Only if you thought 'premier' was classed as things you may like, rather than clear objective things like having a certain amount of corporate hospitality, capacity, certain amounts of concessions.

I think you are more likely to see the RFL's attitude to Headingley if you look how often they use it.

They've got a new screen in that stand now (that the majority of the people in the Western Terrace cannot actually see!), so I'm not sure if the Sky screen comes anymore. Regardless, I had no idea what score it was when I stood in that stand on Friday.

Like you say, I tend to enjoy my experience at Headingley. Just like I tend to enjoy going to working man's pubs every now and again. But are the premier? No way.

Im a pretty tall guy, but im no giant. I often stand in the Western terrace when i go with mates who support other teams and I have never, ever, had any problems being able to see. But in a terrace, smaller people will always have that problem.

On a nice summers evening the Western Terrace is quite nice.

Im not sure what you think it is too small for?

If you enjoy it, it seems odd to complain about it.

A mid-sized stadium on their doorstep that's cheap to hire in a populous area? Yeah, I understand totally why the RFL use it. Nothing to do with it being an premier facility though.

If it was that good, they'd use it for semi-finals and internationals more often. Instead, it gets looked over for actual premier facilities like the KC, Galpharm, Donny, etc.

It's been used for a couple of low-key or experimental events by the RFL as it has a better chance of getting a good crowd in a populous area. That's why.

What are these clear objective things then? You still haven't explained what they are. I see you've made a list of things that you know Headingley qualifies for. But are they all the RFL want? Does comfort, viewing restrictions, cover, etc. not qualify? Do you have any proof that they don't?

The RFL also have offices in Warrington you know, there's a fairly mid-sized stadium there.
Or maybe the desire to spread the tournament around a little, considering the final has consistantly been held at Elland Road. Im sure people would complain if Leeds got both a group game, and the final. The tri/four nations follows a pretty set plan, group games at the JJB, KC, Galpharm, and the final at Elland Road.

When was the last time a semi-final was held at the KC btw?

But again you seem to be mistaking the RFL concept of 'premier facilities' with the facilities being the best in the league.

and internationals competitions. If it was 'a bad' stadium or even a 'not good' stadium the RFL wouldnt hold them there. They have the Galpharm and Halliwell Jones on their doorstep. If Headingley is so bad, why not use them

Things like having a certain amount of corporate facilities, having a certain capacity, having a certain amount of concessions, having certain media facilities, floodlights etc, I have said this to you already.

It's not partly condemned. It has a safety certificate for a reduced capacity than previously. Those two areas that are currently cordoned off are not actually the problem areas, they are simply to limit the capacity.

Cracking ' Bitch ' fight lads , keep it up

And the last time I checked, Warrington gets its fair share of RFL events.


So do you believe that if they held the final at say City of Manchester Stadium that they'd use Headingley for a big international?


Doesn't quite have the advantage of being central to the majority of SL clubs though, does it? Another of Headingley's advantages, yet it doesn't get used too often.


I'm confusing nothing. I believe the RFL's concept of "premier facilities" includes more than the things you have suggested. Things such as cover, sight lines, and comfort I'd suggest are pretty important on that list.


Because it's in a populous area central to everyone and therefore is likely to get a better crowd for lower key events (which is what they use it for). I already said that.


And I have said that this is just a list of things you know Headingley passes on, and not the list of things the RFL look for in a premier facility. If it was, you wouldn't have said "things like", you'd have produced an actual list.

I think this argument requires a vote

I'll start it

Dump

Apparently it doesn't matter, because Smokey is going to provide us with the conclusive evidence he has that the RFL have stated Headingley as being a premier facility, and what the criteria they used to come up with this was...

They are hardly going to upset Gary are they ? , those Emporers 'OLD ' clothes are looking a bit worn at headingley

Dump.


[size=70(Except one stand)[/size

It's not even a full stand 3/4 s at best

so all traditional rugby grounds are dumps and all football grounds are "premier"

glad we got that sorted.

cant see this thread ever getting back on topic

Warrington don't play at a football ground, and you're basically calling any "old" stadium "traditional".

