Re: Back to licensing : Sat Oct 01, 2022 1:57 pm  

Hudd-Shay wrote:

Aye, that's not too much to ask is it?

No it is not and i agree with the other comments on here about this but as strongly as people feel about these proposals if the club supports them what can we as fans do other than suck it up or stop coming to games.

Re: Back to licensing : Sat Oct 01, 2022 10:59 pm  

terry silver wrote:

No it is not and i agree with the other comments on here about this but as strongly as people feel about these proposals if the club supports them what can we as fans do other than suck it up or stop coming to games.

We keep supporting the club.

Re: Back to licensing : Thu Oct 13, 2022 5:08 pm  

Keighley appear to be the only club to have voted against the IMG proposals. Well done Keighley.

Re: Back to licensing : Fri Oct 14, 2022 8:09 am  

I personnally don't see why we, the UK, need to support the French League when the UK game below super league needs all the suport it can get. Why are we developing French clubs when UK clubs are going to the wall?

Re: Back to licensing : Fri Oct 14, 2022 8:36 am  

Sideshow Bob wrote:

I personnally don't see why we, the UK, need to support the French League when the UK game below super league needs all the suport it can get. Why are we developing French clubs when UK clubs are going to the wall?

That is a fair point. Logically, backing French clubs at the expense of British one's seems counter productive. I do however enjoy a few days away in Toulouse/Carcassonne.

Re: Back to licensing : Fri Oct 14, 2022 9:27 am  

From what I’m reading it doesn’t make that much difference in the short term as there’s only gonna be 4 cat A clubs anyway ( no doubt the usual suspects) the rest of superleague will be cat b along with some championship clubs and promotion and relegation will still happen between the cat b clubs . Regardless of what system you have the biggest problem will always be bridging the gap between full time and part time leagues which is probably why rugby league was more competitive back in the 70/s 80s as it was a level playing field . Ultimately it always boils down to money , if the funding isn’t increased to the lower leagues you are always relying on a benefactor and having to do a ‘ leigh ‘ and look overseas as all the best talent are signed up by may . I don’t see how this system helps clubs attain a grade A when it’ll still be the top clubs receiving all the funds . Seems a very bent version of capitalism incorporated into sport not too dissimilar to trickle down economics , the top drink from the ocean the rest with wide mouths open trying to catch a rain drop , what makes it more infuriating is the top teams then berate the lower teams with a condescending attitude of ‘ why aren’t you strong like us ‘ One of the reasons I prefer rugby league to other sports was the family feel and affinity with the players, teams etc . Well this system is closer to a broken family caused by selfishness and greed .

Re: Back to licensing : Fri Oct 14, 2022 9:41 am  

Faxlore wrote:

Well thank you IMG. Back to the old ways of the RFL choosing who the let in to the top league. It was a farce last time and will be again. Cas and Wakefield still in their 100year old crap grounds given top billing no doubt. Bulls going bust but hay give them a licence. There may be promotion between the second and third leagues. So we go back 8 years. How this helps with rugby league in the country I have no idea. Backwards steps and protecting the clubs at the top of the food chain. The sport is ficked!

Wakey fan in peace.

From a personal point of view, and bearing in mind many of my kindred had actually resolved ourselves with being in the Championship next year, I would like to think we have a balanced view on the IMG recommendations. We won't be CAT A, but likely a CAT B, which Halifax could also be with some improvements. And the best CAT B clubs will be in SL. I get that it sounds like the door has been closed for Championship clubs to get to Super League, but in all honesty how many champ clubs get to Super League and stay there anyway? The Keighley chairman has just done his nut about this only because he knows his ground is worse than Cas's, even if he might be able to buy promotion, that eventuality has now been taken away because results alone won't get him to SL. Thats the only reason he is salty. The recommendations just say "get better" to me. If Wakey got sent down, according to the criteria set then there is nothing we could do apart from cop it and move on. What that does though is focuses the powers that be to push push on things like community, academy, and the fact that relegation is removed means that the focus can be longer term and not year to year, retired Aussie to retired Aussie.

Simply buying your way to SL and going down the year after is not sustainable, and is so old hat. And I think it's not a great product. CAT A clubs don't have immunity - per ce - as soon as standard drop that categorisation would be up for review. Flip side is that CAT C and B clubs will also be up for review. See it for what it is, which is not a Hetherington and Lenagan show, and also spare a thought for Rugby Union. There's an example of what buying success does for you.

