Quote ="Kosh"Yes. Several places in fact. But it's all been tabulated in simple form here: wigan.rlfans.com/fusion_pages/in ... age_id=259 The highlight: In 1996 there were 12 sides in SL with a total average attendance of 77,604 or 6,467 per club. In 2011 there were 14 sides in SL with a total average attendance of 124,980 or 8,927 per club. Your argument is not supported by the facts.'" Does anyone know the attendances for all the clubs prior to 1996? I know the Championship and Championship1 gates are dire these days, but it would'nt surprise me if a lot supporters have'nt dumped their lower grade clubs for a SL ones.

Quote ="Kosh"Yes. Several places in fact. But it's all been tabulated in simple form here: wigan.rlfans.com/fusion_pages/in ... age_id=259 The highlight: In 1996 there were 12 sides in SL with a total average attendance of 77,604 or 6,467 per club. In 2011 there were 14 sides in SL with a total average attendance of 124,980 or 8,927 per club. Your argument is not supported by the facts.'" Does anyone know the attendances for all the clubs prior to 1996? I know the Championship and Championship1 gates are dire these days, but it would'nt surprise me if a lot supporters have'nt dumped their lower grade clubs for a SL ones.

Thats assuming he`s actually a Leigh fan is n`t it.

I think what the OP means is "Super League Has Failed because MY team isn't playing there"

Typical of the 'super league' closed shop attitude

, teams like Halifax, Leigh, Featherstone were around long before franchising and will be around long after franchising the same can't be said for Celtic Crusaders/Crusaders/South Wales Scorpions or Bradford atm

It obviously hasn't 'failed' in the absolute sense of the word ( it still exists ) so 'failure' or otherwise is a relative judgement and comes down to a matter of opinion. Personally I don't think the sport has achieved the growth it could have, missing it's potential by a large enough margin that I wouldn't argue with the word 'failed'. The relative rising fortunes of the Union game have probably coloured my opinion, their upward trajectory seeming to be steeper than ours. I know they've got financial issues at club level but there's enough cash sloshing around that sport that somehow or another it's not going away. I know they start out with a much richer demographic ( or advertisers see it that way anyhow ), but still, the fact that we couldn't even find a paying sponsor is a desperately poor state of affairs. What worries me most of all is the claim that the Stobart 'deal' was worth millions. If the RFL are knowingly talking cr@p, that's one thing, but if they actually BELIEVE we're in good place commercially, then we really are in trouble.

Again just because a poster as a teams name in his username does nt mean he`s a fan of that club.
IMO it`s the easiest way for some posters to troll.

Why don't you think that they have? Do you think they've gone down?
Seems a strange thing to assume based off obviously no evidence.

Views like this are why change doesn't happen.

Short term thinking has corrupted UK sport, and I'm not just talking about RL here. In football, we see inflated wages and investment and a reliance on foreign imports, with the latter being a dominant feature in English RL. It happens at junior level as well, as I said a few days ago, as junior coaches in ALL sports seek the thrill of a short term victory instead of the long term satisfaction of seeing young players enjoy themselves, while growing and developing as players and people.

As others have said, it has been FOUR YEARS since licensing was introduced. Do you seriously believe that the benefits you mentioned will be seen overnight? Enough of this club bias, let's have some long term thinking for the good of the game and give franchising a chance.

Why will South Wales not be around long after franchising?

And I believe Bradford were also in existence before 1996, but since I support a Super League club could a Championship fan tell me?

I remember being at craven park in the 80's &90's when we were in div 2&3 and our crowds were around 1000 with most away games being 5-700. Have crowds in the lower leagues really got any worse?

Compared to the decade pre SL I would say the top league is in a better state so no it hasn't failed IMO.

I keep seeing that super league crowds have grown since 1996. That’s fact the figures show this, however was 1996 a bad year for crowds what was the average crowd over the 10 years up to 1996? What is the average crowd up to present? one other thing I would like to see, to confirm that the crowds have gone up and super league is a success as this seems to be the main marker people use to support super leagues success is the cost of a season ticket with regards to average earnings this would be in % form. Is a season ticket cheaper now? Look what that has done to Bradford. Bigger crowds may not mean the club and league is growing.

As for comparing football teams going bust to rugby teams going bust there is one major difference. The Football association did not stop promotion and relegation claiming it would stop teams going out of business. The rules apply across the board and do not change depending on your geographical location or if your face fits.

Almost everything is UP in SL.

Crowds, stadiums, missed tackles, debts, fan obesity, forum trolls, income, popularity, scorelines, baby changing facilities, TV money and monster truck sponsorship.

The only thing that's down is Bradford and Huddersfield season ticket prices and that's a win-win for fans. I'm a lobotomised Championship fan but I still love the game of Rugby League whether it be the cloth capped luddite games I watch down here or the Rolex flashing truffle snuffling super elite games of Super League. I even love the fight between good and evil on this super-highway battle venue that is RLFANS.COM.

God loves Rugby League.

Everything is alright . . . .

[Kinnock mode "We're alright. We're alright. We're alright!!!"

I wouldnt say it is a case of SL has failed, it just isnt succeeding as well as most would like , the original concept has failed, we dont have super clubs in super stadiums in super cities drawing super crowds with superstar players

What we have is a competition with half a dozen viable clubs, which is an improvement on 96

The question is can it continue to improve to the level originally envisaged?

My opinion? , nah, we'll still be in a very similar position in another 15 years

I'd say since franchising started SL is beginning to get closer towards the levels required of a top level comp, and the amateur game seems to be growing too.

