Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 186

Thread: 12 teams in Super League 2021 it is then

  1. #126
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Thick as thieves.

  2. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post
    Thick as thieves.
    pig shit too.

  3. #128
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Mmm. Strange one Dave, arrogant beyond contempt. You will know the types Dave, they only want to talk to those of use! But they know that limited audience in the RL world. It is the only sport where Beaumont at Leigh love him or loathe could say I will underpin Leigh with half a million pounds, and Wood talks about bringing stock cars to Odsal and a derby game against Leeds and he will win the day.

  4. #129
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post
    Mmm. Strange one Dave, arrogant beyond contempt. You will know the types Dave, they only want to talk to those of use! But they know that limited audience in the RL world. It is the only sport where Beaumont at Leigh love him or loathe could say I will underpin Leigh with half a million pounds, and Wood talks about bringing stock cars to Odsal and a derby game against Leeds and he will win the day.
    I was being facetious but I know exactly what you mean. I think we need to remember Leigh have a stadium that doesn't have facilities for stock car racing. What is does have is covered stands, toilets from this century, disabled viewing, corporate facilities and the added bonus of the pitch being in the same post code as the stands.

  5. #130
    In The West Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    5,517
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    The whole thing stinks.

    Never mind Toulouse, Fev are better equipped to have a dig at super league than Bradford.

    Elstone needs to get to grips with this & quickly

  6. #131
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Elstone and his crew are mercenaries. Too many bodies within the RFL and SL and the sport can't sustain them all. I suspect clubs like Wakey and HKR would be comfortable with part time squads if they still received the sky handouts. Bradford would if they get back in, Danny Brough is their star signing. I think many of you have said a race to the bottom.

  7. #132
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,189
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post
    Elstone and his crew are mercenaries. Too many bodies within the RFL and SL and the sport can't sustain them all. I suspect clubs like Wakey and HKR would be comfortable with part time squads if they still received the sky handouts. Bradford would if they get back in, Danny Brough is their star signing. I think many of you have said a race to the bottom.
    I didn't know of Elstone until his appointment. The way he was trumped up I expected him to bring something to the game, rather than selling ownership of the game to outside interests. He really comes across as someone that should be in PR rather than General Mgt. Everytime he see him or hear him, the term Paper Tiger comes to mind.

  8. #133
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    The Heath
    Posts
    257
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    I didn't know of Elstone until his appointment. The way he was trumped up I expected him to bring something to the game, rather than selling ownership of the game to outside interests. He really comes across as someone that should be in PR rather than General Mgt. Everytime he see him or hear him, the term Paper Tiger comes to mind.
    Time for the Hearn dynasty methinks!

  9. #134
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    You just have to look at how the 12th team will be picked to see what is happening. When it’s Toronto it’s down to the clubs to decide, but when it’s down to who replaces them it’s a ‘panel’. Why is there a difference between allowing clubs to decide on whether Toronto are the 12th club and then deciding who should be instead? It will be the other 11 who will share revenue and a competition with them, and if they were trusted to decide on Toronto they should be trusted to decide on Toulouse, Bradford or whoever.

    If this were left to the clubs and the owners Bradford wouldn’t have a chance. None of the Lancashire clubs would pick them, and I don’t think the likes of Hudds, Wakefield or Cas would want them around competing for fans or revenue either. Only Leeds would want them for obvious selfish reasons, but who else would want them? On the other hand, the merits of Toulouse would IMO command decent support across the board, whilst I think Leigh, York, etc would basically be a county split and would cancel each other out. But when I see the way the ‘panel’ has been decided I now completely retract my earlier comments that I’d be amazed if it weren’t Toulouse. I’ll now be amazed if it is.

  10. #135
    Got A Season Ticket The Meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    128
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    The whole thing stinks.

    Never mind Toulouse, Fev are better equipped to have a dig at super league than Bradford.

    Elstone needs to get to grips with this & quickly
    Totally agree that Fev should be considered as first option.
    They were runners up to Wolfpack last season - and as long as they are financially viable - they should be in SL next year.
    “With great power comes great responsibility”

  11. #136
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Meister View Post
    Totally agree that Fev should be considered as first option.
    They were runners up to Wolfpack last season - and as long as they are financially viable - they should be in SL next year.
    On sporting merit, definitely. But we’ve gone well past the stage were sporting merit dictates the structure of the game. The failures of RL in the past 25 years shine brightly when we see a traditional club deprived of the natural progression they should be allowed because we need to promote clubs for other reasons. Featherstone will be nobbled not because of anything they’ve done wrong but because of what Castleford, Wakefield and co have failed to do. The thought of another small town Yorkshire club in SL is frowned upon because Cas and Wakefield have done nothing to up their game off the field, and so Featherstone will have to suffer as a consequence.

