Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
-
- Posts: 1383
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 5:34 pm
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
just a quick comment on explaining the proposed conference
the majority have found it difficult enough to understand and explain to neutrals any of the combinations that have been used for play-offs. My head was spinning trying to read the conference plan (admittedly i get what he's getting to), but is it just another complex situation which is going to switch fans off?
i cant see some chairman buying into it as it stands as only 1 Wigan v Saints derby per year isnt going to please either chairman as its their big cash earner for the year with a full house. At the minute with the loop fixture 1 side will get 2 decent crowds, whereas under conference it will be only 1 game between us
he's obviously put quite a bit of thought into it and i think there appears to be some good points / ideas in there, but as with the one i highlighted above, would the clubs / chairmen buy into it
the majority have found it difficult enough to understand and explain to neutrals any of the combinations that have been used for play-offs. My head was spinning trying to read the conference plan (admittedly i get what he's getting to), but is it just another complex situation which is going to switch fans off?
i cant see some chairman buying into it as it stands as only 1 Wigan v Saints derby per year isnt going to please either chairman as its their big cash earner for the year with a full house. At the minute with the loop fixture 1 side will get 2 decent crowds, whereas under conference it will be only 1 game between us
he's obviously put quite a bit of thought into it and i think there appears to be some good points / ideas in there, but as with the one i highlighted above, would the clubs / chairmen buy into it
-
- Posts: 3267
- Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 2:01 pm
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
Read Shane Richardson's "thought starter" with interest. Get him involved.
Read Martyn Sadler ...up to the point where he lists the conferences. The man is a complete joke, I mean Leeds v Hunslet (etc etc) TWICE A SEASON!!!!
Not worth reading any more. It's just another daft idea of the kind that have got us to where we are now.
I stopped buying League Express years ago because of Sadler. There were good points on both sides of the debate about summer rugby which deserved to be heard. Sadler and LE were only interested in one side. If anyone said anything in favour of remaining a winter sport (like summer holidays mean smaller crowds, nowt else to do in winter, biggest crowds on Boxing Day) their views were censored, ignored or ridiculed: "Wouldn't you rather be watching in shirt sleeves?" sort of stuff.
Don't let Sadler anywhere near the game. He should put his own failing rag in order first.
Read Martyn Sadler ...up to the point where he lists the conferences. The man is a complete joke, I mean Leeds v Hunslet (etc etc) TWICE A SEASON!!!!
Not worth reading any more. It's just another daft idea of the kind that have got us to where we are now.
I stopped buying League Express years ago because of Sadler. There were good points on both sides of the debate about summer rugby which deserved to be heard. Sadler and LE were only interested in one side. If anyone said anything in favour of remaining a winter sport (like summer holidays mean smaller crowds, nowt else to do in winter, biggest crowds on Boxing Day) their views were censored, ignored or ridiculed: "Wouldn't you rather be watching in shirt sleeves?" sort of stuff.
Don't let Sadler anywhere near the game. He should put his own failing rag in order first.
Wigan Saints
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
I'm not really convinced by the 'prospective viewers are put off by the fact only a few teams ever win anything' argument. Is it that much different in football? And yet the Premiership thrives. Or, for that matter, the so-called 'complexity' of the rules. Rugby league is a simple and logical game. Much more so than rugby union, and they don't see the need to change their laws too much.
- Wigan_forever1985
- Posts: 6572
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
The game is simple the structures around it tend to be the most complex
Thing is with football that is simple whoever wins the most points in a season is champions therefore it’s a complete measure of success it rewards consistency not resting players weeks on end
Thing is with football that is simple whoever wins the most points in a season is champions therefore it’s a complete measure of success it rewards consistency not resting players weeks on end
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
I have often thought (to myself i would add) that a simple league structure is the best
But then have a kind of champions league competition too where the top 3 of super league and NRL are added, the finalists of the challenge cup and whatever domestic cup the australians have and make that the big play for, as an example.
It would also drive standards up as we would be directly competing against the NRL every year and for something that matters.
But then have a kind of champions league competition too where the top 3 of super league and NRL are added, the finalists of the challenge cup and whatever domestic cup the australians have and make that the big play for, as an example.
