Up or Under

Up or Under

Post by Dee Brook » Fri, 27 Feb 1998 04:00:00


On BBC2 tomorrow (Thursday) night at 7:30pm is a programme entitled
"Up or Under" which is an investigation into the financial state of
rugby league. It is being shown in the regional "Close up North" slot,
so I don't know if you have to live in the North West to see it.

Dee

 
 
 

Up or Under

Post by John Drak » Fri, 27 Feb 1998 04:00:00

Quote:

>On BBC2 tomorrow (Thursday) night at 7:30pm is a programme entitled
>"Up or Under" which is an investigation into the financial state of
>rugby league. It is being shown in the regional "Close up North" slot,
>so I don't know if you have to live in the North West to see it.

>Dee

What is it with regional TV, that they only ever seem to make such
programmes about negative aspects of rugby league...? I can see it now...po
faced presenter against a gloomy grey backdrop, prattling on about the
latest financial crisis (as if they don't have those in every other pro
sport) and proclaiming the imminent demise of our sport, and no doubt
digging up a bit of archive footage of how great things used to be in the
"old days". And Ray French is bound to pop up somewhere to nod sagely and
say "Ooh Yis" and "when I played for St Helens in the 1960's" for no
apparent reason.

Funny that they've never thought of nipping down to Odsal, these regional TV
bods, to make a half hour feature about a place where rugby league has been
reborn in the past couple of years, and where all the modernised apsects of
the game, such as Super League, summer rugby, squad numbers, pre-match
entertainment etc (usually decried as the cause of the imminent death of the
game) have been made to work and have proved massively popular with the
sporting public.

Far too ***y upbeat.

The only positive thing about this prog will be the fact that as it's on the
BBC, old stoat face GMTV reject Mike Morris, now blighting YTV's Calendar
show won't be allowed to introduce it with his "comedy" eeh-bah-gum accent,
a party piece every time RL gets a mention on that prog (which is hardly
ever).

Rant over. Thank you and goodnight...

John
--
Rugby League - The Greatest Game on the Web
http://SportToday.org/
Remove "nospam" from e-mail address to reply

 
 
 

Up or Under

Post by WiganRLf » Fri, 06 Mar 1998 04:00:00



Quote:
>I can see it now...po
>faced presenter against a gloomy grey backdrop, prattling on about the
>latest financial crisis (as if they don't have those in every other pro
>sport) and proclaiming the imminent demise of our sport, and no doubt
>digging up a bit of archive footage of how great things used to be in the
>"old days". And Ray French is bound to pop up somewhere to nod sagely and
>say "Ooh Yis" and "when I played for St Helens in the 1960's" for no
>apparent reason.

Well I watched the program last night having videoed it.  Ray French was the
presenter and there were interviews with the likes of David Howe, Jim Quinn (ex
Oldham chairman) ML and others.

French managed to keep clear of nostalgia for most of the time although hi did
do one piece from the cleared site of Oldhams old ground with some newsreel
footage of past Oldham glories.

The main topic was where has all the Sky money gone. (Simple conclusion - to
the current generation of players).

ML rubbish'ed the KPMG report as out of date (correct) and said all the
recommendations had been implemented anyway (not sure about that).

Two things stand out.  The interview with Jim Quinn about the effects of
relegation *and* selling the ground on Oldham and an admission from Howe that
due to ARL player raids Saints paid out *double* their income that year in
order to keep players.

I think the Oldham experience is the biggest reason for getting rid of
relegation in SL.

Despite the mismanagement of the Sky money up to now the conclusion was fairly
upbeat in that what remains will be better spent there is a salary cap.

Of the players interviewed, Sullivan put the case that as a player with a short
career he would take whatever money was on offer (who can blame him) and
Farrell was wary of the cap but could see why it was being put in place.

Dave

--
Wigan RLFC - getting back to being Simply the best -

(remove the letter t from clarat if replying via email)

 
 
 

Up or Under

Post by mcswee.. » Sat, 07 Mar 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

> I think the Oldham experience is the biggest reason for getting rid of
> relegation in SL.

WHY ?

In a divisional structure, promotion and relegation are part of the
competition. Without these elements the SL clubs will be too compaicent and
standards will drop. And for those unfortunate enough to be excluded from this
elite there will be nothing to improve for. The game would ultimately contract
rather than expanding.