    It’s an alien concept to me to be honest. We never had to worry about whether the promoted side got good crowds or whether they were the ‘right name’, it wasn’t an issue. You went up and down on merit, but things have changed. We moved the goalposts and tried to make the game something it wasn’t, and all the failed attempts at manufacturing SL to be something it wasn’t have meant that merit is now an out-moded concept that other sports live by but we ignore.

  12. #137
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,592
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Season to start 11th March
    13 home/away games plus magic

  13. #138
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,878
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulscnthorpe View Post
    Season to start 11th March
    13 home/away games plus magic
    Would have preferred early April start with 23 games (home+ away +magic) especially if Covid is in a 3rd wave in the new year. ........... Wonder if the club announces season ticket sales next week.

  14. #139
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,592
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    Would have preferred early April start with 23 games (home+ away +magic) especially if Covid is in a 3rd wave in the new year. ........... Wonder if the club announces season ticket sales next week.
    After this year the clubs will be even more desperate for games..

    I'd expect season tickets to be out soon, hopefully the fixtures will be early enough so people can look at getting Catalans and possibly Toulouse trips booked

  15. #140
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Wirral
    Posts
    2,662
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    On sporting merit, definitely. But we’ve gone well past the stage were sporting merit dictates the structure of the game. The failures of RL in the past 25 years shine brightly when we see a traditional club deprived of the natural progression they should be allowed because we need to promote clubs for other reasons. Featherstone will be nobbled not because of anything they’ve done wrong but because of what Castleford, Wakefield and co have failed to do. The thought of another small town Yorkshire club in SL is frowned upon because Cas and Wakefield have done nothing to up their game off the field, and so Featherstone will have to suffer as a consequence.

    It’s an alien concept to me to be honest. We never had to worry about whether the promoted side got good crowds or whether they were the ‘right name’, it wasn’t an issue. You went up and down on merit, but things have changed. We moved the goalposts and tried to make the game something it wasn’t, and all the failed attempts at manufacturing SL to be something it wasn’t have meant that merit is now an out-moded concept that other sports live by but we ignore.
    Spot on.

  16. #141
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishy3005 View Post
    Leeds v Bradford regularly got over 20 thousand spectators in the late 90’s, early 00’s. Wasn’t Leeds suing over Iestyn Harris the final nail in Bradfords coffin? If so it was a dumb move on Leeds part.
    Bratfud's success had its foundations built of blancmange, though. They got good crowds, but their ticket pricing was ridiculous and unsustainable. I think season tickets came free with a bag of crisps and thousands of tickets were given away through schools and other organisations.

    It's a great marketing gimmick to whip-up interest in the short-term, but Bratfud did it for years. The result was that instead of a club with one of the highest average attendances having strong finances, they had amongst the worst balance sheets and, when their hubris over the Harris incident cost them big, it began a downward spiral. As soon as they started cutting back on the playing roster, performances dipped, their Johnny-cum-lately fans stopped being bothered even with free or cut-price tickets, income fell further, the player budget was cut further, repeat and repeat until it's no longer viable as a business and *pop*

  17. #142
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Odsal is at the centre of all this. Redevelopment warehouses potential at some point. Wood only goes where greed can be fulfilled. Sadly I think they have decided now. Look at the panel? Rhodri Jones, bagman for Wood at the RFL. Don't worry they went to Dewsbury for a reason. The sport is a shambles at best and far far worse in reality.

  18. #143
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    On sporting merit, definitely. But we’ve gone well past the stage were sporting merit dictates the structure of the game. The failures of RL in the past 25 years shine brightly when we see a traditional club deprived of the natural progression they should be allowed because we need to promote clubs for other reasons. Featherstone will be nobbled not because of anything they’ve done wrong but because of what Castleford, Wakefield and co have failed to do. The thought of another small town Yorkshire club in SL is frowned upon because Cas and Wakefield have done nothing to up their game off the field, and so Featherstone will have to suffer as a consequence.

    It’s an alien concept to me to be honest. We never had to worry about whether the promoted side got good crowds or whether they were the ‘right name’, it wasn’t an issue. You went up and down on merit, but things have changed. We moved the goalposts and tried to make the game something it wasn’t, and all the failed attempts at manufacturing SL to be something it wasn’t have meant that merit is now an out-moded concept that other sports live by but we ignore.

