Rugby League in this country has never been as much on it's knees in terms of spending power in relation to it's competition (NRL, Union, Australian rules).

I don't think you can compare previous periods in time to now.

Not sure I agree about catchment area. We've had a couple of juniors at Outlaws picked up by Wakefield. Players are there if you look hard enough. Wakefield, and indeed Sheffield are doing good work by tapping into the relatively unknown midlands area which is well set up in terms f juniors

Yes, pretty much.

Anyone who can remember as far back as the winter of 1999/2000 may recall we had two mergers in SL between Hull/Gateshead and Huddersfield/Sheffield which resulted in what exactly? Gateshead and Sheffield were sacrificed then allowed to rejoin at the bottom and start again as individual entities so what was the point in merging other than reducing the size of SL from 14 to 12?

As I said earlier I don't see the need for mergers now that we have licenses. The RFL need to take a strategic approach, licenses should go to the teams the RFL consider best placed to carry the game forward in each area and not allow duplication. Having say a Castleford and Wakefield in SL only weakens both as they fight over the junior development and the the local commercial budgets.

Leeds fans probably wont ever be affected directly by the specter of mergers and as such I don't really know how I would feel if I were a follower of a 'loser' in such a deal.

Tvoc, Hull/Gateshead and Huddersfield/Sheffield can hardly be examples of mergers not working. They were never a merger in anything but name. They were purely a means to the franchises which you advocate now. The tems you mentioned are way apart, and the final club were based at the same home as one of them.

A true merger would have two or more local clubs and would be inclusive of the positive assets of those clubs, not just one.

Mergers have not been tried out in a correct format before, and should be encouraged to give best options.

Why should mergers be "encouraged"?

Rugby league clubs are individual businesses. Why is it anyone elses problem if two businesses don't want to merge? They live and die by their own business plan.

The examples so far I agree or not Mergers they are takeovers. Effectively, Hull took over Gateshead and bought their assets, as did Huddersfield eventually.

I've said this on another thread but a merger implies two businesses coming together to make a better combined business. That is not the same as two shops next door to each other joining in to one. That only works if they are creating a monopoly in the area so stop the customer going anyhwere else. It's a break even, unless they pool resources and get rid of some people/assets, or even just put the prices up because the customer has no other choice.

Unfortunately in rugby team terms there is a lot of other choice, Sky sports rugby, watching other local sports teams they identify with or not watching at all.....or even watching the new team that is born from the ashes like Sheffield have.

In business terms a merger would work if both side brought something different, like wider loaction. If lets say a big company in Yorkshire merged with a big company in Lancashire they would share resources like distribution, but would gain a wider reach to sell each other products in existing shops. Eg. Mothercare selling Early Learning toys. Saves on ELC trying to buy new shops. Saves Mothercare as their shops are too big for their economoic situation. Good merger (I haven't checked the figures on their profits since though!)

I don't think their will ever be a good merger in the Rugby League Team scenario. They are always going to be Takeovers. One team would lose out. Rugby can only be played on one pitch at a time. Supports won't follow their local rival.
If say Leeds merge with Hunslet, it will just mean Hunslet dying and Leeds might have a nicer training ground.
If Leeds merged with Bradford, one side would eventually keep the stadium and support. The other would drift away or start a rebel team. It wouldn't be a super club because they wouldn't get the theoretical joined support.

Same for all other local rivals.

We might as well create a 10 team league, pool the Sky money into a smaller group and let those that didn't get in just die or survive as a smaller business. If we decided the league on geography so lost Cas at Wakefield's expense, Sts at Wigan's expense, HullKR at Hull's expense, we can then add some teams outside the immediate area and create a wider spread of customers.
Won't work but it sounds good. Why not encourage that?
Can't see so many from Cas, Sts, HullKR voting for that can you?

Leeds' catchment area has a significant greater population count than virtually any other club's catchment area - law of averages suggests that has to be an advantage.

Hardaker was not picked up by any SL club as junior, Watkins is an exception. The bigger clubs like Leeds and Wigan will always be a bigger draw than the likes of Cas, Wakey and Widnes simply because of size, structures and reputation. The T/O of a club like Leeds gives them the spare monies to spend on youth development that the smaller clubs can only dream about.

Mergers only work if they provide the customer with something they want, and can't get through any other means.

You'll struggle to find many fans of the "Calder" clubs who are so desperate to watch SL that they'll happily accept their own club being absorbed into a merger IMO.

I don't think encouraging RL clubs and RL communities to lose their identity is a recipe for future success.

The RFL need to determine the teams they want in SL through the license system and let the others find their level - no need for mergers just a need for some realism at those clubs ill-equipped to sustain competitive full-time squads and maintain a reasonably well-appointed stadium.

Regarding Leeds having an advantage of a larger catchment area, didn't Watkins come from Manchester.......also Sinfield from Oldham.

A view that couldn't be backed up without it happening. That's the issue, until a proper merger and advancement takes place, people will always have this same view, that holds the game back.

A perfect test case for me and crying out for a merger is South Yorkshire. Such a vast area and two small championship clubs playing within it. Such a great run club is Sheffield Eagles, fans that back it all over, and yet in truth does not have any identity at all, and is kind of nomadic moving around grounds. Then Doncaster that is not well run, always struggling, but with a fabulous base and fans that also back it.

A merger of those two clubs would reach out to so many people that it currently doesn't do. And any super league should have a south yorkshire club in it, where it can not be accused of infringing on other locals.

Correct. SL has been too short sighted for too long. The game in this country is being held back by the bottom clubs.. if we are to catch the NRL things must change.

So what do you define as a "proper" merger?

There will always be the perception in any merger that one side has come out of it better off than the other. In Australia, Illiawarra fans view the "merger" with St George as basically just a takeover. The team plays half its game in Illawarra, but it wears the St George jersey with the St George badge on it (albeit with the addition of the Illawarra name).

Tensions are bubbling up at Wests Tigers over what the junior teams are called that play in the NSW Cup, and the perception of Wests fans that the club is effectively being run by "Balmain" people.

Is there evidence to suggest that rugby league fans from Doncaster travelled to Sheffield to watch the Eagles when they were in the top division. Or that Eagles fans travelled to Doncaster when they were in the top flight?

Why would they? completely irrelevant point.

The point is what would they do, or more important people who currently go to neither of these two teams do, should there be only one club in that area, who is also playing in the top flight, and a competition that would be enhanced by restructuring it.

I'm going to try and go through the arguments against mergers one-by-one to deal with them all.

The League don't own the Clubs, so they shouldn't do anything.

No. But the behaviour of clubs impacts on the ability of other clubs to be succesful and of the game to flourish, which is most certainly the responsibility of the RFL. If having a league containing lots of small, uncompetitve clubs that can barely get by season-to-season is bad for the game, then the RFL can (and should) change that system to ensure the best interests of the majority. Note that that will include fans within such clubs that would rather have a team to support playing SL as part of a merger than no team at all.

Mergers will be done badly, as takeovers

Obviously, if a problem can be pointed out in the way mergers have been done, then we can avoid those problems. Suppose a Cas-Wakefield-Featherstone merger. You could:

1. Avoid the 'Calder' problem by calling the team Wakefield-Castleford Rovers
2. Sell off both Belle Vue & The Jungle to have one Stadium for the team
3. Make white/red/blue & orange/black the home/away kits
4. Keep Post Office Road & a Featherstone team in the championship as a development side.
5. Design a merged crest from the two old Wakefield & Castleford crests to serve as the new badge
6. Allow the new coach to merge the two squads into one, keeping the best players.

While this won't stop some people saying 'I just won't watch that team under any circumstances', it should mollify some people to a reasonable degree. It would also help to ensure that the new merged side would do better than the previous unmerged sides. For instance, a Wakefield-Castleford side with a halfback pairing of Tim Smith & Rangi Chase should do quite well.

There isn't a problem, and clubs can just continue on as they are

This is true, if you're willing to see some of SL go back to semi-pro status, or to be reliant on the support of the local 'Mr Big', and for only a handful of clubs (realistically St Helens, Wigan, Warrington, Leeds, Bradford & Hull FC) to ever have a realistic chance of winning anything. To be sustainable, a rugby club needs to be able to threaten a 10k gate reasonably regularly. Do you think that Cas, Widnes, Wakefield, Salford, Leigh, Halifax etc. can do that? If so, show us a plan to get them to do that. If not, what's your solution? Because getting by season to season just isn't good enough.

Obviously liscencing is a good thing, and is a first step. But we need to face facts-that some clubs are never going to be sustainable because the catchment areas they have (e.g. Castleford-a town smaller than 50,000 people) is never going to make a side sustainable, especially when they are competing with other avenues for people to spend their money, such as other teams, other sports, and other forms of entertainment. The choice here is not Cas as they are now v Cas in a merger, it's a Merged Cas v no Cas.

