Fev are an ambitious club but I can't see them ever becoming a top SL team. They're too small for that. In their heyday they were always the plucky underdog from a little town managing to spring the occasional upset but for the most part they yo-yo between the 1st and 2nd tier.

Good luck to them but like Bullinenemyland I've found Fev increasingly unwelcome in recent years despite the ground itself being very good. They've always had a few idiots in their following (anyone remember the 1989 YC Final?) and need to weed them out. Not that we're squeaky clean in that dept either.

I was reading Tony Collins's superb Rugby League in the 20th Century - A Social and Cultural History recently - I recommend it. The passage on the game between 1975 and 1995 is particularly good. We seem to be at a crossroads in the game that is very similar to the early 70s. Back then they struggled to fill stadiums. Crowds were at a low ebb. The game lacked leadership, people's habits had changed. The RFL brought in Oxley and Howes to replace Bill Fallowfield and they transformed things. The game's income from sponsorship went from 4k to over 400k in 7 years. A hundred fold increase. Crowds increased again and the game was on the up by the 80s. We need transformative change like that from the top again.

To be fair to Fev, I recall less than welcoming receptions at plenty of SL clubs such as Wakey, Wire and Saints. Plenty of songs with colourful language broadcast over Sky. We also have our element who recently let the club down so I don't see it as a reason for them not being deserving of a chance if and when it ever comes.

Clubs like Fev will be around long after some rich folk in France have got bored of funding a SL club. Granted a trip to Fev isn't as as appealing as a jaunt to France but let's not be so dismissive of teams that live and breathe the sport.

I'd argue Fev are a bigger club than the likes of Salford who look to be heading back to the wilderness after a brief flirt with some success and now uncertainty over their stadium.

Well I’m not singling Fev out for their undesirable element – just saying they have one, which is undeniable. I also said we do too and I didn’t see anyone on this thread cite that as a reason they shouldn’t be promoted. As for Fev “being around” long after “some rich folk get bored” well what can I say? If you take that attitude to its logical conclusion we should turn down anyone with any money unless they’re from an area that played RL since at least 1889. RL has been played in France for nearly 100 years now so they’re hardly “johnny come latelys”. In fact they have shown more commitment to the game than many over here when you look at how their game was banned during the war, had all its assets seized and couldn’t even call itself “rugby league” until the 1990s. Now they’ve got their act together on and off the field they should be fairly rewarded.



Salford have won plenty in their history – more than Fev in fact. However they’re both yo-yo teams if you look at the past 40 years so not completely dissimilar in terms of playing record. Ironically Salford were the leading club off the field in the 1960s and 1970s when the game was in the doldrums (like now). They diversified their business and were commercially successful. So much so that the RFL used them as an example for others to follow. If either Salford or Fev or the British game is going to thrive they need to look outside their immediate traditional audience as well as old fogeys like you and me.

Interesting points about the 70s.

I heard Paul Rowley discussing Toronto. He was very pro-Canadian RL and had coached there but he said the main issue was the total absence of a plan of what the game would or should look like in 10 years time and what the benefit of that would be.
There was nothing to judge anything by and asked why would any teams supporters agree to their being replaced in SL by a team with no cultural relevance to them.

I'm really interested in watching a tightly fought GB v France game but watching Toulouse is akin to watching racing from Turfontein or the IPL. SO, what is the plan? Or is it just whoever comes along with money to fund a club can get to the SL and another once proud club goes into a league with zero funding on an inexorable journey to becoming Oldham? I don't want to watch that, much less pay for it because it renders our game soulless, and without meaning, which I think is what Rowley really meant.

Quote: M@islebugs "SO, what is the plan? Or is it just whoever comes along with money to fund a club can get to the SL and another once proud club goes into a league with zero funding on an inexorable journey to becoming Oldham? I don't want to watch that, much less pay for it because it renders our game soulless, and without meaning, which I think is what Rowley really meant.'" Ask Ralph what the plan is... But it's always been like this. The successful clubs are the ones with financial backing that are well run. Once that disappears the rot sets in. It's been the case for just about every club. It just happens to be that Catalans and Toulouse are successful at the moment. Would you be happier to see them failing? I daresay it won't last forever because it never does. The game as a whole is in a rut just like it was in the late 60s/early 70s. People losing interest and finding other ways to spend their time so fewer people playing and watching. Clubs struggling financially. A vacuum of ideas and leadership at the top. Self interest filling the vacuum. Anyone on here remember when the RFL asked some external consultants to do a root and branch review into the game? It was called the Caine Report it was ruthless in it's criticism of the RFL. I can't see Ralph commissioning something like this again but it's what is needed. Tony Collins writes about it all here - so many paralells: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Rwe ... ue&f=false

