Re: Your SL : Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:12 pm  

Viking Vengeance wrote:

You know what? Im not so sure they will get the increase they hope for.

The old ground was in the middle of a very large area of housing in the middle of the main heart of Salford. Lots of roll-up customers i would expect, on foot etc. The new one will require the vast majority of fans to get in their cars (if they have them) and drive 5 miles out of town into the area of the trafford centre. It certainly wont be like Wire, where their new ground was effectively in the same general area albeit about quarter of a mile's walk from the old one and still slap bang in the middle of residential/town centre Warrington. They will need the people of Urmston and Flixton to make up that shortfall of walk-up traffic. Also just as an aside, Widnes used to have this problem once upon a time when the chemical companies were booming, but I cant believe how bad the smell is from the sewage works right by Barton Bridge there. Nasty.

I believe it is being capped as part of the proposal of works. But you are quite right.
As for the development. It will see quite a few new fans I reckon. How many people do you hear complaining about vandalism being done to their cars at the moment around the Willers.
Plus public transport to the area aint too shabby either.

Re: Your SL : Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:32 pm  

My money is on the RFL keeping the current 14 teams. They didnt have the bottle last time and i cant see it bein different this time.

If i was a fan of a current SL team id be very disappointed if we were replaced..

Nes

Re: Your SL : Sat Jun 26, 2010 3:36 pm  

nes2002 wrote:

My money is on the RFL keeping the current 14 teams. They didnt have the bottle last time and i cant see it bein different this time.

So then there's no need nor incentive for clubs to progress and improve,they can just rest on their laurels safe in the knowledge that banishment to the lower leagues is unlikely.Sort of makes the whole thing pointless.

Re: Your SL : Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:05 pm  

GSF wrote:

So then there's no need nor incentive for clubs to progress and improve,they can just rest on their laurels safe in the knowledge that banishment to the lower leagues is unlikely.Sort of makes the whole thing pointless.

And our youth set up be a waste of time seen as we are in the top group.Best 5 including superleague teams.Think only saints,wigan and leeds above us?

Re: Your SL : Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:42 pm  

They need to kick someone out or the game will simply stagnate! If the likes of Wakey can get away with not improving the ground dispite promising to do so where is the incentive elsewhere? If a Championship side (ex Toulouse) also doesn't get in especially Widnes with yoof & facilities then where is the incentive for any other side to build a new ground / set up yoof?

If they keep the same 14 it could be the death of the game below SL IMO and also the end of any dreams of a modern game played in top class stadiums and brining through lots of young quality players.

Re: Your SL : Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:18 pm  

nes2002 wrote:

My money is on the RFL keeping the current 14 teams. They didnt have the bottle last time and i cant see it bein different this time.

If i was a fan of a current SL team id be very disappointed if we were replaced..

Nes

They have already stated one will be dropping down from Super League.

Re: Your SL : Sun Jun 27, 2010 7:05 am  

Ah but they state a lot of things - you don't actually believe that do u VM ???

Nes

Re: Your SL : Sun Jun 27, 2010 10:25 am  

I am no fan of the RL but I suspect they mean business this time.Nigel Wood said in an interview a few months back that we are in competition with other sports and entertainments for peoples time and money and in this day and age people expect modern,comfortable facilities.I just got the impression they are sick to the back teeth of promises from certain clubs and the antequated image of the game when televised from some grounds.What would be the point of this charade every 3 years if they are going to award a club with an inferior rating a SL licence above a club with a superior rating?It would just breed complacency with the established also rans doing nothing to make progress with stadia,facilities, etc because they will know that it doesn't really matter.

Re: Your SL : Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:27 am  

Stadia aren't the be all and end all for franchise though. It's set up so super league clubs can cover most criteria and get a B/C grade - enough to stay in. Championship clubs don't have a chance on any criteria except for the shiny stadia one - that wont get a B/C grade. Rules will only change for clubs the RFL want in there - were Crusaders really a C grade based on the facilities they had then, and why weren't they reassessed when they became a new club at the other end of Wales? Is there a criteria for them stating "has potential to get better if franchise moved around until they find somewhere that likes them?"

Closed shop. Lets not kid ourselves eh?

Re: Your SL : Mon Jun 28, 2010 2:59 pm  

Widnes were on a C last time surely! We had two 'problems' the fact a new company effectively and also our youth production both those now dealt with!