S

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

 
 
 

Up or Under

Post by WiganRLf » Sat, 07 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Quote:

>> I think the Oldham experience is the biggest reason for getting rid of
>> relegation in SL.

>WHY ?

Because when they went down they went bust.  

While they were in SL their creditors were prepared to keep giving them credit.
When they went down they were not.

Sponsors pulled the plug as well and all of a sudden a club that was in one
income bracket (SL) is now in a lower income bracket *but* with the outgoings
(SL players contracts) of the higher income bracket.

This also placed Oldham's finances in an even worse mess.  

All because they were relegated.

Unless you can solve these problems relegation and promotion is a luxury the
sport can no longer afford.

When it was semi-pro it was feasible for promoted sides to compete without
breaking the bank (its not now) and likewise relegated sides would not be left
with ruinous contracts to pay.

Now SL is truly professional with full time players across the board at best
relegation would see an entire clubs playing staff on the transfer list or at
worst a repeat of the Oldham experience.

IMO, RL cannot sustain div 1 and div 2 as truly professional leagues.  There is
not enough income generated by the clubs in these leagues to do this.

That also makes promotion/relegation less feasible.

Quote:
>In a divisional structure, promotion and relegation are part of the
>competition.

I would say that used to be the case.  I don't think any promoted side could
live with an SL side anymore (same may go for the Giants too BTW) and so the
promotion/relegation thing will become a farce as promoted clubs go right back
down.

Quote:
> Without these elements the SL clubs will be too compaicent and
>standards will drop.

I don't think the improvements within SL playing standards has anything to do
with promotion/relegation.

Quote:
> And for those unfortunate enough to be excluded from this
>elite there will be nothing to improve for. The game would ultimately contract
>rather than expanding.

Why?  Promoting clubs just because they win div 1 has been just about off the
agenda for a couple of years now.  They have to meet criteria beyond playing
merit.

It may not seem fair but until RL is geographically more diverse I just can't
see SL allowing in South Wales, them finishing bottom, and being relegated to
be replaced by Dewsbury.

Its just not going to happen like that.

Dave
--
Wigan RLFC - getting back to being Simply the best -

(remove the letter t from clarat if replying via email)

 
 
 

Up or Under

Post by WiganRLf » Sat, 07 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Quote:
>> I think the Oldham experience is the biggest reason for getting rid of
>> relegation in SL.

>WHY ?

Because when they went down they went bust.  

While they were in SL their creditors were prepared to keep giving them credit.
When they went down they were not.

Sponsors pulled the plug as well and all of a sudden a club that was in one
income bracket (SL) is now in a lower income bracket *but* with the outgoings
(SL players contracts) of the higher income bracket.

This also placed Oldham's finances in an even worse mess.  

All because they were relegated.

Unless you can solve these problems relegation and promotion is a luxury the
sport can no longer afford.

When it was semi-pro it was feasible for promoted sides to compete without
breaking the bank (its not now) and likewise relegated sides would not be left
with ruinous contracts to pay.

Now SL is truly professional with full time players across the board at best
relegation would see an entire clubs playing staff on the transfer list or at
worst a repeat of the Oldham experience.

IMO, RL cannot sustain div 1 and div 2 as truly professional leagues.  There is
not enough income generated by the clubs in these leagues to do this.

That also makes promotion/relegation less feasible.

Quote:
>In a divisional structure, promotion and relegation are part of the
>competition.

I would say that used to be the case.  I don't think any promoted side could
live with an SL side anymore (same may go for the Giants too BTW) and so the
promotion/relegation thing will become a farce as promoted clubs go right back
down.

Quote:
> Without these elements the SL clubs will be too compaicent and
>standards will drop.

I don't think the improvements within SL playing standards has anything to do
with promotion/relegation.

Quote:
> And for those unfortunate enough to be excluded from this
>elite there will be nothing to improve for. The game would ultimately contract
>rather than expanding.

Why?  Promoting clubs just because they win div 1 has been just about off the
agenda for a couple of years now.  They have to meet criteria beyond playing
merit.

It may not seem fair but until RL is geographically more diverse I just can't
see SL allowing in South Wales, them finishing bottom, and being relegated to
be replaced by Dewsbury.

Its just not going to happen like that.

Dave
--
Wigan RLFC - getting back to being Simply the best -

(remove the letter t from clarat if replying via email)