Well with Wood, Barwick Blake and Rimmer we have 4 TOTAL WONKA'S

well I take no satisfaction from the state your in - not least because I've mates who are bulls fans but I think the idea of a golden ticket is great.
ok at the moment your finances are terrible.
salfords aren't.
neither are a few others.

lets say the Dr wants to spend his money on a player but needs your ticket whats the problem?
you get money from him for your ticket which once that players contract is up reverts to being your ticket.
if your in the position to use it then you do so. if not you sell it again.

there will always be dominant clubs.
it wasn't that long ago it was the bulls making big signings and dominating others.

the golden ticket idea means that others have to benefit from a clubs sugar daddy wanting to invest.

when you were signing your big sponsorship deals should that have been stopped until every club had as good a sponsor in place?
you cannot simply bring everyone down to the lowest so that we are all equal.

I hope the Bulls find a way through this.
they were a great club
really leading the way in so many ways.
someone badly took their eyes off the ball and its sad the state they're in.

but I watched my team dominate and I've watched them in the second division.
you'll be back

Clubs have voted against this idea today - Koukash is a little frustrated...

I understand why a few clubs would like the idea but it's self defeating.

At the moment we have about five clubs who are almost in a league of their own due to them having more money [wealthy backers], whilst the rest are playing 'catch up' on a bare cap or maybe a bit under. It does no-one any favours, not even these wealthier clubs, by letting them pull even further away.

At the moment we still have an, at least [ifairly[/i competitive league, but if this proposal had been voted in, that would have ended big style and even some of the current, so-called [ibig[/i clubs might have had their numbers cut and been in trouble by trying to keep up with the Koukash's. A more level league brings better, more competitive matches and that equals a better competition. Remember a chain is no stronger than its weakest link.

It also encourages the myth that clubs are spending additional money that they can afford.
Salford haven't suddenly become a slick money making machine, they are solvent (as are a good few others) as long as their Dr is interested.
The minute he isn't they will be back in Schtuck unable to afford their marquee talent.
If only someone had such enthusiasm to teach rugby owners CEOs sound business practise and what a P and L account is, rather than coming up with such madcap gimmicks that are unaffordable to the majority of clubs.

If Nigel Wood had a golden ticket, there'd be no chocolate left in the chocolate factory.

sadly in the real world not all clubs are equal.
they never will be.

but this would have been a great way forwards.
allowing those who could keep or attract star players to SL via having to provide money for the clubs who were strapped for cash.heaven forbid we let someone invest in our game.

this weekest link argument though...

which weakest link should we bring the whole game down to?
we would all be equal

equally crap is not the way to progress

Obviously, there are clubs at the top and clubs at the bottom and a few in the middle, moving in both directions, upwards and down; this is just a simple fact of life. Having a decent competition [ie. one where games are not regarded as foregone conclusions] it is essential that the gap between top and bottom is kept within limits. Today, still, much as everyone expects the big teams to beat the lower ones there are still upsets - that is exactly how it should be and how it should remain.

The 'golden ticket' would have been them first step in moving away from this situation and a movement towards where only around five cubs would have any chance, not just in winning the competition which is, to be fair, what applies now, but in winning every game. You simply can't have a 'league' of just five clubs. Thankfully the clubs saw sense.

I think its more a case of the have nots deciding that if tthey can't no one can.
I know the theory of not having a massive gap leads to a closer comp but in reality clubs are going to the wall.
this would have enabled them to get some money in.

It's far more a case of clubs recognising that the move would make the competition even more unbalanced than it is now and that having too many high scoring drubbings, whether in your favour or against, isn't the sort of thing to attract spectators and a decent crowd every week, hoping to see a good game [ie a competition], brings in far more than selling a one off, golden ticket.

Would this lead to the possibility of clubs out bidding each other to buy golden tickets off other clubs?

How many players will Salford need?

Unfortunately this will further widen the gap between the have's and have not's in the game.

It's other effect would be to further push up the cost's of the quality players who are already in short supply - so with player development programs in many clubs being cut to save costs an "quality player" asset bubble will form.

Probably unfair to judge by tonight's performance---- but if you did --- they need a fair few.