    As a sport we are just about keeping the status of full-time in this country. That is only viable on the back of a TV deal. That TV deal is only available as long as sufficient numbers of viewers watch it. The potential number of viewers is enhanced by not barricading ourselves as a provincial novelty sport 'oop north', and instead looking to new markets. We need to keep the sport looking vibrant and interesting to attract interest from outside the heartlands. Part of that is stage-managing which clubs are involved in our showcase competition.

    It's far from ideal, and I wish we could have the sort of national interest that football enjoys and the financial security that accompanies this, to be able to run full promotion & relegation with financially healthy and well-supported teams battling it out in the division below for a berth in the top tier. But we don't.

    The worst case scenario for RL in the UK is to have small pit-villages and other minor northern towns yo-yo'ing between divisions with crowds of 2-3000. That would see national and media interest wane even further, leading to a much-reduced TV deal and almost certainly the return to semi-pro for that vast majority of clubs. That in turn would see the best players be tempted away by the NRL and RU who can offer full-time pro contracts, whilst RL becomes even less attractive to quality youngsters. The quality of our competition depletes further, our international game crumbles.

    IMO, licensing has drawbacks, but these are outweighed by advantages.

    The key is to find a way to stop the second tier being viewed so negatively, and more as a great competition in its own right.

  19. #144
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    Bratfud's success had its foundations built of blancmange, though.
    Being at uni in Sheffield in 2001-04 at the height of Bullmania I knew alot of people who claimed to be Bulls fans. One was a proper fan, loved chatting RL with him, and I'm still mates with him now, but hardly any others knew a thing about their history or about the culture of the game. It all struck me as a phase, which if kept going with trophies could be sustained in the medium term but didn't have a real chance of long term success. It's why I never really cared about Bradford other than as a trophy rival for a short time. They were definitely a club with history and gravitas but they punched massively over their weight. I always looked at them as being like Hull KR or Widnes, namely famous clubs who would have periods of success when everything clicked, but would always be below the level of the proper big clubs like Wigan, Leeds and Hull. Had they lived as a club happy to get 7-8,000 a game and having their moments of glory whilst not bankrolling themselves into oblivion I imagine they'd still be in SL, sitting around the Huddersfield level with bigger crowds and playing an important role. But they aimed far higher than they could really manage in the long term.

  20. #145
    In The South Stand Paul Newlove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,655
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    It was impressive with 20,000 on at Odsal I must admit but it did go belly up no doubt. I don't like the way SL expansion is set up, its all about 12 clubs as we can't attract more money into the game. Instead of encouraging clubs with ambition we are squashing them because we've only got room for one more club financially .
    Automatic promotion and relegation should stop relegating clubs does them no good, the next Sky deal should be negotiated for SLE alone and nothing else if we are getting less money, the Championship has the potential to be a exciting viable part time professional league in its own right that should be available to BT or ITV even Channel bloody 5.
    What governing body allows a TV company to own the broadcasting rights to a competition and not show it. Its absolutely comical. The game can develop at Championship level also. Someone needs to takeover the SL and run with it. We keep ourselves down, so many examples even just sponsorship deals.. I despair

  21. #146
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    As a sport we are just about keeping the status of full-time in this country. That is only viable on the back of a TV deal. That TV deal is only available as long as sufficient numbers of viewers watch it. The potential number of viewers is enhanced by not barricading ourselves as a provincial novelty sport 'oop north', and instead looking to new markets. We need to keep the sport looking vibrant and interesting to attract interest from outside the heartlands. Part of that is stage-managing which clubs are involved in our showcase competition.

    It's far from ideal, and I wish we could have the sort of national interest that football enjoys and the financial security that accompanies this, to be able to run full promotion & relegation with financially healthy and well-supported teams battling it out in the division below for a berth in the top tier. But we don't.

    The worst case scenario for RL in the UK is to have small pit-villages and other minor northern towns yo-yo'ing between divisions with crowds of 2-3000. That would see national and media interest wane even further, leading to a much-reduced TV deal and almost certainly the return to semi-pro for that vast majority of clubs. That in turn would see the best players be tempted away by the NRL and RU who can offer full-time pro contracts, whilst RL becomes even less attractive to quality youngsters. The quality of our competition depletes further, our international game crumbles.