The big problem that's facing the game is the current Championships, and where the RFL want to go with them. Is the aim to grow the Championships into being professional, full time leagues with a paid TV contract, or is it to be a league to 'groom' expansion clubs for Super League, as well as housing clubs like Fev, Leigh, Fax, Batley etc who have great histories and good fan bases, in which case why have it on TV, enjoyable as it may be the game isn't making any money from the TV deal.

I think the academies have developed and every super league club has home grown players of decent levels that could play internationally, the likes of clubb,lms would never have come through without all the solid work of super league in general and the licensing has changed attitudes towards allowing players to come through.

Will Bradford be around after franchising ? South wales are just another part of the welsh experiment which has been a resounding failure so far what is to say it will suddenly become a success. Super league in its current state is not financially viable for teams without the high turnover of teams like Leeds

My argument for the last few years, the RFL havent a clue what to do to make the Championships a ' vibrant, worth winning in their own right competition ' , the TV ' deal ' is quite ridiculous

The RFL should appoint a Championship ' Director ' with specific responsibility to build the competition and the clubs in it, somebody who will put the Championships 1 st and not be influenced by the requirements of SL or any other aspect of the sport, they should also have their own budget, a couple of million a season should do it

If they want to ring me I'll do it

You realise that they went bust long before SL and survived the experience, right? Why would it be any different now?


The 'Welsh experiment" finished when Crusaders disappeared. What's left is genuine fans of RL doing what they can. Who are you to tell them that they're failures? Sheer arrogance.

No idea, I don't have a crystal ball, but at the moment it looks like they won't.

I'm not clued up massively on the Scorpions, but aren't they doing quite well, bringing players through and getting decent crowds (for that level), and the same with the reformed Crusaders?

Agreed. For clubs like Leigh, Fev and Fax there is still a point to the season, as they have aspirations of Super League so need to win it for the points on the application, but for the Batley's of this world who are quite happy where they are what's the point in winning the comp? It's difficult to see how that can ever change with franchising in place, but then I don't think we'd be seeing the improvements across the board in Super League without franchising.

Perilous state of the game's finances or perilous state of certain club's finances? Last I recall, the balance sheet for the RFL was pretty healthy.

There are no current Championship clubs anywhere near strong enough to go into a franchised SL, Fax are probably the current strongest, and their application was ridiculed by the RFL last year, there is nothing for Championship clubs to play for, and the attendances prove it, last night Leigh drew 1,800 for what should have been one of their most important matches of the season

The Championships need massive investement in time, money and most importantly inovation and inspiration, the RFL dont have any of those things

Mick Gledhill begs to differ, assume he has some evidence to support this tweet:
The whole financial viability of #rugbyleague is under threat. Salford, Hull KR and Castleford to name Three others.

He goes on to say "I truly believe that within 5 years, the sport will only sustain Leeds, Hull, Saints, Wire and Wigan as FT clubs"

Sounds like he's done a lot of research on the infrastructure and funding of the sport in the last few months. Can we support a top flight competition with more than 10 clubs? Very much hope so.

This discussion seams to have gone from 'has SL failed'? to more of a discussion about the championship. If we are comparing RL to attendances in other sports then if you look at SL attendances, and compare those to say football. SL would equate to the bottom of the Championship playing the top of the league one clubs. The Championship in RL would equate more to a league 2 football competition in terms of attendances. www.football-league.co.uk/static ... 057,00.pdf In the end we can all wish for more people to watch the game, but wishing will not make it so. Now that posters have show SL attendances to have actually grown, the doubters then change tact and go to the championship and ask for evidence that these have not suffered. What I'd say is if you want to say P&R has reduced attendances in the lower leagues, then it's down to you to show the figures to prove your own point. Anyone can throw out statements and say prove me wrong, but the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges.

This discussion seams to have gone from 'has SL failed'? to more of a discussion about the championship. If we are comparing RL to attendances in other sports then if you look at SL attendances, and compare those to say football. SL would equate to the bottom of the Championship playing the top of the league one clubs. The Championship in RL would equate more to a league 2 football competition in terms of attendances. www.football-league.co.uk/static ... 057,00.pdf In the end we can all wish for more people to watch the game, but wishing will not make it so. Now that posters have show SL attendances to have actually grown, the doubters then change tact and go to the championship and ask for evidence that these have not suffered. What I'd say is if you want to say P&R has reduced attendances in the lower leagues, then it's down to you to show the figures to prove your own point. Anyone can throw out statements and say prove me wrong, but the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges.

If this is genuinely the case, that SL can only sustain these 5 clubs then, i'm sorry, but we need a large pair of gardes shears so that they can have their wings clipped.

FWIW, I dont agree with the comment, although perhaps too many clubs are chasing the dream a little too hard and although the very nature of professional sport is to do just this, perhaps now would be a good time for the sport, not just SL, to re-evaluate its goals.

Of course fans need promotion at the end of the season otherwise winning your league is completely pointless. Nobody would have such a system if they had half a brain. Promotion is essential. That is why if you win the SL, you get promotion to . . . oh, hang on. Well, alright, maybe the SL clubs play on somehow despite the lack of promotion, but what about the Premier League? The clubs at the top spend billions just to try to achieve promotion to the . . er . . . or in fact they all play in the "best league in the world" despite it having . . . NO PROMOTION.

I believe that somewhere in the southern hemisphere there's a rugby league too - NRL or something - where they are doing OK yet eschew any promotion as well. How can all these leading clubs all over the place possibly see the point to a championship season where you don't get promoted to somewhere?