Quote: M@islebugs "SO, what is the plan? Or is it just whoever comes along with money to fund a club can get to the SL and another once proud club goes into a league with zero funding on an inexorable journey to becoming Oldham? I don't want to watch that, much less pay for it because it renders our game soulless, and without meaning, which I think is what Rowley really meant.'" Ask Ralph what the plan is... But it's always been like this. The successful clubs are the ones with financial backing that are well run. Once that disappears the rot sets in. It's been the case for just about every club. It just happens to be that Catalans and Toulouse are successful at the moment. Would you be happier to see them failing? I daresay it won't last forever because it never does. The game as a whole is in a rut just like it was in the late 60s/early 70s. People losing interest and finding other ways to spend their time so fewer people playing and watching. Clubs struggling financially. A vacuum of ideas and leadership at the top. Self interest filling the vacuum. Anyone on here remember when the RFL asked some external consultants to do a root and branch review into the game? It was called the Caine Report it was ruthless in it's criticism of the RFL. I can't see Ralph commissioning something like this again but it's what is needed. Tony Collins writes about it all here - so many paralells: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Rwe ... ue&f=false

Thanks for link Bullseye, a very interesting read

I'd like to grab a copy of that book but - wow - the price is eye-watering! I'm going to keep a lookout for a reasonably priced second-hand copy.

Second hand ones on Amazon for about £20.

The game has shrunk since the financial crash, no doubt about it. That for me is the main cause of the state things are in. Lack of money. And it's only going to get worse as TV money dries up. The game doesn't (and never has had) a model other than "rich clubs are the most successful" so those with wealthy owners end up in SL. Maybe it should have a different model? What would that look like? We already have a salary cap but still only 4 winners of SL in 25 years.

I was dubious about Toronto because of the lack of any firm foundations there, I always thought it was doomed. In France though the game has grassroots and has been played there for nearly 100 years. I've nothing against a French team in SL just like I've nothing against NZ Warriors playing in the NRL.

I think we share concerns about the state of the game in this country and that's down to a lack of leadership and expertise in the RFL and clubs. Chucking out Catalans and Toulouse and replacing them with Leigh and Fev wouldn't change a thing for the positive IMO.

Fair enough. The elephant in the room for all Bulls fans is that there's a club with a history of 10-15k support in a huge city, with a history of producing some of the best players in the world, and whose decline mirrors that of SL to an uncanny degree. My fear is we've reduced SL to the level of Wakefield and are in the process of reducing British RL to the level of France.

Can't argue with any of that. Hence the comparison with where we were in the 70s. We need new leadership in the game to stop the rot. Unfortunately Ralph has Huddersfield Sheffield Giants on his CV and not much else.

I see it a little differently I think...

With the razzmatazz of SL came a wider TV audience and a bigger buzz. To the extent of the Bulls shirt on my back being recognised by a very well heeled family from Surrey whilst on holiday.

The game failed to capitalise and interest was lost. No matter how you dress it up RL is not aspirational in the eyes of the public. Union is, definitely, it's the tory party to our Labour, One's dour, lost and too busy in fighting whilst the other pretends to be for everyone and can cover up the fact it's second rate with media attention telling the public it's what they really want.

Having a couple of French teams might add some glamour, whether we like it or not, so may get more people interested, if it doesn't what have we lost? Nothing, but if it piques the interest of the public it may just help shift the dour, northern, dying game image all other sport are happy for us to carry. Does Sebastian in Surrey want to watch Catalans v Toulouse or Fev v Oldham?

Lets face it there is less and less money up here so...

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... dium=email

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... dium=email

Yeah I saw that. The lack of away fans seems to be the main gripe amongst some. Can't help but think that these clubs need to do more to maximise income generating opportunities outside the gate receipts. There are a few English SL clubs that bring a paltry amount of away fans but I don't see many asking for the likes of Salford and Hudders to be given the chop. I know many clubs are living hand to mouth but I fear short term thinking won't help.

I remember when we went from average gates of 4k to average gates of 13-14k. A lot of that was down to Peter Deakin attracting a new audience. It's not impossible. Sure, having a successful team helps but I remember when we won the league two seasons running in 79/80 and 80/81 the crowds never got to a five figure average - not close.

As for the moan about the cost of travelling to France for an away game the two French clubs do that every other week without complaint.