The RFL argument regarding the location point is so that clubs outside the heartlands that don't have that 'default' rugby league interest aren't at a disadvantage as they're more likely to miss out on the attendance point and the 40% capacity point.
But considering that very criteria is set out to improve the game and the image of the sport - why should they benefit because of things they can't achieve? You could argue both Hull clubs are also at a disadvantage in those points because they're drawing support from the same area.
I'd award those clubs the location point if they achieved (say) average crowds of 4k and reached certain levels of youth development, not because they don't.
Joined: Mar 05 2007 Posts: 13190 Location: Hedon (sometimes), sometimes Premier Inn's
reddan wrote:The RFL argument regarding the location point is so that clubs outside the heartlands that don't have that 'default' rugby league interest aren't at a disadvantage as they're more likely to miss out on the attendance point and the 40% capacity point.
But considering that very criteria is set out to improve the game and the image of the sport - why should they benefit because of things they can't achieve? You could argue both Hull clubs are also at a disadvantage in those points because they're drawing support from the same area.
I'd award those clubs the location point if they achieved (say) average crowds of 4k and reached certain levels of youth development, not because they don't.
I spend a few days a month over in lancs and Mersyside area and geographically there are a lot of teams withing a small area not that much bigger than Hull and surrounding villages.
'when my life is over, the thing which will have given me greatest pride is that I was first to plunge into the sea, swimming freely underwater without any connection to the terrestrial world'
Joined: Jun 11 2007 Posts: 12260 Location: south of Hull.
rover49 wrote:I spend a few days a month over in lancs and Mersyside area and geographically there are a lot of teams withing a small area not that much bigger than Hull and surrounding villages.
Leeds - Bradford Saints - Wigan -Warrington-Salford All within peeing distance of each other,so don`t see why location should be an issue. As both Hull and Rovers get good support I can`t see the problem of two teams in one city.It works in football.
BLACK AND WHITES
East is East,West is West, and never the twain shall meet.
-------------------------------- "I" said the sparrow "With my bow and arrow."
Joined: Jan 18 2005 Posts: 2362 Location: www.eastsidegym.co.uk
reddan wrote:The RFL argument regarding the location point is so that clubs outside the heartlands that don't have that 'default' rugby league interest aren't at a disadvantage as they're more likely to miss out on the attendance point and the 40% capacity point.
The whole concept of awarding points is to disadvantage teams who don't get them.
You shouldn't create new ways of adding points for teams you know don't fit the standard criteria.
I am all for expansion but we shouldn't do it just for the sake of it and at the expense of potentially more viable traditional teams.
“We will not accept a top eight finish as a barometer of supposed success at any point in the future whilst I am the owner of this club." Adam Pearson, FC Website 23-09-2011
Willa wrote:The whole concept of awarding points is to disadvantage teams who don't get them.
You shouldn't create new ways of adding points for teams you know don't fit the standard criteria.
I am all for expansion but we shouldn't do it just for the sake of it and at the expense of potentially more viable traditional teams.
Guess it depends what strategic direction the RFL are heading towards. Their strategy over the last few years appears to be around expansion geographically. Personally i would review my strategy if i were the RFL and look at expanding into the RL heartlands and the viable traditional teams rather than throwing more money at an idea that i dont think works. It's about time the RFL got it into their heads that rugby league is a game played mainly by teams in the north of england across the M62 coridoor.
Barnacle Bill wrote:Those are the criteria for this round of licensing. That is what the RFL stated when licensing was introduced, they were to be used this time round.
The licenses awarded last time were based on (in theory) similar criteria but it was not the transparent process it is supposed to be now.
Bill it wasnt, isnt and never will be.
In fact it would be ridiculous to have a tick box system, especially considering there has been no weighting.
//www.pngnrlbid.com
bUsTiNyAbALLs wrote:Do not converse with me you filthy minded deviant.
vastman wrote:My rage isn't impotent luv, I'm frothing at the mouth actually.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 82 guests
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
