: Sun Aug 09, 2009 8:36 pm  

JB Down Under wrote:

No I don't see one has to come at the cost of another. I do think that expansion areas HAVE to receive more support and finacial support to grow the game to a level where a SL club would be sustainable but I don't see why any club from the heartlands should not be in SL if they can prove to be a sustainable club at that level. Reality is not all can and not all will.

We should be strategic about it though and decide which areas have the best chance for long term sustainable futures and will add value to the SL. These areas should be targeted and worked on to get them there.

Who mentioned SL , I was talking about survival outside SL not getting into it

Several clubs are going for broke in an effort to get what will most likely be the last chance for any heartland club to get in , little to nothing is being done to improve the off field performance of the clubs below SL apart from encouraging clubs to find Sugar Daddys

The gap between SL and the Championships will continue to grow , I would go as far as saying the RFL dont want strong heartland clubs outside SL as that will make it more difficult to bring expansion clubs through the lower leagues

So you are suggesting a system were certain clubs get more assistance than others in a direct attempt to ' groom ' them for a SL place , and you think this wont have a detrimental effect on the other clubs in the competition

: Sun Aug 09, 2009 8:47 pm  

I agree Starbug, I think the gap will get bigger, I think come the next TV deal there could be a big increase regarding money, I think once we come out of this recession SL crowds could boom, especially at the 'lower' clubs with Sheds as grounds currently.
Championship clubs wont be able to compete with this unless they receive their own TV deal.
Sadly I dont think clubs like Leigh, although their stadium is mighty impressive have a chance of promotion and if the Championship becomes a good comp in its own right, it wont do it any favours for its best team to be cherry picked every other year.

: Sun Aug 09, 2009 10:28 pm  

nickcat0 wrote:

Except Union have promotion and relegation , plus a fight for European places , and different teams winning the big prizes .

RL has the same 14 teams for 3 years , Leeds and Saints winning everything , and nothinhg for the other teams to play for .

Or maybe not

[tb]

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 1:58 pm  

Dico wrote:

I agree Starbug, I think the gap will get bigger, I think come the next TV deal there could be a big increase regarding money, I think once we come out of this recession SL crowds could boom, especially at the 'lower' clubs with Sheds as grounds currently.
Championship clubs wont be able to compete with this unless they receive their own TV deal.
Sadly I dont think clubs like Leigh, although their stadium is mighty impressive have a chance of promotion and if the Championship becomes a good comp in its own right, it wont do it any favours for its best team to be cherry picked every other year.

You mean like the one they got in 2008. And the three-year one that replaced it for 2009-11?

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 6:53 pm  

tb wrote:

You mean like the one they got in 2008. And the three-year one that replaced it for 2009-11?

I think he means one where the clubs actually get paid

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:19 pm  

Starbug wrote:

I think he means one where the clubs actually get paid

[tb]

: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:23 am  

Starbug wrote:

I think he means one where the clubs actually get paid

So, not "their own" TV deal (which they already have, and which includes clubs getting paid, though with strings on what they can spend the money on, otherwise they don't get it) – but a "far better TV deal than anyone has shown any signs of being interested in offering" (bearing in mind that only one other broadcaster has ever been interested in showing Championship [or NL as it the was] RL – and they wanted the RFL to pay them to put the games on a channel with even less of a footprint that Sky).

If we're entering those realms: I'd like to win the lottery, or at least have my employer give me a 500% pay rise. Both are pretty unlikely, mind.

: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:47 am  

nickcat0 wrote:

Except Union have promotion and relegation , plus a fight for European places , and different teams winning the big prizes .

RL has the same 14 teams for 3 years , Leeds and Saints winning everything , and nothinhg for the other teams to play for .

Whoops.....

: Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:12 pm  

tb wrote:

So, not "their own" TV deal (which they already have, and which includes clubs getting paid, though with strings on what they can spend the money on, otherwise they don't get it) – but a "far better TV deal than anyone has shown any signs of being interested in offering" (bearing in mind that only one other broadcaster has ever been interested in showing Championship [or NL as it the was] RL – and they wanted the RFL to pay them to put the games on a channel with even less of a footprint that Sky).

If we're entering those realms: I'd like to win the lottery, or at least have my employer give me a 500% pay rise. Both are pretty unlikely, mind.

I was just explaining what Dico meant

I dont recall any SKY money for the NL's/Championship clubs , Co-op yes , SKY no

Personally I dont think it's worth a carrot being on the TV on a thursday but that's another argument

: Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:21 pm  

Rd 24 - CC/Split Rd

CC
Semi 1 Wigan v Warrington 12,975
Semi 2 St's v Hudds 10,638

Total= 23,613

ESL
Salford v Les Cats 3,475
Quins v Bulls 3,112

----------------------------------------------
Rd 19Rd Total = 60,260
Rd Avg = 8,608

Rd 20Rd Total = 53,471
Rd Avg = 7,6,38

Rd 21 Total= 63,645
Rd Avg = 9,092

Rd22 Total=60,192
Rd Avg = 8,598

Rd 23 Total = 67,053
Rd Avg = 9,579