Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 6:44 pm  

I agree change is needed, but not sure this proposed 10 team league is supposed to go.

He guarantees Saints, Wigan, Warrington and Leeds a place.

Then a team from Hull, hypothetically let’s assume it’s Hull.

Then suggests Wales, York, London and Newcastle, bringing a collective core support of 5,000 with very limited away support. These would all be given a place at the expense of Rovers (average crowd c7,000+; away following 1,000+. What would any of those four teams bring to the league more than Rovers currently offer? When would the small city if York hope to eclipse these numbers

Then Castleford, at Wembley on Saturday, relegated because we need to set up a team in Wales again, or would a 40 year old nomadic London team suddenly grin the Capital’s imagination?

Newcastle? Competing against a default of football passsion. Newcastle RU have been established for the past 25 years, what’s their following? Could that be eclipsed?

I appreciate something needs to change, but don’t destroy the core at the expense of small clubs with a history of unsuccessful attempts to gain a foothold in the game.

Is there going to be promotion and relegation? If so, within four seasons you might have Rovers, Cas, Wakefield and Bradford replacing the above four teams fast tracked into the league. If so, why bother putting them there in the first place.

I’d be more inclined to extend the league and partly replicate the NRL. I’d go with a 14 club league, 26 matches, no Magic. I’d start with the existing 14, plus Toulouse and Bradford. I’d ring fence those teams initially for three years, except Xas and Wakefield (who would get 2 years, with the third year subject to improving their ground). That would give stability for all those teams. It would also allow other clubs like York, Newcastle, Wales etc to present a case to join the league and also allow a revitalised Toronto, New York or a Coventry, Bristol etc to join to.

All teams would need to run an Academy team. After two/three years teams could apply to join either replacing any failing club, or as an addition up to 16 clubs.
Sky money would be spread more thinly, but fixture lists could be simplified. Two Sky games per week, with a return to fixtures on a Sunday afternoon allowing more away fans to travel.

Any solution will have its challenges, but let’s not destroy our game by removing 3-4 established teams and replace them with proven failed clubs.

[Chris71]

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:05 pm  

ccs wrote:

Chris71 wrote:

There in lies the issues the sport faces that is likely the case and that way of looking at it is why the sport is slowly killing itself off. They only seem to look at what they will lose out on rather than look at the possibilities and extra revenue that a 14 team set up could bring in. In essence its a professional sport run by amateurs and with all the business savvy within the game its mind boggling that none of them can see or agree on the best options for the sport.

For me personally a league of 10 teams just isn't enough for a meaningful league and wouldn't do much for the sport, I think I'd probably call it a day if it went down that route. All it does is further reduce the appeal and game itself.

SKY money is being reduced by 30% next year, debts are mounting at an alarming rate, and you think the sport can survive with even more teams?

Top be honest I think the game has more chance of surviving with more teams than it does with just 10. Making it a 10 team league is short sighted once again and for me lessens the appeal to sponsors and new fans and the chance to get more revenue in. I was once heavily involved in the Ice Hockey and this was the biggest issue in trying to attract sponsors and get money in as there just wasn't enough interest in small leagues.

The games already struggling to gain any real impact in terms of major sponsors so reducing the sport further will in my experience do more damage and it will be very difficult to come back from it. This is part of the problem that it all comes down to greed and an over reliance on the SKY funding which is why the game is on its booty.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:26 pm  

You may well be right, maybe that's why a number of key players contracts haven't been announced, everyone is waiting to see who can afford what.

Something tells me 10 teams = a merger.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:56 pm  

ccs wrote:

You may well be right, maybe that's why a number of key players contracts haven't been announced, everyone is waiting to see who can afford what.

Something tells me 10 teams = a merger.

Crazy to go down the merger route. So they’d merge Hull and Rovers, so that we could play away at York on Good Friday in front of a record 4,000 fans or 1,500 fans in London; or 1,000 in Wales.

If mergers are part of the future solution, let’s start by merging St Helens and Wigan, and see if everyone else thinks mergers are a good idea for the game?

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:01 pm  

I didn't say it was a good idea, but one team in SL means no derby games anyway.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:32 pm  

ccs wrote:

I didn't say it was a good idea, but one team in SL means no derby games anyway.

I don’t think any one would think a merger was a good thing.

I’d never want just one Hull team in SL either. I love our rivalry and love the Derbies.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:58 pm  

I actually think 10 teams would be OK if only it meant a bigger international calender

The sport needs to be on BBC more only hardcore RL people watch it on sky

And stop giving sponsor packages away for free it tells sponsors and the public we'll give it away no wonder there's no money when you give sponsor rights for free

Internationals are what get people talking look at cricket and union especially

Cricket crowds for domestic sides are terrible

I'd get Bradford and Toronto back aswell as they showed they had big potential Torontos crowds were bigger than most even in the championship

Us
Leeds
Wigan
Saints
Wire
Catalan
Bradford
Toronto
Rovers
Cas

All clubs above 5,000 average none of this 2k crap

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 10:54 pm  

Rugby Raider wrote:

SNIP.

Just to point out York has a 200k population according to the 2011 census.

Don't want Bradford, there's too much that has gone on that has negatively impacted the sport from what various Bradford owners have done, given that, I'd not be wanting to add them into a 14 team comp, but to have several seasons of proven financial stability and a rock solid sustainable financial footing.plan on basis of entry into SL further down the line

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:02 pm  

Thetalentboy wrote:

I actually think 10 teams would be OK if only it meant a bigger international calender

The sport needs to be on BBC more only hardcore RL people watch it on sky

And stop giving sponsor packages away for free it tells sponsors and the public we'll give it away no wonder there's no money when you give sponsor rights for free

Internationals are what get people talking look at cricket and union especially

Cricket crowds for domestic sides are terrible

I'd get Bradford and Toronto back aswell as they showed they had big potential Torontos crowds were bigger than most even in the championship

Us
Leeds
Wigan
Saints
Wire
Catalan
Bradford
Toronto
Rovers
Cas

All clubs above 5,000 average none of this 2k crap

Agree on the sponsorship side of things, also agree Toronto in rinicple but absolutely not Bradford, they have a hell of a lot to prove.
But crucially, how many fixtures, if more than 18, how do to decide who gets whom home and away to meet your notional number of fixtures. Is that a straight top of table are champs, if not then a top xx play offs again means potential for 4/5 meetings (if you're playing more than just home and away)
This works against increasing attendance averages as I've already pointed out re fan tafigue for repeat fixtures and doesn't give any more rest for top players for internationals.

So from 10 teams what's your fixture proposal as to how to have a balanced fixture list and enough space for more internationals whilst having competitive home nation teams.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for the game : Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:37 pm  

BumpyMcbump wrote:

Agree on the sponsorship side of things, also agree Toronto in rinicple but absolutely not Bradford, they have a hell of a lot to prove.
But crucially, how many fixtures, if more than 18, how do to decide who gets whom home and away to meet your notional number of fixtures. Is that a straight top of table are champs, if not then a top xx play offs again means potential for 4/5 meetings (if you're playing more than just home and away)
This works against increasing attendance averages as I've already pointed out re fan tafigue for repeat fixtures and doesn't give any more rest for top players for internationals.

So from 10 teams what's your fixture proposal as to how to have a balanced fixture list and enough space for more internationals whilst having competitive home nation teams.

To be honest 10 or 12 teams doesn't make a massive difference

Even in the rugby union Premiership only have 13 teams

The biggest thing RL needs is more commercial and get that by a stronger international game in front of a few million people instead of 200,000 hardcore RL fans on sky