Harlequins

[robjoenz]

the pieman posted:
I am pretty sure the fans of Workington, Barrow etc are all pretty P*ssed as well as they have not really had a sniff at super league

Town have had a sniff in the first season didn't they. Neither side has anything like the fans to support a franchise, you get more fans going to watch London. Barrow are very poor.

[damien morrissey]

I would prefer them to relegate the London club but come straight out and say we will leave them in the competition to enhance the diversity of the game but on the basis that they show consistant business operation.This would be the honest thing to do imo but will never happen.
The Aussie vs Kiwi game did well for two reasons 1.the only opportunity for the ANZAC tourists,immigrants to see the clash 2.London hs a bigger population of overseas workers.
The only thing i have to add to this is that the team are playing rugby and dont deserve to be in this situation but the club as a whole do.

[robjoenz]

damien morrissey posted:
I would prefer them to relegate the London club but come straight out and say we will leave them in the competition to enhance the diversity of the game but on the basis that they show consistant business operation.This would be the honest thing to do imo but will never happen.

They haven't actually been in any position to be relegated though.

[damien morrissey]

Yes i understand that but isnt the idea behind the franchise system meant to give the league more stability dont we deduct points for breaching salary cap rules to ensure financial security.Didnt this club nearly fold with 3mill of debt that the league bailed out hardly financial secure any deduction of points.The Aussie game as an example deducted the bulldogs all there points for breaching one account the salary it didnt in any way look like it was going to fold through constant mismanagement,this is the precident the aussies set but not the RFL.
All the financial problems being forgotten about because they have new owners seems a little silly because if they have formed a new club then shouldnt they have applied to enter the league.
The team as i have said the team doesnt deserve to be in this situation but shouldnt the league be consistant when punishing rule breakers.

[Mike]

Here is my take on this controversial subject (although I am happy to talk about this at length in the pub...)

Peronsally I welcome an uneven playing field for developing areas - after all Bradford (amongst others) continue to take advantage of the Kolpak ruling which is aimed at developing the South Sea Islands and other fledgling league nations.

To all those anti-Londonites on this thread (and speaking as an ex-Kent Invicta supporter): woud you rather see a 2020 Europa Challenge Cup final featuring Locomtiv Moscow vs Les Catalans watched by a crowd of thousands..... or a Challenge Cup final featuring Batley against Huddersfield Underbank watched by a few hundred?

In the media climate today sponsership, TV money and awareness are king, reguardless of the qualities of the sport. If we focus entirely on the heartlands - making sure no traditional team loses out - and we don't expand the reach and the profile of the game we may not have a professinoal sport for our childrens' generation to watch.

London has to stay in some form (and I hope that the Harequins are considered a Legaue setup in 5 years time), and other expansion teams (like the current South Wales setup) have to be supported until they are ready to enter meaningfull professional competition.

[robjoenz]

damien morrissey posted:
Yes i understand that but isnt the idea behind the franchise system meant to give the league more stability dont we deduct points for breaching salary cap rules to ensure financial security.Didnt this club nearly fold with 3mill of debt that the league bailed out hardly financial secure any deduction of points.The Aussie game as an example deducted the bulldogs all there points for breaching one account the salary it didnt in any way look like it was going to fold through constant mismanagement,this is the precident the aussies set but not the RFL.
All the financial problems being forgotten about because they have new owners seems a little silly because if they have formed a new club then shouldnt they have applied to enter the league.
The team as i have said the team doesnt deserve to be in this situation but shouldnt the league be consistant when punishing rule breakers.

Yes, I agree with what you say, however, the franchise thing doesn't come into play until 2009 I believe. London haven't broken the salary cap or finished in the relegation zone. As I said earlier on in this thread they should be forced to use a team of British players, although I can see this being difficult with most RL players being from the North and not wanting to move darn sarf. As in Mikes very good post look to the future and things are looking a lot better for RL in London.

[mike binder]

Mike posted:
Here is my take on this controversial subject (although I am happy to talk about this at length in the pub...)

Peronsally I welcome an uneven playing field for developing areas - after all Bradford (amongst others) continue to take advantage of the Kolpak ruling which is aimed at developing the South Sea Islands and other fledgling league nations.

To all those anti-Londonites on this thread (and speaking as an ex-Kent Invicta supporter): woud you rather see a 2020 Europa Challenge Cup final featuring Locomtiv Moscow vs Les Catalans watched by a crowd of thousands..... or a Challenge Cup final featuring Batley against Huddersfield Underbank watched by a few hundred?

In the media climate today sponsership, TV money and awareness are king, reguardless of the qualities of the sport. If we focus entirely on the heartlands - making sure no traditional team loses out - and we don't expand the reach and the profile of the game we may not have a professinoal sport for our childrens' generation to watch.

London has to stay in some form (and I hope that the Harequins are considered a Legaue setup in 5 years time), and other expansion teams (like the current South Wales setup) have to be supported until they are ready to enter meaningfull professional competition.

mike your right but on an equal playing field to us all,cant see this happening at any other sport like some 1 said why do we not let them start with 14 players .take 8 points off them they will survive and we may get in play offs

[Fraggle]

mike binder posted:
mike your right but on an equal playing field to us all,cant see this happening at any other sport like some 1 said why do we not let them start with 14 players .take 8 points off them they will survive and we may get in play offs

An equal playing field like the one that allowed us to work to a different salary cap to everyone else a couple of seasons ago? We (Wigan) can't talk about an equal playing field when we've had the rules bent for us on occasion.

[mike binder]

that was only because we had player contracts that we had to abide to ,that happens when you bring new rules in

[Fraggle]

mike binder posted:
that was only because we had player contracts that we had to abide to ,that happens when you bring new rules in

But the other clubs will also have had players under contract at that time. Sorry, but it's still a bit hypocritical of us to complain about a club receiving different treatment when we've been allowed to bend the rules in the past. Should we have been allowed to have a higher salary cap in exchange for losing a couple of points? I still think the bigger picture is that a strong RL presence in London is vital for the future of the sport when we've got lots of other sports strongly represented in the media. I'd hate us to be reduced to competing with things like kaber tossing in terms of getting TV coverage.