Featherstone End Leigh's Season And Progress in Play-Offs It was knock-out football as the Betfred Championship Play-Offs arrived at Leigh Sports Village, where fifth placed Featherstone Rovers met the Leigh Centurions for the priviledge of a semi-final encounter against the York City Knight next weekend. Both sides were without some key players as they went into a nerve-wracking sudden death battle. The last time that they met was in West Yorkshire when Rovers secured a 24-20 win but when Rovers visited the LSV in February it was the home side who took the win with a 29-20 victory. Leigh were big favourites with the bookies but this was knockout football, anything could happen. READ MORE ON THIS STORY...

Featherstone End Leigh's Season And Progress in Play-Offs It was knock-out football as the Betfred Championship Play-Offs arrived at Leigh Sports Village, where fifth placed Featherstone Rovers met the Leigh Centurions for the priviledge of a semi-final encounter against the York City Knight next weekend. Both sides were without some key players as they went into a nerve-wracking sudden death battle. The last time that they met was in West Yorkshire when Rovers secured a 24-20 win but when Rovers visited the LSV in February it was the home side who took the win with a 29-20 victory. Leigh were big favourites with the bookies but this was knockout football, anything could happen. READ MORE ON THIS STORY...

How long until Degsy throws a hissy and rips up all the players contracts... again

Well more than 20 of em don’t have a contract for next season- so he hardly needs to go out and buy a shredder does he

For sure he wont be happy

Yet he should be. Considering Leigh had zero players when everyone else started training, 4th was a remarkable achievement. There's been little in the tank for a few weeks now, and last night they met a team that was 'up for it' far more than we were.

He's never come over as jovial to me.

Oh, I think he can show all emotions!

Yep and we all know what you mean

Fev outplayed us, no complaints here

Sadly, they 'out-everythinged' us Roy. A very good victory for them. I wish them well, and look forward with interest to see them against Toulouse, or Toronto. (providing they can overcome the small matter of York!)

Mind you, the way things are 'progressing' with SL and Robert Elstone, Toronto may not need to be beaten!

First of all, not a bad season for Leigh with how things were at the beginning of the season and well done to Fev on their victory.
However, I'm intrigued what you mean about Elstone & Toronto ?

Care to share what you know

I presume this refers to Elstone's comments in the press yesterday about Toronto still needing to pass some undefined "due diligence".

Thanks, I hadn't seen that.

Strange comments indeed, especially when he mentions that Toulouse would not be subject to the same levels of scrutiny.
Quite strange really ??

"Super League chief executive Robert Elstone has insisted there is “no anti-Toronto agenda” as Toronto Wolfpack seek to prove they can meet minimum requirements ahead of their potential elevation to British rugby league’s top flight.
The trans-atlantic side were formed ahead of the 2017 season and are two games away from achieving their second promotion in three years. Brian McDermott’s men, who have racked up 21 successive victories, host Toulouse Olympique on September 22 at Lamport Stadium with the winner advancing to the Championship Grand Final on October 5 for a place in Super League.
David Argyle, the Canadian outfit’s majority shareholder, is currently in the UK for talks with Super League’s top brass and Rugby Football League bosses, who are undertaking due diligence on Toronto over a wide range of issues.
These include providing assurances over the club's financial position - if Toronto do go up they will forgo any central distributions and it will be shared out among rival clubs - and logistical matters such as their ability to suitably host visiting teams.
“If Toronto win the right to be promoted, then they have to meet minimum standards,” said Elstone. “We are seeking a number of assurances from the RFL and if we get those, and Toronto win that game, they are in - but it’s important we get assurances well before promotion is secured on the pitch.

“What we can’t do is make the decision after promotion on the pitch; it has to be done in advance of that. If they are in, they won't be taking a central distribution and the pot will be shared among the other eleven clubs.”

French side Toulouse will not be subjected to the same levels of scrutiny as Toronto should they earn promotion from the Championship. Elstone explained: “Toulouse will again be asked to comply with minimum standards per the RFL but there are some different concerns relating to Toronto.
“That is not to say there is any bias there or anti-Toronto agenda, but I think the circumstances are different in a number of ways and concerns that we think are specific to Toronto.”
Elstone, speaking to the media at the launch of the Super League play-offs at Old Trafford, said loop fixtures would remain next year and confirmed the location of the 2020 Magic Weekend was close to being announced.
The former Everton FC supremo, a noted advocate of the NRL, said the prospect of copying the Australian competition by introducing two referees was still on his agenda."

Again, why wouldn't Toronto receive a share of the TV revenue, it's all just a little bit odd.

I can understand why he'd be cautious about Toronto with reports of players not being paid and debts being chased. There is also the practicality of having Toronto in SL. Unlike the RFL, the SL wont allow Toronto to dictate whether they play their games in blocks etc.

I think all SL want is assurances that they wont go pop and that they can cover the funding required to get teams to and from Canada. This is why I don't think they'll give them the Sky money as they could just take the money then fold 6 months down the line.

