Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:12 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

City teams in that they would be big enough target markets to attract enough commercial support, sponsorship, funding and support. Wakefield and Salford do none of those things and just scrap annually to survive and nothing more. They add nothing to the competition at all, no away support, no impact on the TV deal.

The responses since my post just highlight everything that is wrong with Rugby League in this country. They care only for their club and nothing else. They'd prefer to be watching Wakefield play Salford in front of 2,500 than watching big clubs really push the sport forwards.

Expansion within SL is probably dead now. If Bradford are somehow promoted back up, that's the end of the line in terms of potential for the competition growing. Any half decent players will leave for the NRL or Union and crowds and interest in the game will shrink back to pre-SL levels. The funny thing is that it'll be those flat cap traditional sides that disappear first as they don't have the youth systems to fall back on or the fans to support the club when the TV deals all but disappear.

Over the next 10 years there is likely to be a fully professional rugby competition in North America and Canada drawing crowds way in excess of Super League's. With a bit of vision that could have been a rugby league competition, but now it won't, it'll be Union

You do remember which clubs nearly bankrupt the whole sport ??

Certainly not Wakefield or Salford.

Is this post for real ?

Saints care way more for Saints than they ever do about the game as a whole.
Like others on here, you prefer to blame the likes of Wakefield and Salford for the games failings which is utter bilge.

Where has Saints, Wigan or Leeds, leadership of the sport been.

Hetherington, I think does see the bigger picture but, Saints and Wigan are bothered about only Saints and Wigan.
They need a serious look in the mirror before they blame everyone else for the sports failings.

Remember who came up with the Marque player idea, certainly not the sports top sides, it was MarwanK

What are Wigan and Saints doing for the sport as a whole.
Yes they mop up the best juniors and develop lots of them into very good SL players but, perhaps if they didnt sweep the country for youngsters, there could be a more even share of the youth.
The salary cap should certainly be higher but, IIRC, it takes a majority to sort this so, who else is "holding back the sport".

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:20 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

To attract the kind of investment and funding the sport needs, it has to be adding something. Toronto had been around for five minutes but were already doubling Salford's crowds and had received the biggest sponsorship deal in UK RL history whilst the competition itself was unable to raise more than some free pizza. It doesn't have to be Toronto or Canada, but the sport has to think bigger than the M62. Why? Because after 120 years or so, the sport is still struggling to realise full professionalism and is about to slip back to being an amateur sport. It wouldn't matter at all if the likes of Salford and Wakefield were attracting big crowds, bringing through quality young players on a consistent basis and helping us to have a vibrant competition. But they're not, the sport is going backwards at an astonishing rate. Adding Bradford back for one more administration achieves what exactly?

Toronto might have failed, Toulouse might fail. But for me it's better to at least try to make things better than retreating back to watching lads who've done a mornings work on a building site before playing and watching any player who shows any potential leave to Union or the NRL.

The best things that could happen to SL now is either they go with another round of franchising and make clubs apply for membership again to weed out some of the dross that are holding the competition back. Or sell it lock stock and barrel to the NRL or elsewhere. They've got to try something. You flat cappers might take great joy in watching the sport burn because you told everyone it wouldn't work, but it's not a good thing.

Most of this post is utter bilge. In fact nearly all of it. I could pull it to pieces but I simply can't be bothered

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:15 pm  

Donnyman wrote:

1. The people who attend games, and work for and volunteer at clubs OF COURSE want to watch their own clubs. Are you seriously suggesting 5,000 Salford fans and 5,000 Wakefield fans will hang around to support phoney canadian clubs?? Why hold their love for their club against them??

2. What do you mean "The competition growing"? You tell us the vision you have for growth? Was it putting in TWP, New York and Ottawa in SL and taking out Salford, Wakefield and the likes of Bradford. You don't get it do you. replacing English Superleague clubs with overseas clubs expands absolutely nothing. In time it breaks the SKY deal as they don't want North American content, then everyone's dead.

3. Now you get it North American Rugby Union that is decades in front of the little bit of league there is in North America have all the players and have all the investors to maintain and grow the MLR. Again please explain how Livolsi, Peres and Wilby were ever going to find players or TV deals to stop that juggernaut??