    IMO, licensing has drawbacks, but these are outweighed by advantages.

    The key is to find a way to stop the second tier being viewed so negatively, and more as a great competition in its own right.
    Standing here in 2020 you're probably right, and all I can do is counter-factually rewrite the mistakes of our recent past to suggest that it didn't need to be that way. I'm not convinced by the argument that any sports succeed based upon the quality or make up of its bottom sides. Success is based on the best teams and how good they are. We have Wigan, Saints, Leeds, Hull who are famous names and who can all attract five figure crowds in decent stadiums (some not their own obviously), and we have less well known (nationally) clubs like Warrington who can also do this. The future of our sport is linked to the viability of those big clubs to punch their weight and create big games and big title races every season. We created so many hurdles for the biggest and best clubs to jump that we are now looking at manufacturing the league to make up for the mistakes we made in reducing the power and marketing potential of what we have at the top.

    TV ratings didn't decline because we have Wakefield or Salford in the SL. They declined because we messed with the system and diluted the importance of the games between the big sides. We implemented ridiculous play off systems that meant that Leeds v Wigan on a Friday night in July became a completely pointless game in the eyes of neutrals or would-be fans. We had a broadcaster telling their viewers that the race for 8th was more important than the race for 1st, and priority was given to ensuring that the very clubs that should make up the numbers became the clubs that were pampered and told they'd achieved something by passing a manufactured bar in a play off system, whilst the sides at the top that generate the tv deal and generate the crowds were playing games nowhere near as important as they should have been. Stick a top 5, 6 or 8 team play off in the PL and see if the viewing figures for Liverpool v Man City 9-10 weeks into the season hold up. Tell the world that the real race is between Everton and Wolves to get the 6th or 8th spot and see how neutrals react to the reality that the 'Big 6 blockbusters' are meaningless because they'll all make the play-offs regardless. It isn't like that, and so Liverpool v Man City is huge 9-10 weeks into a season because every point counts, and nobody views the title race based on whether Brighton or West Brom are pulling their weight, because in reality it doesn't matter.

    Nobody has ever been offered a contract by a top 6 PL club and turned it down because they don't want to play at 'Stoke on a wet Wednesday night'. They sign the deal because they want to play massive games against Liverpool, United, Chelsea, City that have importance.

    Imagine when we were both kids and we'd been told that one day these amazing title races that we saw in the 80s would never happen again. What would we consider the possible reasons why that would be the case.

    No money? No, there's more money in the game now.
    Players not getting paid? No, they're all full time now.
    Grounds falling to pieces and the game imploding? No, most big clubs play in modern grounds and get bigger gates than back then.
    No interest? No, we have a tv deal unlike back then when hardly any games were on tv.

    So, we got to the mid-90s, we still had really good title races, we moved to summer, we were seeing crowds rising, etc. Did anybody care that the league had clubs like Workington, Halifax and Oldham in it then? Why did Sky invest in a league with those clubs in back then? Because they were irrelevant. They bought in because we had Wigan, Leeds, Saints and for a time Bradford at the top of the game, and the top of the game was vibrant and exciting. Hull weren't even in SL in the first year, but nobody really cared because the top of the league was solid and was producing drama. But over the 25 years since we (and Sky) devised system after system to reduce the drama at the top, to handcuff the top teams with salary caps and play-off systems, all to make the game more 'exciting from top to bottom'. Relegation battles are exciting, but we didn't want them because it was more important to prioritise pandering to those clubs and giving them hope rather than making them earn their position in a sport were they were already given manufactured leg-ups via the structure of the season and the salary cap. Title races are exciting, but we didn't want them because 3-4 clubs at the top meant that the mediocrities couldn't be told they were achieving something, so we changed it all to make them feel more important.

