Re: Restructure part 2. : Tue Jun 27, 2017 2:27 pm  

griff1998 wrote:

Nod, maybe. But the notion that $uperleague clubs will chip in a few quid to finance them is difficult to believe.

However, as always, it's the clubs who make the decisions, not the RFL.

Exactly, so think it through.

We can believe it because it's the SL clubs (and therefore their notion) that are proposing to go to 13 or 14 teams which raises the interesting question where will the funding come from?

This must have been considered by the SL before putting that idea on the table for as you say there is no way they would have done so if it meant they would lose out, sitting on the branch with a saw comes to mind.

There is something going on behind the scenes that will take care of the above and not leave them out of pocket.

As a speculation.

Take Toronto for instance, would the owner have bothered to set up a club knowing the best they could ever achieve was Championship rugby?

Would the RFL ever have let them form if they new they would restrict them to Championship rugby which would likely lead to a pretty quick demise?

Will their funding be through some sort of sponsorship through Premier Sports and or Air Transat that picks up their tab?

Would the same apply through French TV for Toulouse?

Interesting times and it will show where the RFL, SL and the rest stand when it all comes out.

Re: Restructure part 2. : Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:35 pm  

Quite frankly I am totally confused by the 'strategic planning' of the SL clubs and the RFl.
How can you forever be tinkering with a sport format (even mid season!) and expect credibility, sponsorship,investment, sustained future growth from bottom up.
This just looks to me that the untouchables at the RFl and SL Chairmen are hell bent on a closed shop for the privilege few.
The remainder may well find themselves cast aside and perhaps even in a part time breakaway league structure comprising the unfashionable heartland clubs!
As has been said earlier let's re visit in 5 years time and see where the game as a whole is at.

Re: Restructure part 2. : Wed Jun 28, 2017 9:49 am  

So there are a host of issues that will need addressing.
Totnto's deal with Premier Sports - if they are promoted how does this work, probably Prem Sports will get sacked off once again in favour of Sky, likewise with Toulouse I guess.

SL teams - will they take less money, of course not.

More games - they are already moaning there are too many, I don't think the SL teams can come in at any later stage in the CC unless they play rock, paper, scissors until there are just two left and they join at the semi-final stage with two 'lesser' clubs with guarantee the SL clubs are kept apart.

Cynical, I think not, I'm with Mr Hall, sack the lot off as there really seems to be little for Fax to carry on for. Let the club fold and we can reminisce on past glories as that is all it looks like we will ever have.

Re: Restructure part 2. : Wed Jun 28, 2017 9:52 am  

Three years ago there was a huge pressure from supporters to go to twelves and eights, despite the Swiss soccer league (only ones to use it, sfaIaa) saying it was carp. If we hadn't made this change, we'd never have heard the end of it.

As it turns out, it's a nice fit from a competition point of view, but the financials aren't good at all. You don't know the fixtures for the last seven games of the season until July. Ground sharers are always second to soccer for their fixture date picks. Clubs who only sold season tickets for the twelve phase of the season made a huge mistake in thinking they could sell "mini season tickets" for the eight phase.

Toronto can only make their decision on the basis of the situation at the time they made that decision. If the door to $uperleague does close, they may just close the club down. Or they may not. They don't seem to be doing so bad at the moment, crowds still good, sponsorship healthy. Obviously there's a lot which hasn't been made public about their finances, so we'll never know.

The Sky contract is also a factor - it's based on twelves and eights and if there's to be a change before the contract runs out, Sky would need to agree because the RFL have an obligation to provide games on the twelves and eights format.

But - again - if there's some "plot" at Red Hall, it'll be at the instruction of the clubs. They are the masters and the RFL are the servants.

My preference would be for no change for 2018 and, if there is to be a change for 2019, for it to be announced before the 2018 season starts.

Re: Restructure part 2. : Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:03 am  

griff1998 wrote:

My preference would be for no change for 2018 and, if there is to be a change for 2019, for it to be announced before the 2018 season starts.

