That is very interesting and looks good...if you're already in SL and receiving all the benefits of such. On the face of it it's summat to aim for but it's like sending a child into the sweet shop with no brass. Any non SL clubs voting in favour of this charade might as well be turkeys voting for Christmas.
Hear All, See All, Say Nowt. Eat All, Sup All, Pay Nowt. And if Tha ever does Owt for Nowt, Allus do it for Thissen.
Hudd-Shay wrote:That is very interesting and looks good...if you're already in SL and receiving all the benefits of such. On the face of it it's summat to aim for but it's like sending a child into the sweet shop with no brass. Any non SL clubs voting in favour of this charade might as well be turkeys voting for Christmas.
I’m going to reserve judgment for now but the whole process leaves me feeling a bit apathetic.
Well at least provisionally the targets have been set out, how realistic it is for clubs such as us who have ambitions to reach them is another thing but whether they can or can’t it will be down to them to determine what current level each of them is at.
Because of being in the highest division it was inevitable that the existing SL clubs would be better placed for an initial higher grading.
Since the goal is always to aim upwards IMG were always going to start at the top.
With that in mind the reasoning is, why should the best of the sport of rugby league (SL) lower the standards to match that of say the Championship?
Or the second best, Championship to Championship 1 level, would we be happy to do that?
is hardly Rugby League reimagined. Below is the list of criteria for SL licensing for 2009-2011:
Facilities
Teams will get one point for having a stadium with a capacity of 12,000 or more. Another point will be awarded if the ground meets the standards of a premier competition in the 21st century.[13]
Attendances
A point will be awarded to clubs with an average attendance of around 10,000 spectators. Another point will be awarded if stadiums are operating at 40 per cent capacity.[13]
Finances
Teams will receive a point if they are solvent. Another point will be awarded if their turnover is more than £4 million.[13]
Player strength
Teams earn one point if they are considered to have made a contribution to the competition - that means averaging a place in the top eight over each of the last three seasons. Another point is available to clubs who make a contribution to home-grown player development. That means at least eight members of a first-team squad of 25 should be discovered, trained and developed in the team's home country (United Kingdom or France).[13]
Salary cap
One point is on offer to teams who have not committed a major breach of the salary cap in the last three seasons.[13]
Geographical expansion
The final point goes to clubs who do not have another rugby league club within a 20-mile radius
Like I said whatever the proposals are they were always going to favour the current SL clubs and I can’t ever see a scenario where Keighley or Fax for that matter would be used as the models to set the standards.
Will the proposed standards create a closed shop of just 12 clubs?
I thought it was said that if and when more clubs reached the cat A & B standards then the number clubs in the elite comp would increase so you could end up with say 14 if enough qualified?
As long as the standards for the A&B cats were maintained then they would remain in the elite group.
This was the reason for the move away from totally relying on on field performance to avoid the yo yo situation of promotion and relegation where the newly promoted clubs often came straight back down.
Hard to keep up over the last few months with all the chatter and what is real and what is speculation so I might have dreamed it.
Like I said whatever the proposals are they were always going to favour the current SL clubs and I can’t ever see a scenario where Keighley or Fax for that matter would be used as the models to set the standards.
Will the proposed standards create a closed shop of just 12 clubs?
I thought it was said that if and when more clubs reached the cat A & B standards then the number clubs in the elite comp would increase so you could end up with say 14 if enough qualified?
As long as the standards for the A&B cats were maintained then they would remain in the elite group.
This was the reason for the move away from totally relying on on field performance to avoid the yo yo situation of promotion and relegation where the newly promoted clubs often came straight back down.
Hard to keep up over the last few months with all the chatter and what is real and what is speculation so I might have dreamed it.
Just have wait for what the clubs have to say.
Last edited by faxcar on Sat Mar 11, 2023 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Well said Keighley. This is absolutely spot on, 100%! How other clubs can't or won't see what is happening is beyond me. We need to get P&R locked in, get rid of the ridiculous loop fixtures in SL and aim to have 14 clubs in that division. Then market the sport from there. After all we keep saying we have the best sport in the world, which we have I believe, we just need people at the top to get realistic and market the game as such and stop trying to push pie in the sky ideas which have almost ruined Rugby League at all levels. Up The Fax! :thumb:
Well said Keighley. This is absolutely spot on, 100%! How other clubs can't or won't see what is happening is beyond me. We need to get P&R locked in, get rid of the ridiculous loop fixtures in SL and aim to have 14 clubs in that division. Then market the sport from there. After all we keep saying we have the best sport in the world, which we have I believe, we just need people at the top to get realistic and market the game as such and stop trying to push pie in the sky ideas which have almost ruined Rugby League at all levels. Up The Fax! :thumb:
Hear All, See All, Say Nowt. Eat All, Sup All, Pay Nowt. And if Tha ever does Owt for Nowt, Allus do it for Thissen.
faxcar wrote:Like I said whatever the proposals are they were always going to favour the current SL clubs and I can’t ever see a scenario where Keighley or Fax for that matter would be used as the models to set the standards.
Will the proposed standards create a closed shop of just 12 clubs?
I thought it was said that if and when more clubs reached the cat A & B standards then the number clubs in the elite comp would increase so you could end up with say 14 if enough qualified?
As long as the standards for the A&B cats were maintained then they would remain in the elite group.
This was the reason for the move away from totally relying on on field performance to avoid the jo jo situation of promotion and relegation where the newly promoted clubs often came straight back down.
Hard to keep up over the last few months with all the chatter and what is real and what is speculation so I might have dreamed it.
Just have wait for what the clubs have to say.
Like I say I’m gonna reserve judgement until there’s more clarity on the situation, the grading system seems quite complex and probably needs to be simplified for the average Joe just wanting to support their club . With onfield performance only contributing 25% does that enthuse teams to actually play to their best , who knows , usually onfield performance and fandom ties together but fax who have had two good seasons haven’t seen a significant rise in attendances . I’m also not sure super league is the promised land , as a product I find it quite boring. What’s ironic is that rugby league has spent the last 30 years trying to make it what it was three decades ago , a great product.
When involvement of IPG was first muted I naively hoped that they would be coming up with new ideas to raise the profile of the game, or increase levels of investment/sponsorship. As has been said this feels just like a very modest revamp of old licencing guidelines. It's almost as though no one has put any thought onto it for 12 months, then suddenly realised they had a week to produce something so just dug out the old licencing guidelines and reworded them slightly. While I'm realistic enough to realise that some change to the promotion/relegation structure is needed, if the main aim of the proposals is to increase crowd numbers, having a system that only applies 25% to onfield performance shows a complete lack of understanding about what motivates supporters to back their team.
[Part quote="Ilkley Fax"]While I'm realistic enough to realise that some change to the promotion/relegation structure is needed, if the main aim of the proposals is to increase crowd numbers, having a system that only applies 25% to onfield performance shows a complete lack of understanding about what motivates supporters to back their team.
Regarding the performance weighting it’s because everybody knows what draws in the crowds and expects every sports team to try and win every game regardless so they won’t need any encouragement in that area.
For years the first team is where all the money had been spent whilst other areas have been neglected so making them more important is intended to give more incentive to invest in them.
Not saying it’s the right or wrong approach, just offering an explanation.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
