Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 10:44 am  

atomic wrote:

Well the funding of a further 1/2 clubs in SL has to come from somewhere..What would you suggest?

I would suggest that if "somewhere" means taking the funding from the likes of the Championship, which would potentially ruin these clubs and everyone associated with them then divide the money already allocated to SL by 13 or 14 instead of 12 or don't add the extra club / clubs.

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 12:12 pm  

At the end of the day you either like it or loathe it. Did we agree to the doors being closed on SL in the name of expansion? Which clubs survived? Which clubs didn’t!


Did we agree to snatch the hand off Sly to support the game financially until 2021, although there was better offers in my eyes on the table, which would have promoted the game better.


Was the Super 8’s set up as a gateway to SL? The Super 8’s failed when Leigh gained promotion.


Now we are in 2017, we have a fulltime club that can’t make the top four of championship and an established SL club that faces possible relegation, again all in the name of expansion.


Anything and everything the governing body has tried is a failure. We have a self funding club across the pond that as shown more expansion in 12 months, than our own governing body as done in 20 years.


It is what it is. Without SL chairman, without SL the game is dead on all levels. I read a comment on here as in we are safe for another season with the funding. Is that progression? Or failure!

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 12:35 pm  

atomic wrote:

At the end of the day you either like it or loathe it. Did we agree to the doors being closed on SL in the name of expansion? Which clubs survived? Which clubs didn’t!


Did we agree to snatch the hand off Sly to support the game financially until 2021, although there was better offers in my eyes on the table, which would have promoted the game better.


Was the Super 8’s set up as a gateway to SL? The Super 8’s failed when Leigh gained promotion.


Now we are in 2017, we have a fulltime club that can’t make the top four of championship and an established SL club that faces possible relegation, again all in the name of expansion.


Anything and everything the governing body has tried is a failure. We have a self funding club across the pond that as shown more expansion in 12 months, than our own governing body as done in 20 years.


It is what it is. Without SL chairman, without SL the game is dead on all levels. I read a comment on here as in we are safe for another season with the funding. Is that progression? Or failure!

So what were these better offers then? I've seen absolutely zilch reported that any other broadcaster (or at least any that could provide serious funding) was interested. I also find you comments quite amusing when your own Club isn't self funding (even with the £1.6million or whatever it is from Sky) itself - Des has already moaned at least once this season about having to dip his hand into his pocket because not enough people are coming through the gates on match days.

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 1:02 pm  

If I remember at the time BT Sport put a tender in which was obviously lower than what was on the table from Sly,but they where offering much better coverage of the game,with the shortfall being made up with exposure and sponsorship on all levels, which would have seen all tiers benefitting.

I can't speak for Derek as he is only following the leaders so to speak. But I will say without Sly we have no game,with Sly the game is dying.

Edit: Sorry I was reffering to Toronto as being a self funding club as they receive no central funding.

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 1:17 pm  

atomic wrote:

At the end of the day you either like it or loathe it. Did we agree to the doors being closed on SL in the name of expansion? Which clubs survived? Which clubs didn’t!


Did we agree to snatch the hand off Sly to support the game financially until 2021, although there was better offers in my eyes on the table, which would have promoted the game better.


Was the Super 8’s set up as a gateway to SL? The Super 8’s failed when Leigh gained promotion.


Now we are in 2017, we have a fulltime club that can’t make the top four of championship and an established SL club that faces possible relegation, again all in the name of expansion.


Anything and everything the governing body has tried is a failure. We have a self funding club across the pond that as shown more expansion in 12 months, than our own governing body as done in 20 years.


It is what it is. Without SL chairman, without SL the game is dead on all levels. I read a comment on here as in we are safe for another season with the funding. Is that progression? Or failure!

All may be incredibly valid points but how will adding an extra club or two to SL and funding it by taking the money from the Championship positively change any of what you have mentioned and be sure that this will not be just another failure on a catastrophic level?
If the game without the SL is dead then how will it be alive if there is nothing else except SL?

This is maybe where I am going wrong because I was under the impression that we are not talking Super League and then the rest, but we are talking Rugby League with no distinction.

Now if it is Rugby League, this has a long history and sporting tradition in this country.

The RFL, SL clubs and their Chairman and all the other clubs and their Chairmen have a responsibility to look after that history and tradition and the game as a whole.

It is the whole game that is in their hands and not just SL, they are the strongest and should use that strength for the whole game.

The adding of extra clubs to SL at the expense of those outside SL is a failure to the game as a whole as it will weaken the game as a whole.

If it is now just Super League and that is what rugby league has now come to then they should say so, loud and clear, dissolve the game as it is currently known and form a completely new sport under a new name with the same 14 clubs playing each other each week with nothing underneath and the rest of us can just walk away from the game and find something else to do.

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 1:28 pm  

Mr Dog wrote:

So what were these better offers then? I've seen absolutely zilch reported that any other broadcaster (or at least any that could provide serious funding) was interested. I also find you comments quite amusing when your own Club isn't self funding (even with the £1.6million or whatever it is from Sky) itself - Des has already moaned at least once this season about having to dip his hand into his pocket because not enough people are coming through the gates on match days.

Only this week the press stated that although one in particular (IL from WN) wasn't happy about the deal when it was struck in today's climate where rugby league viewing figures are down it's a good thing the RFL aren't trying to negotiate now as they would be lucky to get anywhere near the same amount and the deal has turned out to be not that bad after all.
It wouldn't make any difference how much they got anyway, each SL club would just spend more on the same players, playing against the same teams on the same grounds to the same standard before the same crowds etc etc as they are now.
The game as a whole would not change, just that the same players would just have a bit more in the bank.

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 2:04 pm  

I'm surmising the question? Was asked on how to fund further additional clubs to SL. Only one replied,with an uneducated reply. That still doesn't answer the question on how to fund additional SL clubs. Nobody has said it should been taken from lower tiers,only a comment that was made that the good Doctor has picked up on.

Personally, the M62 corridor is all our heritage,it's our game.To put a Toulouse before a Fax is wrong.

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 2:34 pm  

[quote="atomic"]I'm surmising the question? Was asked on how to fund further additional clubs to SL. Only one replied,with an uneducated reply. That still doesn't answer the question on how to fund additional SL clubs. Nobody has said it should been taken from lower tiers,only a comment that was made that the good Doctor has picked up on.
Sorry but that is not accurate, more than one SL chairman has said take from the lower tiers and it wasn't just something that was picked up on.
If you read my first post it quotes what the reply was when MK specifically asked how the extra team / teams would be funded.
The specific reply was " it would be taken from the Championship".
One RL paper stated one person gave the answer another RL stated that more than one person were behind the proposal and the answer.
The people who proposed it were the same people who gave the answer.
It had clearly been thought through and they either didn't see the possible consequences or didn't care.

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 2:50 pm  

Ok,lets say the saviour of Rugby League being Super League have 12 votes.Nobody has voted,only proposals at this point.

Would you like an NRL structure and become a feeder club?

Re: The 13 Team Proposal. : Sat Jul 29, 2017 3:18 pm  

It's a shiiiiiiiite idea.

End of discussion.