they wouldnt,

its a common tactic on these boards, invent a very unlikely and pointless example of something, point out how pointless it would be but ignore how unlikely it is, then pretend you have argued against whatever it was an example of.

Testify brother

I think you will find that, that is what I said



Very clever, but that does not represent what I said or why I said it.

Western Suburbs Magpies highest attendances on average were around 11k (they had one 15k average in 1961, the rest were 8-11k). They dropped as low as 6k on average.
Balmain Tigers are similar. Apart from a brief period in the late 60s where their averages were between 15-19k, they were 8-11k every other year, again dropping as low as 6k on average.

The years leading up to the merger, they were both averaging between 6-10k.

Wests Tigers averaged 12-13k straight away, and now average 17-19k. They average combined what Balmain and Magpies were getting on their own. It's a very successful merger, and neither of these clubs have shown signs since the 60s of getting anywhere near decent crowds on a consistent basis.

A bit different in this instance , as it would seem there is money on offer if 2 clubs decided to do it , we dont know how much money or if any clubs are excempt , but it does make this particular issue more relevant

you say that, but your argument is pretty much destroyed by one question, the same one which i responded to.

Why would Hunslet and Bramley merge?

Answer, they wont so it isnt a useful example.

A more useful example would be the Coventry example given previously, or at a stretch a cumbrian merger with a view to SL which, pragmatically is a little beyond any of the current sides.

... except the proposals seem to talk about "A club brought about by the amalgamation of two existing clubs in the Championships" and guaranteeing a place in "the Championship" not 'the championships', so Cumbrian sides merging for an SL bid (however unlikely that might be) fits better than clubs outside the current championships clubs merging to enter Championship 1.

I'm sure the feedback on that section will be 'interesting'

You have taken one line of what I said and either misunderstood or twisted it to suit your views.


I saidThe problem with a merger is that the stronger club tries to retain its identity, ie Hull/Gateshead, Huddersfield/Sheffield.

What would happen if say Hunslet and Bramley merged but played out of the South Leeds stadium? '"

with respect it was you that started the Hunslet/Bramley merger thread - you just picked an inapropriate combination that's all.

Rather than Sheffield/Huddersfield and Hull/Gateshead which were both extremely obvious

Hmmm... you've used "very unlikely", "never going to happen", and "ridiculously unlikely" in two sentences. I take it you don't think it will happen

I'll focus on "ridiculously unlikely" 'cos it sounds nice. The term is only relative to time; what is "ridiculously unlikely" now may not be so in two years....five years... 10 years time. Just ask fans of Sheffield and Gateshead what it's like to be "ridiculously unlikely".