, about going out and beating the other lot, not waiting for them to die of boredom." Danny Blanchflower.
Might have been written by a footballer about football - but never a truer word............
It will be down to financial stability in the end with each club in the running having to make a bid I suppose.
And, in yet another example of learning absolutely nothing from past mistakes, the new 12th SL club is apparently going to be operating on significantly less funding than the other 11 clubs. It would be unbelievable if it wasn’t also entirely predictable.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby...b-set-22961338
This is precisely the problem. As soon as you introduce a funding imbalance, you then have to start introducing all sorts of other artificial measures to account for it. Just either have a 12 team comp and share the funding fairly (my preferred option), or stick to 11.
Why should the RL and SL help the new club succeed? If they fail the authorities can prove they are up to the job by selecting another new team in a couple of years. They are talking approx 50K per cub less for the existing clubs, than if everyone is on an equal footing. That 50k could go toward Wakeys new stadium.
On the flip side of that, why should they help ensure their failure? I'm not suggesting that they should have special treatment, just that the 12 clubs in the league should be treated equally.
EDIT: I'm thinking I might have missed a hint of irony in your post - apologies if so!
The clubs need to have their voting rights taken from them for certain issues and a board (for a better word) need to make decisions on what is best for the game. Too many small minded owners and chairmen making decisions to benefit themselves. And it will carry on until someone/group make a stand and say enough is enough!
If Sunak is extending furlough until March that's a clear sign of the government's timetable, or is at least an acceptance that March is the earliest time that they expect things to improve. If we are thinking of starting the season in March I would be tempted to make March a Challenge Cup month and maybe play up to the QFs or even the SFs with limited crowds or empty stadiums. Then do home and away SL fixtures (22 rounds) and a Top 5 play off (with 2 weekends for the Cup Semi Finals and Final in June) over 28 weeks from the beginning of April until early October.
Clubs could sell 14 game season tickets giving access to the 11 home games, the Cup SF if they get there and 2 home play off games. If clubs only played the 11 give fans either a pro-rated discount or take it from their 2022 STs. It would maximise the potential for big Cup SF and play-off crowds and allow all clubs to get their full whack off the ST sales up front.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-league/55057985
Wood seems to think that 13 months without administration qualifies you for SL. I hope not.
Season to start 11th March
13 home/away games plus magic