|
|
Post by red54 on Sept 11, 2019 5:59:57 GMT
Just been reading an article by Paul Redhead in serious about Rugby, he wants a 14 team league and that at all costs London should be saved , and how their achievement is greater than Salford, and oh how we would miss the Hull derby, also if it were Leeds that were in the frame for relegation it wouldn’t be right. What if it were Salford, bet nobody except us would be crying.
i am sick of the League formation being changed every other year, I know it would get rid of this stupid playing some teams 3 times and we wouldn’t have beaten Wire 3 times😉😂 . I am not against a 14 team league but just sick of the constant changes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 7:40:54 GMT
I read this and think a great deal of what he says makes sense, having an enlarged league would end the ludicrous idea of playing some teams more than others (I mean look how unfair it's been on Warrington, them having to play us 3 times has obviously hindered them winning the league  ).
But the logic for keeping London and Leeds at all costs is flawed, London don't (as he insists) bring about greater media coverage but do give fans a decent trip down to the Village, Leeds bring a great deal to RL but if they were to finish bottom then they should not be exempt from going down.
I'm curious to see what would happen if this time next season Toronto (assuming they get promotion) are at the bottom, I think there will be moving of goalposts to keep them there as it will be marketed heavily that they are the flag bearers for a new era of RL in North America.
On North America see that NY and Ottawa have deferred entrance to the league, I'm actually excited at the prospect of being able to go watch Salford play in NY and Canada over the period of say 14 days. Do though think the league needs to insist that they don't just fill teams with NRL/SL stars and have a defined pathway for local talent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 8:31:50 GMT
I have agreed with this for a while - loop fixtures are daft (I’m sick of the sight of KR). London have been a success and I’d like to see what they could do with another year. I’m no KR fan but they are well supported and have done their time in the lower leagues. Leeds are a big club having a blip. Wakey are generally well run and having an awful run with injuries. Huddersfield are a shambles but do have a benefactor pumping money in. All bring something.
I realise that money would be an issue but If/when Toronto come up next year, that would help as they won’t be taking Sky money so you’d only be sharing the money with one extra team. If you made that extra team another overseas one with their own tv deal then you wouldn’t have to share any Sky money at all but that would trigger the anti-expansion crowd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 8:42:04 GMT
The very simple answer to this is that P&R should be every 2 seasons.
London have done much better than expected but are going to be picked apart by other teams regardless of safety, if they had gone into this season knowing there would be no relegation they could have retained there talent and added, can you imagine if they would have another season with Lamb pulling the strings.
Should say York upset the odds and win promotion they are 2 months behind everyone else in terms of recruitment and realistically are only going to get players from the relegated team and then those the other teams didn't want, if they knew they had 2 years it would give them that safety net and option of offering better 2 year deals to tempt people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 8:45:05 GMT
I was reading something last week on going back to licensing- I’ve not made my mind up either way but there were some good points made. No system is perfect really is it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 8:47:16 GMT
I was reading something last week on going back to licensing- I’ve not made my mind up either way but there were some good points made. No system is perfect really is it? Vasey at Swinchester would be rubbing his hands in glee if that happens, can you imagine what the franchise for a Manchester SL team would be worth to someone like Dr K. |
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on Sept 11, 2019 12:38:18 GMT
The very simple answer to this is that P&R should be every 2 seasons. I genuinely hadn’t thought of that. Really good idea |
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Sept 11, 2019 14:20:49 GMT
How works P&R every 2 years work? You can finish bottom this year and your fine but next year you’re relegated for finishing bottom? Likewise with winning the division below?
I agree there should be 14 teams, not to keep anyone in SL, just to make it a more ‘natural’ fixture list. But I don’t think we should change the set up again, we’ve only just done it - must have had 5 or 6 versions in last 20 years. None are perfect. Need to choose one and stick to it
(PS - Londonred - KR weren’t one of our loop fixtures I don’t think - just home and away once in league. It’s just we drew them in cup and magic weekend too. In theory we could have played them 5 times this year if they’d been a loop fixture too. Our loop fixtures were Wigan, wire, hull FC, hudds, London)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 14:50:24 GMT
How works P&R every 2 years work? You can finish bottom this year and your fine but next year you’re relegated for finishing bottom? Likewise with winning the division below? In effect yes.
There needs to be a fair way for the promoted clubs to get a decent squad built rather than the current 1 season boom and bust, most teams who get relegated are in need of a restart also so time building from the ground up with a parachute payment would assist.
It will never happen but for me it's the least worst option for stability rather than having teams yoyoing up and down.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 15:20:26 GMT
How works P&R every 2 years work? You can finish bottom this year and your fine but next year you’re relegated for finishing bottom? Likewise with winning the division below? I agree there should be 14 teams, not to keep anyone in SL, just to make it a more ‘natural’ fixture list. But I don’t think we should change the set up again, we’ve only just done it - must have had 5 or 6 versions in last 20 years. None are perfect. Need to choose one and stick to it (PS - Londonred - KR weren’t one of our loop fixtures I don’t think - just home and away once in league. It’s just we drew them in cup and magic weekend too. In theory we could have played them 5 times this year if they’d been a loop fixture too. Our loop fixtures were Wigan, wire, hull FC, hudds, London) Blimey that would have been horrendous! |
|
|
|
Post by dixon13 on Sept 12, 2019 19:12:20 GMT
I don't get this Leeds are a big club so should not be relegated or London should be in because we need a team in the capital or Huddersfield should be in because they have a sugar daddy. Yes have 14 teams and the magic weekend.What we have now is better than the million pound game.In the past the mighty Wigan were relegated because they finished bottom that's how it should be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2019 19:55:10 GMT
I don't get this Leeds are a big club so should not be relegated or London should be in because we need a team in the capital or Huddersfield should be in because they have a sugar daddy. Yes have 14 teams and the magic weekend.What we have now is better than the million pound game.In the past the mighty Wigan were relegated because they finished bottom that's how it should be. I’ll agree that the Huddersfield one is the weakest one. But like it or not Leeds are a well supported (home, away and on tv) club who are one of the main attractions for sponsors and when negotiating the next tv deal. With London, Super League is a more attractive proposition for tv companies and sponsors if it’s not restricted to the M62 corridor. Wouldn’t say that’s a strong enough argument in itself to bin relegation but shouldn’t be dismissed. |
|
).