    It's ended up with our sport having month after month of games every season that are nowhere near as important as they should be. When we play Wigan or Wire it's big for us tribally, but does a fan in Leeds or Hull really care? When Leeds play Hull do we really care? And if not, why not? Why aren't the games between the biggest clubs as important as they used to be? Could it be because we have a league structure that diminishes the value of 2 points and diminishes the value in fighting for top spot? If we don't care why should anyone else? If Sky are telling us that it's boring if the same teams win the GF every year and that it'd be great if a team won it from 8th (which they said often), and then told us that it was wonderful that Leeds won it from 5th and told us with a straight face that it meant they were the best team in the league that year, why would anyone get invested in the weekly rounds? There are long time fans who shrug off a regular season defeat now as if we've lost a friendly, and there are loads on here who will put up with boring RL every week as long as we win the GF. If the system and the structure inspires apathy from some of us, what chance do we have getting others involved. We had a chance in the mid-90s to take all the good bits about the RL we grew up with, to modernise it, professionalise it and build from it, with clubs that had history and gravitas that could grow even bigger with a tv deal and a move to summer. But we blew it, because we stopped prioritising the best bits of the competition in favour of the mediocre bits. There has to always be mediocre bits, that's life, and we should never want a comp where everyone wins 50% and loses 50% because that would frankly mean everyone was mediocre. Some will thrive, some will struggle, but the ones that thrive will generate the crowds and the tv revenue much like Leicester, Bath, Exeter and Saracens generated tv revenue for RU even if Newcastle and London Irish went up and down every season in front of poor crowds.

    When you prioritise the mediocre they became the thing everyone obsesses over, and so the make up of the mediocre becomes the thing that we think drives the success of the game. So we get worked up over whether we have Featherstone in the league when in reality it should be irrelevant if Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Hull and Warrington are playing huge games every weekend in modern stadia in front of decent crowds in a league structure that prioritises the top of the league and not the bottom. But, it's all counter-factual I know, but it was there for us and we ballsed it up.

  22. #147
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Just a bit about the History of Bradford, they first went bankrupt in 1964 with the last crowd being 324 within Odsal. Just a strange club and a strange City. They have had strong periods but for me like Wakey, I personally think enough is enough. Wood saying we shouldnt be judged on our past? Widnes are saying they are not credible at present due to how they have been mismanaged.

    The only brave and right decision is Toulouse. Lets be honest they bring an empty away end. How many do Huddersfield/Wakey bring or have ever brought? Salford this season actually came with a good support which was nice to see. I will add London in the right stadium, not that thing they are in now.

  23. #148
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    547
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulscnthorpe View Post
    Season to start 11th March
    13 home/away games plus magic
    As it will be a 12 team league how will they get 13 home/away games ??

  24. #149
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,592
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mufcsaint View Post
    As it will be a 12 team league how will they get 13 home/away games ??
    Loop fixtures

  25. #150
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    Standing here in 2020 you're probably right, and all I can do is counter-factually rewrite the mistakes of our recent past to suggest that it didn't need to be that way. I'm not convinced by the argument that any sports succeed based upon the quality or make up of its bottom sides. Success is based on the best teams and how good they are. We have Wigan, Saints, Leeds, Hull who are famous names and who can all attract five figure crowds in decent stadiums (some not their own obviously), and we have less well known (nationally) clubs like Warrington who can also do this. The future of our sport is linked to the viability of those big clubs to punch their weight and create big games and big title races every season. We created so many hurdles for the biggest and best clubs to jump that we are now looking at manufacturing the league to make up for the mistakes we made in reducing the power and marketing potential of what we have at the top.

    TV ratings didn't decline because we have Wakefield or Salford in the SL. They declined because we messed with the system and diluted the importance of the games between the big sides. We implemented ridiculous play off systems that meant that Leeds v Wigan on a Friday night in July became a completely pointless game in the eyes of neutrals or would-be fans. We had a broadcaster telling their viewers that the race for 8th was more important than the race for 1st, and priority was given to ensuring that the very clubs that should make up the numbers became the clubs that were pampered and told they'd achieved something by passing a manufactured bar in a play off system, whilst the sides at the top that generate the tv deal and generate the crowds were playing games nowhere near as important as they should have been. Stick a top 5, 6 or 8 team play off in the PL and see if the viewing figures for Liverpool v Man City 9-10 weeks into the season hold up. Tell the world that the real race is between Everton and Wolves to get the 6th or 8th spot and see how neutrals react to the reality that the 'Big 6 blockbusters' are meaningless because they'll all make the play-offs regardless. It isn't like that, and so Liverpool v Man City is huge 9-10 weeks into a season because every point counts, and nobody views the title race based on whether Brighton or West Brom are pulling their weight, because in reality it doesn't matter.

    Nobody has ever been offered a contract by a top 6 PL club and turned it down because they don't want to play at 'Stoke on a wet Wednesday night'. They sign the deal because they want to play massive games against Liverpool, United, Chelsea, City that have importance.

    Imagine when we were both kids and we'd been told that one day these amazing title races that we saw in the 80s would never happen again. What would we consider the possible reasons why that would be the case.