Over to you

In our 2018 SL Season, Saints had the biggest travelling support at Leigh & they filled the away end. The most disappointing given the size & status of the clubs were Leeds & Wigan.

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:27 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Is this post for real ?

Saints care way more for Saints than they ever do about the game as a whole.
Like others on here, you prefer to blame the likes of Wakefield and Salford for the games failings which is utter bilge.

Where has Saints, Wigan or Leeds, leadership of the sport been.

Hetherington, I think does see the bigger picture but, Saints and Wigan are bothered about only Saints and Wigan.
They need a serious look in the mirror before they blame everyone else for the sports failings.

Remember who came up with the Marque player idea, certainly not the sports top sides, it was MarwanK

What are Wigan and Saints doing for the sport as a whole.
Yes they mop up the best juniors and develop lots of them into very good SL players but, perhaps if they didnt sweep the country for youngsters, there could be a more even share of the youth.
The salary cap should certainly be higher but, IIRC, it takes a majority to sort this so, who else is "holding back the sport".

Wrencat Id ignore Bellend,he`s nothing more than a troll.

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Thu Nov 26, 2020 9:02 am  

Ste100Centurions wrote:

In our 2018 SL Season, Saints had the biggest travelling support at Leigh & they filled the away end. The most disappointing given the size & status of the clubs were Leeds & Wigan.

Thanks for the reply. At 6,700 Leeds gave Leigh an "above average crowd" but not by a lot. I can't explain it definitively, but in recent years the M62 has become less and less appealing to Yorkshire and maybe Lancashire fans. Then up came Saints who gave Leigh a crowd 2,500 above the average.

St.Helens to Leigh is apparently 11 miles

When Leeds went to Huddersfield that season they gave Fartown their biggest crowd of the season by far. When Saints went to Huddersfield there was little Saints support with a crowd less than Fartown's average.

So to me it's the travel..........

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Thu Nov 26, 2020 9:20 am  

Bartholemew Smythe wrote:

ignore Bellend,he`s nothing more than a troll.

OOOffff go steady don't get yourself in trouble here, no need to stoop as low as him He says.........

"Because after 120 years or so, the sport is still struggling to realise full professionalism and is about to slip back to being an amateur sport. You flat cappers might take great joy in watching the sport burn because you told everyone it wouldn't work"

We are indeed 120 years old and have indeed been professional since 1996, and will be around for a very long time yet. One way to kill the game was to allow TWP, Ottawa, New York, Vancouver and Montreal to buy 150 players from here made available by the relegation of Salford, HKR, Wakefield, Huddersfield and castleford.

That of course would have left the SKY deal in tatters as North American "clubs" are of no value to SKY sports just as Leeds, Wigan, Hull, Warrington and St.Helens are of no value to North American sports TV. The English premiership is fairly insular (apart from Welsh Incumbents) for a very good reason. They don't even entertain the idea of Celtic and Rangers joining the Premiership.

That handful of names in our game like McDermott and Wilkin made their own mistakes and seem to want to use the BBC as a platform to bash the game with. Why oh why could their agents not get them to see sense and keep it shut?

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Thu Nov 26, 2020 12:02 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Saints care way more for Saints than they ever do about the game as a whole.
Like others on here, you prefer to blame the likes of Wakefield and Salford for the games failings which is utter bilge.

Saints voted for Toronto, which would have meant less money for Saints. McManus has also called for an end to the power of the clubs in Super League and criticised the fact that the clubs get to vote on the critical issues as too many of them will always vote purely in self interest.

You won't see it because you support one of the many clubs scrambling around to survive on life support, but it's true. The likes of Salford and Wakefield are a ball and chain stopping the sport progressing.

If Elstone wanted to go traditional and not take a risk on expansion, there is still so much they could do to improve the competition and the sport in this country. Insisting on minimum stadium requirements is long overdue. It was meant to happen at the start of SL and needs to be brought back. How can you grow and thrive as a sport when families can't even use the toilet without getting MRSA? They also need to insist ALL Super League clubs have Under 16s,18s and 21s academy levels and reserves (Catalans can play those grades in France if they see fit). That is another area where the likes of Salford and Wakefield would like to not have to invest, digging an even bigger hole for themselves in the process. After a couple of years of firmly establishing those requirements you can then increase the cap and allow investment into the sport cleverly. Not by increasing the cap, but by giving 100% exemptions for players that came through your own academy. That rewards clubs who are developing players and enables clubs with some money to invest in attracting better players to improve the competition to do that.

