: Sat Apr 25, 2009 4:35 pm  

Alice's Phallus wrote:

You cannot have a system which does not coincide with the TV contract. That is because the size of the TV contract is affected by the roster of clubs.

etc etc

That has to count as one of the most senseless posts I have ever read on this forum (except for all the posts of fredie, Roofs and vastman.)

The TV issue is a fair point, but I doubt that it is the problem you make it out to be. TV deals will be for a given number of matches in a given compettition, saying that they would quibble with replacing a club would be similar to Sky Sports complaining that a team was relegated from the Premiereship. Obviously there is an appeal of a franchise system to the TV deal, possibly they would ask that a couple big-interest clubs not be relegated during a given TV deal period - but even without a rolling franchise review clubs could still go under due to extreme circumstances, what would Sky sports say to that.

As to your last comment, it starts as good rhetoric but then lapses into exaggeration. I may have a kettle here that would like a word with you.

Your post also shows that you have completely missed the point that other posters agreed so vehemently with, which is that "the best club" should get a franchise, no matter other wishes (i.e. no more yorkshire clubs). I will admitt that this position is somewhat sophistic since in reality this is a topic to argue which is "the best club".

: Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:04 pm  

By 2030, if it's still going then I'd like to see:

Leeds
Hull
Barrow
Toulouse
Barcelona
Moscow
Fulham (Harlequins)
Chelsea
Arsenal (North London)
Wakefield (Merged with Cas + Featherstone)
Catalans
Bradford
Manchester (Former Salford)
Liverpool (Former St Helens)
Edinburgh
Cardiff (Celtic)
Dublin
Glasgow
Belfast
Birmingham

Imagine:
Leeds v Arsenal
Chelsea v Liverpool
Belfast v Moscow
Birmingham v Manchester
Barcelona v Edinburgh

etc...

: Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:13 pm  

efcrhino wrote:

By 2030, if it's still going then I'd like to see:

Leeds
Hull
Barrow
Toulouse
Barcelona
Moscow
Fulham (Harlequins)
Chelsea
Arsenal (North London)
Wakefield (Merged with Cas + Featherstone)
Catalans
Bradford
Manchester (Former Salford)
Liverpool (Former St Helens)
Edinburgh
Cardiff (Celtic)
Dublin
Glasgow
Belfast
Birmingham

Imagine:
Leeds v Arsenal
Chelsea v Liverpool
Belfast v Moscow
Birmingham v Manchester
Barcelona v Edinburgh

etc...

: Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:32 pm  

efcrhino wrote:

By 2030, if it's still going then I'd like to see:

Leeds
Hull
Barrow
Toulouse
Barcelona
Moscow
Fulham (Harlequins)
Chelsea
Arsenal (North London)
Wakefield (Merged with Cas + Featherstone)
Catalans
Bradford
Manchester (Former Salford)
Liverpool (Former St Helens)
Edinburgh
Cardiff (Celtic)
Dublin
Glasgow
Belfast
Birmingham

Imagine:
Leeds v Arsenal
Chelsea v Liverpool
Belfast v Moscow
Birmingham v Manchester
Barcelona v Edinburgh

etc...

Far fetched to say the least!

You shouldn't give Albert your password!

: Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:52 pm  

efcrhino wrote:

By 2030, if it's still going then I'd like to see:

Leeds
Hull
Barrow
Toulouse
Barcelona
Moscow
Fulham (Harlequins)
Chelsea
Arsenal (North London)
Wakefield (Merged with Cas + Featherstone)
Catalans
Bradford
Manchester (Former Salford)
Liverpool (Former St Helens)
Edinburgh
Cardiff (Celtic)
Dublin
Glasgow
Belfast
Birmingham

Imagine:
Leeds v Arsenal
Chelsea v Liverpool
Belfast v Moscow
Birmingham v Manchester
Barcelona v Edinburgh

etc...

is that a football avistar you have there? ...erm looks more like a football fixture list to me....imagine the costs to goto all the away games...lol...yeah, loved to

Re: Which clubs should be added to Super League in 2012 + 20 : Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:17 pm  

Marsdengiant wrote:

A nice outline of the old criteria for licencing not franchises.

However.....

RFL/SLE have already put down markers with certain clubs re their facilities / stadia. This has been done via public general statements and the specific reports to clubs. they have also indicated that at least one club will enter SL next time around (this need not necessitate a relegation from the RFL/SLE pov. However SL clubs are unlikely to expand the SL if the Sky money would be 'diluted'.)