    No money? No, there's more money in the game now.
    Players not getting paid? No, they're all full time now.
    Grounds falling to pieces and the game imploding? No, most big clubs play in modern grounds and get bigger gates than back then.
    No interest? No, we have a tv deal unlike back then when hardly any games were on tv.

    So, we got to the mid-90s, we still had really good title races, we moved to summer, we were seeing crowds rising, etc. Did anybody care that the league had clubs like Workington, Halifax and Oldham in it then? Why did Sky invest in a league with those clubs in back then? Because they were irrelevant. They bought in because we had Wigan, Leeds, Saints and for a time Bradford at the top of the game, and the top of the game was vibrant and exciting. Hull weren't even in SL in the first year, but nobody really cared because the top of the league was solid and was producing drama. But over the 25 years since we (and Sky) devised system after system to reduce the drama at the top, to handcuff the top teams with salary caps and play-off systems, all to make the game more 'exciting from top to bottom'. Relegation battles are exciting, but we didn't want them because it was more important to prioritise pandering to those clubs and giving them hope rather than making them earn their position in a sport were they were already given manufactured leg-ups via the structure of the season and the salary cap. Title races are exciting, but we didn't want them because 3-4 clubs at the top meant that the mediocrities couldn't be told they were achieving something, so we changed it all to make them feel more important.

    It's ended up with our sport having month after month of games every season that are nowhere near as important as they should be. When we play Wigan or Wire it's big for us tribally, but does a fan in Leeds or Hull really care? When Leeds play Hull do we really care? And if not, why not? Why aren't the games between the biggest clubs as important as they used to be? Could it be because we have a league structure that diminishes the value of 2 points and diminishes the value in fighting for top spot? If we don't care why should anyone else? If Sky are telling us that it's boring if the same teams win the GF every year and that it'd be great if a team won it from 8th (which they said often), and then told us that it was wonderful that Leeds won it from 5th and told us with a straight face that it meant they were the best team in the league that year, why would anyone get invested in the weekly rounds? There are long time fans who shrug off a regular season defeat now as if we've lost a friendly, and there are loads on here who will put up with boring RL every week as long as we win the GF. If the system and the structure inspires apathy from some of us, what chance do we have getting others involved. We had a chance in the mid-90s to take all the good bits about the RL we grew up with, to modernise it, professionalise it and build from it, with clubs that had history and gravitas that could grow even bigger with a tv deal and a move to summer. But we blew it, because we stopped prioritising the best bits of the competition in favour of the mediocre bits. There has to always be mediocre bits, that's life, and we should never want a comp where everyone wins 50% and loses 50% because that would frankly mean everyone was mediocre. Some will thrive, some will struggle, but the ones that thrive will generate the crowds and the tv revenue much like Leicester, Bath, Exeter and Saracens generated tv revenue for RU even if Newcastle and London Irish went up and down every season in front of poor crowds.

    When you prioritise the mediocre they became the thing everyone obsesses over, and so the make up of the mediocre becomes the thing that we think drives the success of the game. So we get worked up over whether we have Featherstone in the league when in reality it should be irrelevant if Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Hull and Warrington are playing huge games every weekend in modern stadia in front of decent crowds in a league structure that prioritises the top of the league and not the bottom. But, it's all counter-factual I know, but it was there for us and we ballsed it up.

    Hard to argue with any of that.

    Back in the mid-/late-90's and even up to the mid-00's, we certainly had an entertainment product that was vibrant, confident and in the ascendency.

    It's verging on the criminal how those running the sport, through a range of rule changes both on and off the pitch, have taken the sport backwards to the ramshackle position it is now in.

    One aspect I do think needs to be kept in mind is how those powers-that-be repeatedly talked about improving the competitiveness of the national team when announcing some of the most important changes. The salary cap was brought in ostensibly to try to 'even up' the league so that there were fewer walkover games and so players would be more used to playing at a higher level of intensity week after week. Allowing the slowing of the PTB (that IMO has played the biggest part in decreasing the entertainment aspect of the sport) was done, they said, to get players having to work harder for territory and breaks like they'd face in an Ashes Test.

    Looking at the England/GB team now, and we're no closer to Australia (last WC Final was akin to parking the bus in football with 10 men behind the ball at all times and thinking a 1-0 defeat with no shots on target is better than a 3-1 loss where you gave it a go)

    So in effect they've ruined the sport for nothing.

    But at least by removing one of the cornerstones of Saints' attacking prowess, they stopped us winning another handful of titles.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •