Spot on. Whoever wins the election will bin the whole thing - ignore it.

Ignore it?

What about the work that Supporters Direct do? should we bin that too?



Thats the exact thing we are trying to avoid. ST's wouldn't put that sort of money in as it's not economincally viable to do so. surely you should only be paying out what you can afford to do. and not be reliant on mr x or y to fund the club?

Works pretty well for the Green Bay Packers.

It may well simply be a pre-election vote grabber but I don't believe anyone can be certain that it will be dropped as soon as the election is over. This is a big issue at the moment and the government is under pressure to step in and do something. Those issues aren't going to go away overnight and whilst the proposal is far from flawless, it could certainly bring benefits to football and other sports including rugby league if it as developed properly and with a number of bodies such as Supporters Direct, the FA (maybe even the RFL) and club owners being involved from the start.

The aim of the proposal is not to make football poor, it is to weed out the irresponsible owners claiming to pour millions of pounds into the club whilst actually financing this 'investment' with loans which are then transferred to the club (see Manchester United and Liverpool). Nobody can deny that sugar daddies have been good for the game in terms of success on the field and there are undoubtedly some that are fully supportive of the club they own and would never dream of walking away and leaving the club facing financial ruin but the model simply isn't sustainable. The sugar daddies have to make money somehow and if that income stops or whatever reason the sports club is in big trouble.

Supporters Trusts are not the right option for every club in terms of complete ownership, but even those not in ownership of the club can use a shareholding to act as guardians of the club to ensure the major investor is running the club sustainably. It is very much down to the supporters and how they see their position with the club - are they happy to keep pumping their time and money into the black hole of club financies or would they like to know exactly where that money is going?

Unfortunately, there are many supporters in both games who are happy to sit and complain about their club being badly run but not willing to step and do something about it.

The RFL do not want any supporter owned clubs in SL , or even the Championships for that matter

Do you know this for certain? I'd be keen to know your source of information.

It seems an odd statement to make given that the RFL have part funded my position as Rugby League Supporters Trusts Development Officer for Supporters Direct.

They are happy for a supporters trust to come in and save a club from going under because they are not viable and are of no interest to any individual , but they would never grant a licence to a club run by a commitee , bear in mind that at the moment there is probably only 1/2 profitable pro/semi pro RL clubs in britain , unless a club can pull in at least 20,000 members of supporters trust they just dont have the financial muscle to build a club , all they can do is tread water until a ' sugar daddy ' turns up

I wouldn’t mind having a crack at running Leeds Rhinos..

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 589872.stm

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 589872.stm

It would mean attending matches though.

I think you've had too much already

Coming your way..

Oh please...oh yes please....

Curious, that, given that one of the principal Objects in the "Model Rules" for Supporters' Trusts, sponsored by Supporters' Direct, is to aspire to the Trust acquiring shares in the club and gaining board representation. And, as SD1 observes, the Supporters' Trusts initiative clearly has the backing of the RFL.

SD1 know's my feelings on this subject and i'm not sure a leopard can change it's spots.

whilst they have rochdale as a ST run club, i'm not sure they want more and the one eyed people who own the clubs, certainly don't want the likes of me and you invading their playgrounds and joining their club.

Board representation is one thing , majority shareholding is something entirely different , also do you seriously believe that any businessman is going to be happy putting in say 40 % of the required finance with a committee of fans that can be replaced then deciding how his money is spent , at the level that Bramley are operating then sponsors are probably happy to just tip up and let the fans decide who does what , can you see that happening at W1g4n ?

Unfortunately we have the situation in the game where those clubs with rich owners prepared to bankroll their clubs (and that includes guaranteeing the club debts not just wri9ting cheques) have a massive advantage over those without. The former include Wire, Saints, Hudds, Salford, Wigan, HKR, Quins and did include Leeds before the massive property sale profits. Not sure where Crusaders and Les Cats stand. Bulls for one are in the minority "without" camp.

The owners of the "monied" clubs will no way cede any control unless they need to get out and someone buys them out. The owners of the impoverished clubs without rich backers may well be interested in anyone fronting up with some serious cash.

But you have moved the issue. Your statement was that the RFL do not want any supporter-owned clubs. What you have gone on to talk about though is whether the OWNERS want any such.

Incidentally, at our fledgling Bulls Supporters' Trust, we have specifically said that it should not be the Trust's present intention to seek to buy into the club. For a number of reasons that would be both impracticable and would serve no useful purpose at the present time.

