Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 7:06 pm  

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/di ... by-league/

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/di ... by-league/

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 7:08 pm  

This all makes sense, only problem is has stated individual club owners will not relinquish their own power for the good of the game.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:00 pm  

There are some good ideas but as often happens these proposals look down on clubs like Cas and Wakey as disposable and want to replace them with expansion franchises that we have tried time and again and nearly always fail. These are clubs who have faced tough times over and over again and with limited budgets have defied the odds and put together competitive teams and are massively important in their communities.

It's easy to take the view of "we need to look outside the M62 corridor" when its not us who is proposed to be cut.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:38 pm  

karetaker wrote:

This all makes sense, only problem is has stated individual club owners will not relinquish their own power for the good of the game.

I don’t see the sense in replacing Hull or Hull KR and Castleford with clubs like York (small City surrounded by countryside), Wales (how many previous attempts?), Newcastle (didn’t work when Shane Richardson had Gateshead in the Super League) and London (very little success in 40 years).

As someone else has said, it’s easy to say it’s a good idea when it’s not your team being sent to oblivion.

Try inserting the sentence, ‘we will retain two clubs from St Helens, Wigan and Warrington’ and then see how sensible the report reads after that?

That’s not me suggesting I’d remove any of those three clubs, (as a Hull fan) I’m just giving a perspective on how the report reads to others.

I agree change has to happen, but the whole infrastructure needs to change with one RFL/SL; other income streams in addition to Sky; better fixture slots, dwindling away support due to Thursday night TV fixtures at the other end of the M62; Academy teams and competition for all top flight clubs etc

I wouldn’t slash what we have and see the above four teams struggle while established clubs with decent support disappear. We could move to the NRL model, initially with the existing 12 clubs plus Toulouse and Bradford. This would allow us to protect and grow the fan base we have. Scrap Magic and loop fixtures and play a straight forward 26 game season with play offs. Set minimum conditions and timescales to compete in terms of ground standards (e.g Cas and Wakefield) and Academies.

After 2/3 seasons, allow other clubs the opportunity to join an expanded 16 team competition or replace any failing club.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:44 pm  

Rugby Raider wrote:

I don’t see the sense in replacing Hull or Hull KR and Castleford with clubs like York (small City surrounded by countryside), Wales (how many previous attempts?), Newcastle (didn’t work when Shane Richardson had Gateshead in the Super League) and London (very little success in 40 years).

As someone else has said, it’s easy to say it’s a good idea when it’s not your team being sent to oblivion.

Try inserting the sentence, ‘we will retain two clubs from St Helens, Wigan and Warrington’ and then see how sensible the report reads after that?

That’s not me suggesting I’d remove any of those three clubs, (as a Hull fan) I’m just giving a perspective on how the report reads to others.

I agree change has to happen, but the whole infrastructure needs to change with one RFL/SL; other income streams in addition to Sky; better fixture slots, dwindling away support due to Thursday night TV fixtures at the other end of the M62; Academy teams and competition for all top flight clubs etc

I wouldn’t slash what we have and see the above four teams struggle while established clubs with decent support disappear. We could move to the NRL model, initially with the existing 12 clubs plus Toulouse and Bradford. This would allow us to protect and grow the fan base we have. Scrap Magic and loop fixtures and play a straight forward 26 game season with play offs. Set minimum conditions and timescales to compete in terms of ground standards (e.g Cas and Wakefield) and Academies.

After 2/3 seasons, allow other clubs the opportunity to join an expanded 16 team competition or replace any failing club.

Not aimed at you because you not the only person to ever say it BUT I don’t get the love in with Bradford, why should they be considered. They had it all and the owners got greedy or stupid either or.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:45 pm  

The one stand out issue is as long as all clubs have the right of veto nothing will ever improve.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:11 pm  

karetaker wrote:

Not aimed at you because you not the only person to ever say it BUT I don’t get the love in with Bradford, why should they be considered. They had it all and the owners got greedy or stupid either or.

Fair point.

I can’t remember what happened at Bradford, but obviously something went wrong either with contracts, ground maintenance, falling gate receipts etc?

However, if I was re-setting the League structure, I’d have Bradford back in the league due to their potential fan base. Owners of all clubs would need to approved, however the game needs fans (home and away). Bradford would provide that.

One other threat is potential Mergers. For instance, if they forced Hull and Hull KR to merge, on Good Friday we’d go from having 24,000 fans at a game, to either a record 4,000 fans at York, or 1,500 at London watching a combined Hull team. Mouth watering!

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:19 pm  

I'd want more teams, not less. 10 would be repetitive and boring.

16 team league, no playoffs. League determines champions. The league winners not winning the league is a difficult concept to grasp for anyone getting into the sport.

Winner of the CC can play the winner of SL at Old Trafford for another trophy.

Market the stars of the game and the big games, which will be rarer and more enjoyable because of it.

Any expansion clubs can work their way up through the leagues and will have more chance of surviving with a bigger league and a better product.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:38 pm  

Rugby Raider wrote:

Fair point.

I can’t remember what happened at Bradford, but obviously something went wrong either with contracts, ground maintenance, falling gate receipts etc?

However, if I was re-setting the League structure, I’d have Bradford back in the league due to their potential fan base. Owners of all clubs would need to approved, however the game needs fans (home and away). Bradford would provide that.

One other threat is potential Mergers. For instance, if they forced Hull and Hull KR to merge, on Good Friday we’d go from having 24,000 fans at a game, to either a record 4,000 fans at York, or 1,500 at London watching a combined Hull team. Mouth watering!

When Bradford were in their pomp the had regular 20k plus crowds(stand to be corrected ofc) then when the bubble burst and the money had all gone and Bradford started to struggle the fans went down also, yeh they were a great club when it was good, so was Widnes in its day and so on and so on. Guess we can all be guilty of being starry eyed from them past days but it all as to move forward now, so as Richardson’s reports says we really need to look at ways to expand but also like the document says he seriously needs to be scrutinised and not just done haphazard as it kinda looked from previous attempts. It’s got to get worse before it gets better there is no way everyone will be happy but something as got to change.

Re: Shane Richardson’s plan for Rugby League. : Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:56 pm  

Jack Napier wrote:

I'd want more teams, not less. 10 would be repetitive and boring.

16 team league, no playoffs. League determines champions. The league winners not winning the league is a difficult concept to grasp for anyone getting into the sport.

Winner of the CC can play the winner of SL at Old Trafford for another trophy.

Market the stars of the game and the big games, which will be rarer and more enjoyable because of it.

Any expansion clubs can work their way up through the leagues and will have more chance of surviving with a bigger league and a better product.

I agree a bigger league is probably the best way forward from a sport point of view and also loop fixtures really need to go. It would be better for the supporters to have fixtures that mean more (We play Wigan and saints too often these days) and also for the league to be a level playing field instead of certain teams having to play the best sides more than others. I'd like to think the bigger games would then be more marketable which would be good for sponsors too.

The big (huge) stumbling block to this is that unless a bigger sponsorship and TV deal can be agreed to provide the extra funding for those extra teams the existing teams will need to agree to a reduced cap, which won't happen. Plus the lower cap will make the competition and teams poorer in the short term and the lack of funding will likely lead to academy cuts which will make teams poorer in the long term and threaten the sustainability of the sport in the UK.

Without bigger funding for the sport the only real option superleague has is to carry on treading water. The big clubs (including us) have too much power under the current setup but from the outside looking in the RFL don't appear to be fit for purpose either.