Basically, as hard as it is to believe, the newer stadiums have better facilities, and often share with other clubs. The older ones have dated facilities.

not hard to believe at all. why would you build something worse than you already have?

so why not just put teams into the newest 14 stadiums and have done. then as a new stadium is built whoever is in the oldest stadium gets relegated.

it would be as interesting as this thread. and strange people could argue long into the night about toilets and plastic seats.

why would a hull supporter rather de rail a thread about rugby league and turn it into one about stadiums?????

It does indeed, which completely negates any argument to say that Headingley is only used by the RFL because it is convenient.

Id see no reason why not, Headingley has been used for international competition in the recent past.

It is used as often as the KC. Plus Leeds making the semi-finals of the CC more often than not would probably discount its use most years.

Comfort and cover are adequately provided. Sight lines are for the most part, fine.

and the Galpharm isnt? And if the stadium is 'bad' then why is it likely to get a better crowd than a 'good' stadium half an hour away?

it is part of the list of things the RFL look for in a premier facility. I would have thought it obvious 'things like' simply highlighted that the list wasnt complete, rather than the strange interpretation you have taken that i meant things similar to.

On field performance doesnt matter anymore

as long as youve got a massive 21st centrury atmosphereless 1/3 full stadium your alright

It does? I'd have thought it would show that the other stadium that the RFL find convenient to use gets used a lot compared to other similar stadia sort of adds to it? Why don't they use the Stobart as often?


Low key internationals. In fact, GB vs France is the only full international I can think of that's been played at Headingley in the last decade.


There are two semi finals you know. Leeds can't play in both of them


Hull isn't close to any other SL teams. Don't pretend that it's a like for like comparison.


Totally disagree. If there is something blocking your way due to the nature of the stadium, it is restricted viewing. There is restricted viewing in the majority of the North, a lot of the South, and the shallow nature of the steps in the West make viewing restricted also.

No cover for the majority of away fans. And I don't find myself comfortable when I'm getting rained on, as well as if I'm sitting on a horrible tight wooden seat.


No. Huddersfield is hardly a populous area in comparison to Leeds.
And believe it or not, how "good" the stadium is isn't the only factor in how many people attend. Otherwise Huddersfield would be getting far more than Leeds in the league.

There are more RL fans within close proximity in and around Leeds than Huddersfield. Huddersfield relies mainly on out-of-towners for big events.


So why don't you complete the list then?

Nice to see that on-field criteria is of no interest to some of those who moan about no P&R

Totally self-inflicted, sunshine.

You started a thread about the subject, and then immediately derailed it by attacking various clubs and in particular two clubs' grounds.

Then, after I demonstrated your comparative criticism on the specific subject of two grounds was badly flawed, you declined the opportunity to draw a line under it and bring the debate back to the original topic. Instead, you increasingly resorted to the desperate and dishonest tactic of derision and attempting to distract readers from the argument you had so clearly lost.

All that achieved was to concentrate attention on the stadium issue (yet again) rather than on the subject you claimed you wanted to see discussed.

Then you bleated that all you were doing was expressing your opinion - taking us for idiots by assuming we would somehow forget your pathetic derisory and diversionary attacks on Bradford and your obsession with having the last word to show just how jolly well right you were. Disingenuous and transparent.

Brought it all on yourself, and made yourself look like a silly kid. I doubt though that you will see through your OWN tinted glasses how this was all your own doing.

Nope..it was yours. I posted my opinion that Odsul and Belle view were as bad as each other as a small part of my response to someone else and YOU jumped all over that rather than discuss the odiginal topic......which was about on-field performance in the Franchise era.....I'll remind you.
HKA 1.156
Catleford .9852
Wakey .8750
Catalan .8281
Bradford .7794
London .6617
Salford .6250
Crusaders .5000

I suspect your attention to my comment about your pit of a ground was more to do with the fact that your once great club wasn't doing so well as opposed to any real sense of injustice about poor old odsul.

Looking stupid? Maybe to you, but I don't trust your eyesight....you think Odsul is an aceptable stadium for the 21st century

Gutterfax how many trophies have quins won?

Going at a bradford fan who have a cabinet full not the best idea

You posted a derogatory comment on only a small part of the quote you were commenting on. Are you surprised it got jumped all over?

Here's a lesson for you. If you want an actual discussion about a topic, don't take cheap shots about something different, like here...


Time to grow up, me thinks.