If you have a point to make , sorry but I'm just not getting it , in a perfect world then Supporters trusts would be perfect for owning pro clubs , but we aren't in a perfect world we are in a competitive world , and the sports governing body [ no matter how ' PC ' they are being do not want clubs run by committees of fans , they want blokes with stacks of cash in charge of them

I believe the point was that you made a clear statement that the RFL do not want any trust owned clubs in any of the professional leagues but have failed to provide any actual evidence to back this up.

You may of course, be right in what you say. And of course the proof of that would only come when the situation arises that a supporters trust is in a position to take over a club that is not in receivership. However, I can only speak from my experience and say that I have received a great deal of support from the RFL (including the finance they have invested) so it would be slightly bizarre if they weren't supportive of the model as a whole.

The government proposal only talks about part-ownership of football clubs and this is a model that is highly viable for any sport, including rugby league. The Supporters Direct model is based on voice, influence and ownership and there are a great variety of ways to influence a club without necessarily owning shares or sitting on the Board.

So we are talking about a glorified supporters association similar to the ones that most clubs already have and that help provide clubs with funds , unless you have the majority of the shares in anything , you dont own it , so the O/P is not what it actually meant

Supporters trusts should not be providing any clubs with funds without getting something in return. That is the basic premise of a trust as opposed to a supporters club. Their constitution does not allow for them to simply become a fundraiser for the club as pumping money into the black hole that is club finance will do nothing to create sustainable, community focussed clubs.

Why not have a look at our website at [urlhttp://www.supporters-direct.org[/url then you may have an idea of what supporters trusts do.

I fully understand what Supporters trusts do , very little is the answer , due to the highly competitive nature of british proffessional sport they are not suitable as an ownership body , they are ok as a last resort to keep a club going , but nothing more , and certainly not at the top level of any major sport

Quote ="Marto"Ignore it? What about the work that Supporters Direct do? should we bin that too? Thats the exact thing we are trying to avoid. ST's wouldn't put that sort of money in as it's not economincally viable to do so. surely you should only be paying out what you can afford to do. and not be reliant on mr x or y to fund the club?'" Aye you wouldn't get multi millionaires like Moran at Warrington pouring a fortune into his club on top players, the former england coach and the 'head hunted' Director of Youth Development. probably a supporters trust at the Wolves would not have done that. Paradoxically this would have been to the detriment of a club like.....Bramley: www.bramleybuffs.com/storm/282-s ... ley-coach- How fortunate for Bramley that Mr Moran is so generous

Quote ="Marto"Ignore it? What about the work that Supporters Direct do? should we bin that too? Thats the exact thing we are trying to avoid. ST's wouldn't put that sort of money in as it's not economincally viable to do so. surely you should only be paying out what you can afford to do. and not be reliant on mr x or y to fund the club?'" Aye you wouldn't get multi millionaires like Moran at Warrington pouring a fortune into his club on top players, the former england coach and the 'head hunted' Director of Youth Development. probably a supporters trust at the Wolves would not have done that. Paradoxically this would have been to the detriment of a club like.....Bramley: www.bramleybuffs.com/storm/282-s ... ley-coach- How fortunate for Bramley that Mr Moran is so generous

Quote ="GiantJo"Aye you wouldn't get multi millionaires like Moran at Warrington pouring a fortune into his club on top players, the former england coach and the 'head hunted' Director of Youth Development. probably a supporters trust at the Wolves would not have done that. Paradoxically this would have been to the detriment of a club like.....Bramley: www.bramleybuffs.com/storm/282-s ... ley-coach- How fortunate for Bramley that Mr Moran is so generous '" and there was me thinking you were bos. or is that just on the huddersfield board?

Quote ="GiantJo"Aye you wouldn't get multi millionaires like Moran at Warrington pouring a fortune into his club on top players, the former england coach and the 'head hunted' Director of Youth Development. probably a supporters trust at the Wolves would not have done that. Paradoxically this would have been to the detriment of a club like.....Bramley: www.bramleybuffs.com/storm/282-s ... ley-coach- How fortunate for Bramley that Mr Moran is so generous '" and there was me thinking you were bos. or is that just on the huddersfield board?

and there was me thinking this thread was on ownership patterns of clubs, or do you just need to write about me?

I think it is great that a club with a wealthy supporter behaves this way.