Then they can look at increasing to 14 clubs, adding the likes of Toulouse/York/London. Those clubs, like it or not, WILL improve the TV deal and bring more investment into it.

But instead of any of that we do it Elstone's way. No expansion, promote Bradford for another round of administration, reduce the TV deal, remove the reserves and not require academies. Yeah that'll work.

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Thu Nov 26, 2020 2:03 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Saints voted for Toronto, which would have meant less money for Saints. McManus has also called for an end to the power of the clubs in Super League and criticised the fact that the clubs get to vote on the critical issues as too many of them will always vote purely in self interest.

You won't see it because you support one of the many clubs scrambling around to survive on life support, but it's true. The likes of Salford and Wakefield are a ball and chain stopping the sport progressing.

If Elstone wanted to go traditional and not take a risk on expansion, there is still so much they could do to improve the competition and the sport in this country. Insisting on minimum stadium requirements is long overdue. It was meant to happen at the start of SL and needs to be brought back. How can you grow and thrive as a sport when families can't even use the toilet without getting MRSA? They also need to insist ALL Super League clubs have Under 16s,18s and 21s academy levels and reserves (Catalans can play those grades in France if they see fit). That is another area where the likes of Salford and Wakefield would like to not have to invest, digging an even bigger hole for themselves in the process. After a couple of years of firmly establishing those requirements you can then increase the cap and allow investment into the sport cleverly. Not by increasing the cap, but by giving 100% exemptions for players that came through your own academy. That rewards clubs who are developing players and enables clubs with some money to invest in attracting better players to improve the competition to do that.

Then they can look at increasing to 14 clubs, adding the likes of Toulouse/York/London. Those clubs, like it or not, WILL improve the TV deal and bring more investment into it.

But instead of any of that we do it Elstone's way. No expansion, promote Bradford for another round of administration, reduce the TV deal, remove the reserves and not require academies. Yeah that'll work.

Again, what the hell are you on about ?

You have a pop and Trinity and Salford and then in conclusion, suggest that Elstone is getting "his" way.

You also have a go at Trinity, suggesting that they would rather not have the cost of the different "grades" of Rugby and yet, even on a shoestring budget, they have all of the grades that you suggest ??
So, the best that you have is that in your opinion "they would rather not have the cost of running those sides" ??

I'm really chuffed that Saints backed the inclusion of Toronto - maybe this shows what poor judgement they have for the future of the sport.
I could explain this further but, we already have numerous threads on the subject - suffice as to say THEY HAVE NO MONEY and their SL future was based on selling "grooming kits" ??

Try again, pal.

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Thu Nov 26, 2020 3:36 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Saints voted for Toronto, which would have meant less money for Saints. McManus has also called for an end to the power of the clubs in Super League and criticised the fact that the clubs get to vote on the critical issues as too many of them will always vote purely in self interest.

You won't see it because you support one of the many clubs scrambling around to survive on life support, but it's true. The likes of Salford and Wakefield are a ball and chain stopping the sport progressing.



But instead of any of that we do it Elstone's way. No expansion, promote Bradford for another round of administration, reduce the TV deal, remove the reserves and not require academies. Yeah that'll work.

I would kick out "basket case" Wakefield Trinity and that ball and chain, they just don't cut it on many fronts. Many years ago we had the "Framing of the Future" with the requirements of new stadia, youth development etc. Some are dragging their heels and its more like "Framing of the Past" with a Last of the Summer Wine feel to it. Perhaps Featherstone Rovers would be worth a punt to see how they go.

When you look at the clubs west side of the pennines you have Wigan, Warrington, St Helens, Salford, Widnes and Leigh in modern stadia conforming to that Framing of the Future, not so in West Yorkshire a lot of clubs are a disgrace when it comes to the ground and hospitality, they need to get their finger out and raise standards on many fronts.

Re: Jon Wilkin agrees with what I have been saying for years : Thu Nov 26, 2020 4:51 pm  

Breaking news......... "Framing the Future" was scrapped in 2014.