Agreed.

The 8's is Ok as long as you are in the ones that really mean anything. The Middle 8 when points are reset is the one with real interest. The top 8 works as long as there is a bit of hope that those below the 4 can make it in there, if you're 8-10 points adrift it's pointless, so to speak, same with the bottom 8 though there is always the relegation side of this which can make interesting watching,IF somebody is actually going to be relegated.

They could keep the 8's format but it might be split with Bottom 6 of SL and top 2 of Championship and the first 5 stay up and 6 & 7 are in the Million Pound game. No one cares how they then split the rest.

Re: Restructure part 2. : Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:03 am  

griff1998 wrote:

My preference would be for no change for 2018 and, if there is to be a change for 2019, for it to be announced before the 2018 season starts.

Only acceptable way...

Re: Restructure part 2. : Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:26 am  

mr t hall wrote:

Only acceptable way...

Absolutely it's the only way. You have players complaining about mental health due to the Million pound game etc. How does a sudden change in format help players make decisions on their careers when they don't know what the fudge is going on from one season to the next.

Would clubs have spent more money knowing that from next year it's a closed shop again.

If it does go back to a form of franchising then I am done, I watch SL on TV but really have no preference who wins as long as it's not Wigan, Leeds and Leigh, I could only watch fax but not in a meaningless competition. Franchising is purely for clubs with wealth to flash the cash and get in, Toronto, London and Toulouse and that'll be done!. Surely some of the chairman realise this, Wakefield for instance would be first out of the door!.

Re: Restructure part 2. : Wed Jun 28, 2017 12:16 pm  

griff1998 wrote:

Three years ago there was a huge pressure from supporters to go to twelves and eights, despite the Swiss soccer league (only ones to use it, sfaIaa) saying it was carp. If we hadn't made this change, we'd never have heard the end of it.

As it turns out, it's a nice fit from a competition point of view, but the financials aren't good at all. You don't know the fixtures for the last seven games of the season until July. Ground sharers are always second to soccer for their fixture date picks. Clubs who only sold season tickets for the twelve phase of the season made a huge mistake in thinking they could sell "mini season tickets" for the eight phase.

Toronto can only make their decision on the basis of the situation at the time they made that decision. If the door to $uperleague does close, they may just close the club down. Or they may not. They don't seem to be doing so bad at the moment, crowds still good, sponsorship healthy. Obviously there's a lot which hasn't been made public about their finances, so we'll never know.

The Sky contract is also a factor - it's based on twelves and eights and if there's to be a change before the contract runs out, Sky would need to agree because the RFL have an obligation to provide games on the twelves and eights format.

But - again - if there's some "plot" at Red Hall, it'll be at the instruction of the clubs. They are the masters and the RFL are the servants.

My preference would be for no change for 2018 and, if there is to be a change for 2019, for it to be announced before the 2018 season starts.

Spot on Griff.

The bit I highlight is the biggest problem to all the clubs. How do sell sponsorship for the games when you don't know when they are to be played, whether you are going to have 3 or 4 home games, how do you set up the pricing for executive boxes, season tickets, sort out advertising, etc. The casual fans will not necessarily leave the weekends blank to attend games.

On that basis you can see why some chairmen/chairwomen may be saying let's have 14 teams with a 27 game fixture list (13 guaranteed home games)

Re: Restructure part 2. : Wed Jun 28, 2017 1:21 pm  

Season tickets, you probably just need to take a view on where you're likely to finish. If you're right, great. If not, just take it on the chin.

This business of including three games and selling you another ticket at a discount if there are four games is an admin nightmare.

Re: Restructure part 2. : Wed Jun 28, 2017 1:26 pm  

griff1998 wrote:My preference would be for no change for 2018 and, if there is to be a change for 2019, for it to be announced before the 2018 season starts.

Got to be that way to give clubs / players any chance of planning ahead.