Yeah, I can imagine that Sheffield would definitely see a merger in a good light.
What with all the benefit they got from it last time and everything.

Seriously? what is it that is so hard to understand? Sheffield have never been in a merger. They were taken over in order to meet a franchise requirment to get Huddersfield in.

As Sheffield are the stronger of the two clubs in South Yorkshire, they would definitely be getting the better deal of the one I suggested.

Perhaps you should try posting that on the Castleford board?

So whats this then? You don't half talk wet at times you lad.

Not going to do this one by one (sorry) but a couple of things leap out...



Sorry, but again, by what mechanism can a governing body mandate the merger of two businesses? It's not that they [ushouldn't[/u do anything because they don't own the clubs, its that they [ucan't[/u do anything because they don't own the clubs.




You wouldn't and couldn't just glue the squads together though, so that's a bit of a nonsense, with respect. They'd still have a salary cap to adhere to. While I gether neither are paying the full cap at the moment, I'm sure they're paying more than half!

This works both ways. What makes you think that people [uwould[/u get behind such a venture? Sport in this country most often draws on a strong sense of geographical loyalty, particularly in morte "minority" sports (football clubs as 'global brands' are sometimes a bit different). You could end up with a strong club backed by two towns. Or, you could end up with a contrived entity that nobody much cares about (see Leeds Tykes or whatever they're called now).

Take Leeds Rhinos as an example, then look at other sports, Leeds United say, or Sheffield Ice Hockey team.

The Rhinos have supporters constantly coming to games from well outside the Leeds area. Leeds United have supporters at games from other countries, never mind many from the south of the country. Sheffield Ice Hockey team are not just supported from Sheffield.

The geographical loyalty is an excuse in reality. Rugby League sells it's self on the product it has to offer. As the product diminishes less fans will watch. As the product enhances, more will watch.

Take the two clubs from the championship, who are going nowhere let's be honest. A huge catchment area, a huge talent pool, one an extremely strongly run club who defy the odds constantly, and the other a poor run club but with the facilities that the strongly run one so desires. What you have together is a very good product, bringing the positives of both sides to join. As that club then improves and is playing in a better competition, fans will want to see that product.

Then look at Catalans. Who supports them when they play in this country? they bring more to away games than London and Salford. There not french, no it is other fans from the UK who have an interest in them.

Huddersfield were already in - albeit not as competitive on the field as Sheffield were.

The bit that's hard to understand is why you're either ignoring what happened to Sheffield in 2000 or thinking a future merger between existing SL clubs wouldn't end up looking similar.

How big will the RFL merger sweetener be this time? IIRC it was £1 million in 1999, would the mergers have gone ahead without it?

The Huddersfield/Sheffield team did play a couple of it's games in the steel city but they were shunned to such an extent that it was looking pointless to take any more there so they didn't, not that Huddersfield saw an upturn in their attendances either - while on the field the merged club won four games from twenty-eight to finish bottom and three of those were V Wakefield by a combined aggregate plus score of ten.

Because what happened previously is nothing like what is been suggested on this thread. Sheffield previously was not a merger, and could never have been regarded as any potential of success.

I don’t think anyone would suggest a merger in the form of a hudds/Sheffield or Gateshead/hull merger would be the way to go.

However I would take issue with the assumption that those mergers weren’t a success. Compare where Hull and Hudds were pre-merger to now. They are in a much much stronger position.

The failures of those mergers quite clearly, imo, wasn’t the failure to take two struggling clubs and make one strong one because they did that (Hull and Hudds now are stronger entities than pre-merger Hudds, Hull, Gateshead and Sheffield). It was a failure for those mergers to keep one party of the merger interested. Quite big distances separate Hull and Gateshead and Hudds and Sheffield, neither club did much, if anything, to create and identity which represented both parties of the merger. Their locations and history made it pretty impossible.

This wouldn’t need to be addressed in the same way, and there wouldn’t be the same problems encountered in crafting an identity which covers not only Wakefield but Cas and Fev as well. To be fair, that identity has existed for 30+ years, its called the Wakefield Metropolitan District. That’s the only hurdle a merged club would need to overcome, to sell the team as a team not for Wakefield, not for Cas, not for Fev but for all of them, and others. That wasn’t ever a possibility for the other two mergers.

If we merged Wakefield, Cas and Fev and got one Hull FC sized club, with a good supporter base, good sponsors, a quality stadium, a decent size and a strong off-field presence (ignoring Mr Pearsons blame game) then that would be a plus for the game.