: Tue Oct 28, 2008 12:47 pm  

Starbug wrote:

So you think that the clubs in NL 1 will be able to pull more sponsorship and get more fans through the turnstiles because of the inclusion of Toulouse

You are in dreamland , it is a no win situation , if Toulouse do well on the pitch the fans will see it as they are being allowed to flout the salary cap and quota rules , if they do badly and potentially end up in a relegation place the fans will question why they have been allowed in NL 1 instead of starting in NL2

And all this is costing the RFL close to a million pounds over the 3 years

And yet every NL club is struggling to survive

NL1 clubs should certainly be able to pull in more sponsorship and different sponsors through those sponsors getting exposure in a different market. A tiny sample of the fans (on here) seem negative but NL clubs should be looking at the larger number of latent supporters that could be attracted to games if they were given a reason to attend. If club chairmen simply explain the reasons why Toulouse have been placed into NL1, rather than NL2, their spectators may react more positively. If they whinge about the iniquities of the situation then spectators will take their cue.

: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:07 pm  

Starbug wrote:

An awful lot of editing of complete quotes there

Have you given up on the

NL 1 clubs are very different to NL 2 clubs now

well the differences have been listed three times, it seems pointless trying again


and none of those statements were changed by the context, all were definitive statements,

: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:17 pm  

Starbug wrote:

I notice that you missed the bit about nobody coming up with one tangible benifit , which was after all the point of the original post

so you cant answer the fact that your opinion is ridiculously contradictory

that on one hand you are arguing there is no negatives to bringing toulouse in, then on the other arguing clubs will lose money on it,

and then to argue that three clubs would be individually disadvantaged by it, because Toulouse may or may not be promoted ahead of them, and then to not only argue that Toulouse will bring no negatives to NL1 even though this is a negative, but also that at least one and probably two of these clubs has been saved from itself by Toulouse being promoted ahead of them

what tangible, specific benefit is there to Leigh being in NL1 that cant be applied to Toulouse, why not drop the to NL2 what would we lose?

you have caught yourself out and come clean here, your argument isnt specific it isnt real, and it is no better than the 'we dont want them forriners in our league, this is a northern sport' you pretend you are better than, your argument is simply Toulouse may be better than us, they may prove over the next 3 years they are better than us, if they do that then in three years time when they are picked ahead of us for a franchise i cant blame it on everything being been bent, but would have to accept they are better than us

: Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:01 pm  

CS at home wrote:

NL1 clubs should certainly be able to pull in more sponsorship and different sponsors through those sponsors getting exposure in a different market. A tiny sample of the fans (on here) seem negative but NL clubs should be looking at the larger number of latent supporters that could be attracted to games if they were given a reason to attend. If club chairmen simply explain the reasons why Toulouse have been placed into NL1, rather than NL2, their spectators may react more positively. If they whinge about the iniquities of the situation then spectators will take their cue.

You seriuously think that the local Featherstone/Barrow builders merchants/nightclub will pay more money to them because they are going to play 2 games [ one home ,one away ] against Toulouse

Yes I will admit that playing Toulouse will sound ' sexier ' than playing Leigh/batley but the probable lack of any noticable away support will remove atmosphere from those games , so a balance there

Why exactly have they been placed in NL 1 ? , if the chairmen explain that it is to prepare them for a SL franchise in 2012 I'm sure that will go down well in Leigh/Widnes/Fax and Fev

The posts on here would suggest they will not

No disrespect but you dont seem to be in touch with NL rugby , the way the clubs have to operate or the fans opinions of it

: Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:42 pm  

Starbug wrote:

So they have had 70 years to make something of themselves and they havent , time somebody else got a chance

for the first time in your life you have spoken some sense.

: Sat Nov 01, 2008 6:06 pm  

Starbug wrote:

No disrespect but you dont seem to be in touch with NL rugby , the way the clubs have to operate

You couldn't be further from the mark, although it was a couple of years ago. PM me if you wish

Barrow are sponsored by BAe Systems, other clubs also gain small (relatively speaking) sums from multi-national companies, these can be grown with international competition.

: Mon Dec 08, 2008 3:45 pm  

The fun will start when in the near future a Scottish,Irish and possibly other Welsh club apply for a Franchise and one or two of the current SL brotherhood gets kicked out.

As a Leigh fan I have settled my mind to probably never playing in SL as do most of my fellow Leythers,so I can assure you my views on Toulouse or any other potential new entrant is not a bitter one.

All we want is an equal playing field which obviously will never be the case.

: Mon Dec 08, 2008 5:36 pm  

The only beneficiary of Toulouse being in the Championship (NL1) will be Toulouse.

The only reason that Toulouse are in the Championship is because it has been promised a guaranteed SL spot for one of its clubs in 2012. This was a gesture, made by the RFL, to placate some of the top NL1 clubs worried that they will have no chance of a spot in 2012 after licensing was introduced. It will now be cynically manipulated to ensure Toulouse get that place.

Toulouse will not bring in any more sponsorship money by their presence in the Championship; the introduction of TV games will have helped that far more, and even that is negligible.

As Toulouse cannot be relegated, it may have a detrimental effect on some clubs who may have survived in the Championship had Toulouse not been there.

As Toulouse, barring some financial disaster will be awarded a licence, then several of the top NL1 clubs may suffer. Unless SL expands to 15 clubs, or two clubs are removed from SL, I can see little chance of any heartland clubs being awarded a licence, which will be a direct result of Toulouse’s inclusion.

I doubt that the RFL will include another French club in the English lower leagues again. It will cost too much. If the RFL had not guaranteed a licence place for an NL1club in 2012, then Toulouse would have simply been offered the same deal as Les Catalans, for entry into SL. This is what will happen if the RFL wish to introduce any more French clubs in to SL imo, as there is no longer any need to placate lower league clubs with an offer of a guaranteed licence for one of it’s clubs.

To be honest Toulouse look like a decent club on the face of it, with a certain amount of potential. Their licence bid looked quite good, with access to some excellent facilities, a league to draw players from and a major city of around a million people to draw from as well as a long history in the game. They look streets ahead of Celtic, who have absolutely none of this.


It will be a nice weekend for away fans, well the fans that can afford to travel there, but Toulouse will only have a neutral effect, at best, on the Championship. It looks good for them though.

: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:02 pm  

I think it certainly adds a novety to the Championship. I will go to a few of their games in England next season if it dosen't clash with my own team.

: Tue Dec 09, 2008 1:08 pm  

Can I ask what harm it does that Toulouse are in the Championship?

Then we can look at some people's agendas on here...