I'd add to previous complaints about the need for sides to grow.

'A route to the top for any club' and 'Promotion and Relegation from SL' are not necessarily the same thing.

Given P&R requires clubs to gamble financially on both going up & staying there, while period licenscing creates the same problem on three-year cycles, it might be better to abandon both.

Instead have fixed criteria, assessed over multiple seasons, with any club meeting those criteria being included. E.g. if you can reach & sustain a minimum turnover, minimum profit, not be too indebted, have sufficient crowds & win a number of games, you can come up. Such criteria should be achievable (to get clubs to come forward) but stringent (so we don't promote clubs who'll never work as a business).

We should not be expecting clubs to go from amateurs to SL in five years. Fifteen years is more like it.

Absolutely true, and yet junior teams are left to fend for themselves, with their success often coming despite the dozy old duffers who administer the junior game rather than because of them; furthermore, professional teams are largely uninterested until U14's, when they suddenly appear looking for potential scholars to hoover up.

Add to this that coaches in the junior game are pretty much a law unto themselves and spectators are allowed to behave like football hooligans, and you're left with an unhealthy situation at the bottom tier of the game that sees many talented young athletes lost to football, RU or worst of all, cider and park benches.

If this is a long term plan to increase the player pool and improve the long-term health of the sport, then the junior game really needs some TLC.

Spot on!



I'd also add that whilst the junior game is (in my opinion) at best average but generally poor at developing players it's even worse at developing interest in RL. It's not entirely the junior game's fault because they rarely get enough/any support from pro/semi-pro clubs but they're still pretty bloody useless in my opinion.
It's one of the biggest factors that holds the game back.

In fairness, junior clubs are usually reliant on the goodwill and efforts of a small percentage of the parents of their players; you can get lucky and unearth a few diamonds, or you can find yourself relying on angry Dads who just want to win and well-meaning Mums without a clue.

Given all of that, it's a bit much to expect the vast majority of junior clubs to be able to do any marketing or PR work on top of the fundraising, coaching, admin, catering, social events, transport, kit supply and god knows what else they have to do on a voluntary basis.

What a pleasant well thought out post. Have to agree.

London, as as we have been, spent to the full cap in 2013.....it would mean having no or at least an equal cap in the Championship.....meaning more clubs reliant on benefactors.


London played Fev and Sheffield in 2013.....1,217 watched the Fev game, 2,459 watched the game in Sheffield........games that aren't included in the season ticket generally struggle for crowds.

Really?

Answer me this, out of the 4 teams mentioned above, 1 of the teams OWNS there own stadium, has the highest commercial revenue and largest average attendances.

And according to you we will never be self sustaining? We've ALWAYS had to rely on fans and not an owner. Do some research before you write absolute rubbish.

The domestic comp must support the international objectives
Increase player pool
Expand game
Create an intense elite

Two full time tens must be the way, HKR Widnes hull Warrington Salford London did not kick off the career of any of Saturdays 17, yet Leigh did
We need that second tier to expand the pool and allow the inclusion of Toulouse and a second French club soon after

But we have included Toulouse before and it failed.

Why should we include them a second time round?

Wouldn't the game be better investing money in the French league?

Is there any chance the government will invest more money into rugby league after the World Cup?

Didn't they take away a huge chunk of money?

It's all pointless anyway in terms of self sufficiency.....

Broncos posted debts of just over 13 million last week for their accounts up to 2012. Conservative estimates put Hughes ploughing in another 3 million in 2013...so basically, 16 million in "loans" in 8 years....that's 2 million a year.

3,414 is the average attendance over these 8 years and 105 home games.......if the average ticket is 15 (allowing for corporates/ST's/Kids/concessions etc) then 665k a year in ticket revenue is what the Broncos have averaged over 8 years. Sky deliver 1.3 million a year....

So
SKY, Tickets and Loans alone have delivered 4 million a year to London (excluding sponsors/shop and other bits)

London need to replace the 2 million loan with income.....if it was all through tickets, they'd need to increase their average to 13,670, but in reality, once they get to 10k then sponsorship and residual sales would makeup the difference.

So, which of Leigh, Fax, Fev, Sheffield or anyone else is going to either hit 10k averages or has a sugar daddy willing to plough in 10 million over a number of years on the off chance they might get there?

Replacing London with another team is not the answer...........financing London centrally for the benefit of the game is.

One change they should bring in that would be easy to market, a double header of the Challenge Cup Semi Finals, tickets ten and fifteen quid, less for concessions, at the Manchester of City Stadium.