Or, finding a structure that can ensure the inclusion of Toronto and Toulouse. We might end up with a 16 club top flight, just to ensure that they are in there or to ensure that the "mighty" Leeds are not relegated:shock:
It's quite incredible that the structure will be agreed when the season is effectively over, which leaves us looking downright inept and smacks of either favouritism or utter incompetence.
When the football Division 1 was going to be expanded once, all Division 1 teams were promised they wouldn’t be relegated and just the top two from the Division 2 would come up and join them all. After the season finished, at the last minute Spurs were told they were going to be relegated and Arsenal promoted (Arsenal finished FIFTH! in Div2).
That was favouritism, incompetence and some dodgy dealings with brown envelopes.
Or, finding a structure that can ensure the inclusion of Toronto and Toulouse. We might end up with a 16 club top flight, just to ensure that they are in there or to ensure that the "mighty" Leeds are not relegated:shock:
It's quite incredible that the structure will be agreed when the season is effectively over, which leaves us looking downright inept and smacks of either favouritism or utter incompetence.
I suspect you are correct and I agree with your observation.
The desire to get Toulouse and Toronto in is about money rather than expansion. As long as the Sky money is split between 11 Super League clubs, these 11 clubs will be happy.
The main beef with a team winning it from 5th was that it was Leeds.
After the top 5 and GF’s pretty much were the same teams/finalists/winners each year people thought more playoffs spots would provide different finalists/winners and wouldn’t have minded if it was a new champion winning from 5th. After winning it from 2nd and 1st three years on the trot people weren’t expecting/hoping it to be Leeds to be the team finishing 5th and winning it.
I think the issue with Leeds as a club during this period was that they clearly weren't putting 100% in until the playoffs. They would just coast along get a top 5 finish then show up for the last 3 or 4 games and be champions. This isn't a criticism of them, they did what the needed to do and they did it well. However it shows how poor the system is when it is generally accepted that trying to finish top of the league is a waste of energy.
It is funny how many of the RFLs attempt to artificially level the playing field and share the success around has actually resulted in the opposite. Mainly the playoffs and the salary cap.
I think the issue with Leeds as a club during this period was that they clearly weren't putting 100% in until the playoffs. They would just coast along get a top 5 finish then show up for the last 3 or 4 games and be champions. This isn't a criticism of them, they did what the needed to do and they did it well. However it shows how poor the system is when it is generally accepted that trying to finish top of the league is a waste of energy.
It is funny how many of the RFLs attempt to artificially level the playing field and share the success around has actually resulted in the opposite. Mainly the playoffs and the salary cap.
I don’t think it was lack of effort in 2011. McGuire and Peacock missed the first half of the year with the serious knee injuries they picked up at the end of 2010. McDermott was meant to be McClennen’s assistant in 2011 before taking over in 2012 but McClennen decided to leave before the season started so plenty of upheaval and players like Diskin, Donald and Eastwood had left and Senior was finished by May. Their was plenty going on that makes a lower league position understandable.
In 2012 I do think we prioritised other things in the WCC at Headingley for the first time and finally trying to land the cup for these players. Had they done so they probably wouldn’t have won the GF. You can call it a lack of effort in the league but when they’d won it several times by that point it’s understandable to target those other things I mentioned.
Adam Pearson and Neil Hudgell (FC and KR owners) have issued a joint statement. Basically putting pressure on the RFL for agreement on the SL clubs proposal on Friday, hinting there will be a breakaway if they don't
Adam Pearson and Neil Hudgell (FC and KR owners) have issued a joint statement. Basically putting pressure on the RFL for agreement on the SL clubs proposal on Friday, hinting there will be a breakaway if they don't
I'm fully expecting this to go through. I can't really see any reason why a championship club would reject this new structure. Right now they have to beat super league teams to have a chance of promotion. Under the new structure you just have to be better than your fellow championship clubs. It should be a no brainer.
Adam Pearson and Neil Hudgell (FC and KR owners) have issued a joint statement. Basically putting pressure on the RFL for agreement on the SL clubs proposal on Friday, hinting there will be a breakaway if they don't
Adam Pearson and Neil Hudgell (FC and KR owners) have issued a joint statement. Basically putting pressure on the RFL for agreement on the SL clubs proposal on Friday, hinting there will be a breakaway if they don't
Adam Pearson and Neil Hudgell (FC and KR owners) have issued a joint statement. Basically putting pressure on the RFL for agreement on the SL clubs proposal on Friday, hinting there will be a breakaway if they don't
One minute they need loop fixtures as 11 home games aren't sustainable, the next, they're big enough to breakway from the sport (without the CC or England RL) It won't matter to all, but i can't see many players being happy at not having chance to win CC or play for their country anymore.
Sorry, with threatening statements like that from chariman wanting more power, the sport is heading one way. SL isn't premier league football, many of the "elite" clubs are getting over 6k attendances.
I've said all a long, i agree with SL that the eights need to go. But this railroading and threatening language of "do what we say otherwise we'll screw the rest of the sport over just because we're the 12 clubs that happen to be in SL at this moment in time." is laughable. Take time out, and try find solutions to the problems that have caused us to change the structure for the third time in 10 years. No matter what Hudgell and Pearson think, SL isn't big enough to go it alone. The super 8s being removed on Friday isn't going to solve the sports main issues, lack of money, and most importantly, lack of people playing the game.
UllFC wrote:
Adam Pearson and Neil Hudgell (FC and KR owners) have issued a joint statement. Basically putting pressure on the RFL for agreement on the SL clubs proposal on Friday, hinting there will be a breakaway if they don't
One minute they need loop fixtures as 11 home games aren't sustainable, the next, they're big enough to breakway from the sport (without the CC or England RL) It won't matter to all, but i can't see many players being happy at not having chance to win CC or play for their country anymore.
Sorry, with threatening statements like that from chariman wanting more power, the sport is heading one way. SL isn't premier league football, many of the "elite" clubs are getting over 6k attendances.
I've said all a long, i agree with SL that the eights need to go. But this railroading and threatening language of "do what we say otherwise we'll screw the rest of the sport over just because we're the 12 clubs that happen to be in SL at this moment in time." is laughable. Take time out, and try find solutions to the problems that have caused us to change the structure for the third time in 10 years. No matter what Hudgell and Pearson think, SL isn't big enough to go it alone. The super 8s being removed on Friday isn't going to solve the sports main issues, lack of money, and most importantly, lack of people playing the game.
How many current SL players are there that joined an SL team from school never having played for an amateur team or a lower division club in some capacity? There can't be very many. SL needs the rest of the RFL community from amateur level upwards to survive, or it could very quickly run out of players if there is an acrimonious split. Yes, there would still be movement from players to SL teams, but said players may think twice about it if the rest of the RFL world took their bat and ball home and declared that anyone having played in the "new" SL would be barred for playing in the "other" competition. Dafter things have happened when folk with big ego's fall out.
One up, one down and genuinely retaining funding is fine with me, but please stop the bully boy tactics.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 234 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...