It would also drive standards up as we would be directly competing against the NRL every year and for something that matters.
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
Something like that was done years ago, but increasingly the Aussies just don't seem interested. A shame.culinator wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:52 pm I have often thought (to myself i would add) that a simple league structure is the best
But then have a kind of champions league competition too where the top 3 of super league and NRL are added, the finalists of the challenge cup and whatever domestic cup the australians have and make that the big play for, as an example.
It would also drive standards up as we would be directly competing against the NRL every year and for something that matters.
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
Quite a few on here suggest that the solution to the structure question is a straightforward winner takes all league.
How does that address the issue of every match being meaningful for teams that have no chance of winning after the first 1/3rd of the season?
And perhaps more importantly, how does it address the issues with promotion and relegation between a pro and semi-pro league?
I'd be interested because there does seem to be a clear preference for a simple league solution. But I can't see it solving some of the fundamental issues the game has.
How does that address the issue of every match being meaningful for teams that have no chance of winning after the first 1/3rd of the season?
And perhaps more importantly, how does it address the issues with promotion and relegation between a pro and semi-pro league?
I'd be interested because there does seem to be a clear preference for a simple league solution. But I can't see it solving some of the fundamental issues the game has.
-
- Posts: 3267
- Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 2:01 pm
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
Finding an ideal league structure will not address our problems such as falling gates and age profile of supporters, media coverage.
I don't think there is a simple answer but issues which are more central, in my opinion, are the international game, TV coverage, youth development, perception of "M62 corridor" sport.
As a gamble with no guarantees, I'd push for a deal with the BBC, even for less money than Sky, to raise public awareness of our great sport.
One more point - however unfair you might think it is, you can't ditch a GF that gets 60,000+ and gets us noticed. Turkeys voting for Christmas.
Finding an ideal league structure will not address our problems such as falling gates and age profile of supporters, media coverage.
I don't think there is a simple answer but issues which are more central, in my opinion, are the international game, TV coverage, youth development, perception of "M62 corridor" sport.
As a gamble with no guarantees, I'd push for a deal with the BBC, even for less money than Sky, to raise public awareness of our great sport.
One more point - however unfair you might think it is, you can't ditch a GF that gets 60,000+ and gets us noticed. Turkeys voting for Christmas.
Wigan Saints
- Wigan_forever1985
- Posts: 6572
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
So my preference is league takes all so I’ll give you my 2pMike wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 5:20 pm Quite a few on here suggest that the solution to the structure question is a straightforward winner takes all league.
How does that address the issue of every match being meaningful for teams that have no chance of winning after the first 1/3rd of the season?
And perhaps more importantly, how does it address the issues with promotion and relegation between a pro and semi-pro league?
I'd be interested because there does seem to be a clear preference for a simple league solution. But I can't see it solving some of the fundamental issues the game has.
On the every match mattering I think it makes every match matter more so than now. Let’s face it the league is a bit of a joke now it’s a peloton so to speak of teams keeping in touch - there is no surprise teams start the year have 5-6 out injured every game but come the play off the top teams start fielding full strength squads to close out the year. You couldn’t afford to take a game off if you were a top team aiming for the title because a slip is harder to recover from. At the moment none of the league games have any peril. As for the teams out of it they still have a part to play they can scalp a title team and that actually means something.
In practical sense you could have prize money based on position as an incentive for the club to carry on trying their best or qualification for something or cap exemption etc
On your second point I agree that’s harder but I don’t again see it as any different to now you still have to be top 4-6 to make anything of the season and mostly you have a couple of teams with no chance of that
For me I just think the playoff system completely devalues the season and that is the bit the clubs make money from for fans - think about it like the derby game in the season now can almost be skipped it carry’s no bragging rights and the teams are always under cooked - people will say yeah it doesn’t matter as long as we win the gf - but it would matter in a league system because beating them would actually shape yours and your rivals chances of winning the league
I would ask why would football not go down this route if it was better?
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure
Re: Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs
For better or worse, if you have a play-off system (as both RU and the NRL have, let's not forget), I don't think there's any going back to to a league-leader takes all set-up. It's just too much of a money-spinner. And yet somehow, it's only in SL that we hear all these complaints about fixtures not mattering. So why is that?