RFL/SLE are in the process of reviewing the criteria and the assessment process. So last years will be unlikely to be used next time. For e.g. the move to a U20s competition may have repurcussions.Also the new criteria will take into account that Championship clubs 'cannot' achieve 10K etc. There will also be considerations of clubs making improvements rather than mere maintainence.

The criteria are likely to change. One club is likely to be 'promoted' and SL is unlikely to go to 15 clubs. Everything possible will be done to keep Quins and Celtics in. Saints at KR would stay in but with a potentially 'lower score'.

That leaves Wakey /salford/Cas vunerable. If they are all groundless in 2011 other things being equal I think cas should go down.

This is why this proccess is open to abuse with biased opinions
As you say Everything possible will be done to keep Quinns, Celtic. What do you mean everyting possible will be done? ...and why?

That leaves Cas, Wakie, Salford. But YOU think, Cas should go down. You like me, have an opinion. Opinions always vary...would someones opinion be fair to take away a team from SL?

Just curious but why would you say CAS? (yes, I am defending my team)

Everything you said highlights that the RFL could basicaly do what every THEY like.

If the system is going to work...its got to be 1 rule for 1, 1 rule for all....NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE GEOGRAPHICALY

Re: Which clubs should be added to Super League in 2012 + 20 : Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:07 pm  

classycas2009 wrote:

This is why this proccess is open to abuse with biased opinions
As you say Everything possible will be done to keep Quinns, Celtic. What do you mean everyting possible will be done? ...and why?

That leaves Cas, Wakie, Salford. But YOU think, Cas should go down. You like me, have an opinion. Opinions always vary...would someones opinion be fair to take away a team from SL?

Just curious but why would you say CAS? (yes, I am defending my team)

Everything you said highlights that the RFL could basicaly do what every THEY like.

If the system is going to work...its got to be 1 rule for 1, 1 rule for all....NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE GEOGRAPHICALY

The license system we now have was created to make rugby league a more popular and valuable product.

Where a Super League club is geographically is very relevant to Super League's popularity on television, and hence value to the television networks. This all translates into the value of the TV contract that the RFL can negotiate.

But so far the RFL has not bent the rules in favor of expansion. They have bent them in favour of giving old clubs like Wakey, Cas, Hull KR and Salford a second chance to justify their presence in Super League. If these clubs fail to abide by the rules (e.g. by having a modern SL standard stadium built or at least under construction), then in 2011 they deserve to be demoted to the increasingly attractive Championship.

: Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:03 pm  

2012 - 12 clubs (not enough British/French quality for 14)

Saints
Wigan
Wire
Widnes

Bradford
Leeds
Hull
Huddersfield

Quins
Celtic

Catalans
Toulouse

A strong 14 team Championship of.....

Salford, Wakey, Cas, Fev, HKR, Halifax, Leigh, Oldham, Barrow, Whitehaven, Doncaster, Sheffield, Gateshead, and either Batley or Dewsbury.

2015 - 14 team SL

The original 12 plus Gatehead and Barrow (and be open about it too dont hide behind it by nudging criteria and turning blind eyes). You have a game them that is as national as it could ever really be over the next 20 years.

Then swap 2 from the original SL with 2 from the Championship based on on-pitch merit alone. Not geography, not baby changing facities, not stadia.....good old fasioned on pitch performances.

If its Celtic, Quins, or Toulouse then tough, by 2015 it would speak volumes anyway.

: Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:04 pm  

personally i'd have 16 teams
top 6 in playoffs

teams involved
1.Leeds
2.St Helens
3.Warrington
4.Hull FC
5.Hull KR
6.Castleford
7.Quins
8.Catalans
9.Wigan
10.Wakefield (only if they build new stadium)
11.Widnes
12.Celtic
13.Huddersfield
14.Toulouse
15.Barrow
16. A new Scottish or Irish side

Re: Which clubs should be added to Super League in 2012 + 20 : Sat Apr 25, 2009 11:13 pm  

Alice's Phallus wrote:

The license system we now have was created to make rugby league a more popular and valuable product.

Where a Super League club is geographically is very relevant to Super League's popularity on television, and hence value to the television networks. This all translates into the value of the TV contract that the RFL can negotiate.

But so far the RFL has not bent the rules in favor of expansion. They have bent them in favour of giving old clubs like Wakey, Cas, Hull KR and Salford a second chance to justify their presence in Super League. If these clubs fail to abide by the rules (e.g. by having a modern SL standard stadium built or at least under construction), then in 2011 they deserve to be demoted to the increasingly attractive Championship.

Yes. I do agree with the highlighted. Just that it must be 1 rule as for all