Just my 2c

Re: Back to licensing : Fri Oct 14, 2022 10:27 am  

Totally agree with Lup 94 and Backseatcaoch. But it is all about money. All of the championship clubs and league 1 clubs and I would say at least half SL clubs have very small income stream and work on very very tight budgets just to keep going. We are then told they new proposals come along and say our proposals are here to make all these teams better. No they are telling us spend more money, which we don’t have. IMG demanding improvements doesn’t make people start chucking money at Rugby League clubs. It makes them more cautious. I’m not sure these proposals are good for the game

Re: Back to licensing : Sat Oct 15, 2022 2:28 pm  

BackSeatCoach wrote: Wakey fan in peace. From a personal point of view, and bearing in mind many of my kindred had actually resolved ourselves with being in the Championship next year, I would like to think we have a balanced view on the IMG recommendations. We won't be CAT A, but likely a CAT B, which Halifax could also be with some improvements. And the best CAT B clubs will be in SL. I get that it sounds like the door has been closed for Championship clubs to get to Super League, but in all honesty how many champ clubs get to Super League and stay there anyway? The Keighley chairman has just done his nut about this only because he knows his ground is worse than Cas's, even if he might be able to buy promotion, that eventuality has now been taken away because results alone won't get him to SL. Thats the only reason he is salty. The recommendations just say "get better" to me. If Wakey got sent down, according to the criteria set then there is nothing we could do apart from cop it and move on. What that does though is focuses the powers that be to push push on things like community, academy, and the fact that relegation is removed means that the focus can be longer term and not year to year, retired Aussie to retired Aussie. Simply buying your way to SL and going down the year after is not sustainable, and is so old hat. And I think it's not a great product. CAT A clubs don't have immunity - per ce - as soon as standard drop that categorisation would be up for review. Flip side is that CAT C and B clubs will also be up for review. See it for what it is, which is not a Hetherington and Lenagan show, and also spare a thought for Rugby Union. There's an example of what buying success does for you. Just my 2c You are wrong.The story goes back to the 1990's involving Keighley Cougars - which also involved a friend of Wakefield Trinity - now the much admired Sir Rodney Walker. However,the past has been put behind the O'Neill family,and the statement has been made for the good of the sport. This covers a little of the 1990's - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JDiodo9eJdw

BackSeatCoach wrote: Wakey fan in peace. From a personal point of view, and bearing in mind many of my kindred had actually resolved ourselves with being in the Championship next year, I would like to think we have a balanced view on the IMG recommendations. We won't be CAT A, but likely a CAT B, which Halifax could also be with some improvements. And the best CAT B clubs will be in SL. I get that it sounds like the door has been closed for Championship clubs to get to Super League, but in all honesty how many champ clubs get to Super League and stay there anyway? The Keighley chairman has just done his nut about this only because he knows his ground is worse than Cas's, even if he might be able to buy promotion, that eventuality has now been taken away because results alone won't get him to SL. Thats the only reason he is salty. The recommendations just say "get better" to me. If Wakey got sent down, according to the criteria set then there is nothing we could do apart from cop it and move on. What that does though is focuses the powers that be to push push on things like community, academy, and the fact that relegation is removed means that the focus can be longer term and not year to year, retired Aussie to retired Aussie. Simply buying your way to SL and going down the year after is not sustainable, and is so old hat. And I think it's not a great product. CAT A clubs don't have immunity - per ce - as soon as standard drop that categorisation would be up for review. Flip side is that CAT C and B clubs will also be up for review. See it for what it is, which is not a Hetherington and Lenagan show, and also spare a thought for Rugby Union. There's an example of what buying success does for you. Just my 2c You are wrong.The story goes back to the 1990's involving Keighley Cougars - which also involved a friend of Wakefield Trinity - now the much admired Sir Rodney Walker. However,the past has been put behind the O'Neill family,and the statement has been made for the good of the sport. This covers a little of the 1990's - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JDiodo9eJdw

Re: Back to licensing : Sun Oct 16, 2022 10:32 am  

If we were to say just about all Championship teams are Cat C clubs the only real difference between Cat B and C is the SL funding money so to me it really does not go any way to solving a problem. Even if some teams are Cat B in the Championship, I imagine off the top of my head Fax, Fev, York, Batley, Widnes will be, the Cat B clubs in SL still have so much of an advantage over those teams becuase of the funding. If changes were made to the funding split then I would think it would be a good idea I just don't see it at the moment.