You could apply that argument to any club that relies on the benevolence of an owner (that's more than half of the league at a conservative guess). Even Wigan's last accounts includes a warning from the auditor about their long-term financial viability.

The comments from Elstone smack of a protectionist shake-down to me.

If Toronto are providing one 12th of the entertainment to the Sky product, then I don't think its unreasonable for them to expect a share of one 12th of the TV deal. At the end of the day, the SL clubs should be working together to collectively add value to the TV deals, be those in the UK, France, North Amercia, Australia or anywhere else where SL may have TV appeal as and when each respective one materialises, with everyone reaping the respective rewards. We don't want to be in a position that Spanish football is in whereby each team negotiates their own TV deal, creating huge inbalances in financial power.

Personally, I would also make the argument that top-flight sports clubs should be capable of making and paying for their own travel arrangements. When you're dealing with part-time players, it's fine to fly them economy class and put them up in university dorms for what is, in many respects, an all-expenses paid jolly-up. But for professional, elite athletes? They do and should expect more and the clubs will (or should) have their own views on the best travel arrangements for them. Most clubs can usually find the money for a winter training week at Browns or La Santa - take it out of that budget if necessary.

To me this just smacks of club owners doing anything possible to reduce their cost base to hide their failure to grow. They tried putting the cost burden on the players by consistently voting for real terms pay cuts and now they're trying to shake down expansion teams for all they are worth. At some point we have to ask why, after 20 years of reducing player salaries and growing TV deals, are our clubs still skint?

I agree with most of what you are saying.
Mind you, if the current 11 SL clubs are to share circa 1.65 million between them, this will more than cover the cost of a trip over to Toronto.

However, if Toronto are ever going to get close to becoming a viable sports club, without massive help from their consortium of backers, surely they should be getting a slice of the SL revenue and you would think that they may, at some point, actually need it.

Where I dont agree with you is where you state " this just smacks of club owners doing anything possible to reduce their cost base to hide their failure to grow" (see above).

I know this has been done to death but, in a sport where none of the clubs in the top flight are in rude health, adding clubs form N.America, will do little to increase the revenue of the existing SL club, in fact, it would be an additional cost, albeit offset by splitting the new clubs' share of the TV contract.
Also, whilst accepting that it's up to each individual club to generate interest in their home fixtures and improve their own attendances etc, with the proposed cap of 3 overseas clubs, that would be 3 fixtures, plus London, where there are very few away fans attending games and regardless of who's responsibility it may be to get bums on seats, the absolute lack of fans certainly takes something away from the matchday experience.

On this subject, Elstone missed a trick.
Rather than capping the number of overseas clubs, perhaps there should have just been a guarantee of the number of "domestic" sides
Fundamentally, I dont believe our sport can sustain the increasing number of overseas sides in SL and maybe there should be a different way found for allowing the sport to grow in these "new" territories ?

We've gone over this ground many times before and I think it's safe to say that we don't necessarily see eye-to-eye on this one, but how many clubs actually make away fans a part of the experience that they sell? I cannot think of a single time when the deciding factor of whether or not I buy a ticket has been the 'lack of atmosphere because there aren't enough away fans'.

The clubs have the power to really define the matchday experience that they deliver and sell - most of the matchday experience is focused on home supporters (the live bands playing in the South Stand concourse at half/full-time aren't playing to any away fans). You can create something that the people of <insert heartland town/city> want to buy without needing away fans to be a part of this.

Yes I get that away fans can add something, but that doesn't mean that we pay undue attention to something that, in the grand scheme of things, is an issue that cannot be overcome with some gumption and creative thinking. Away fans should be seen as a bonus, they shouldn't be driving how and why we do things.

The band at Leeds & Cowbell at Huddersfield would be reasons not to attend games at Headingley or The John Smiths Stadium.
However, I fundamentally disagree with you regarding the atmosphere.

Most derby games have "a better atmosphere" than say London or Catalan coming to town.

It seems ridiculous to suggest that having attended say Wakefield v Cas and then Wakefield v London, that you would prefer to go to another Wakefield v London game in preference to the derby game.
Equally, the old Leeds v Bradford games were on a different level to Leeds v Huddersfield or Leeds v Salford.

Therefore, regardless of direct income from these games, I'm sure that the majority of fans would pick the derby fixture.
Conversely, Leeds v Catalan at Headingley will have more thrown at it in terms of marketing than certain other fixtures.
Many clubs already include offers for the games where there are expected to be very few visiting spectators.

Of course, Toronto in the Championship, due to their huge spend on players, have been something different and despite their lack of travelling fans, the locals have come along in great numbers to see if their side could topple their big spending rivals.
This would be somewhat less attractive when the home side is spending similar amounts and should their winning bubble burst, which you would expect when they play Wigan, Saints and Warrington etc, some of their "allure" will disappear and they will likely become, "just another side", with no supporters.

I'm not making that point and I'm not disputing that local games have a better atmosphere than a game between distant rivals. I genuinely can't fathom how you've interpreted my comments that way. You didn't talk about atmosphere - you spoke about match experience.

The atmosphere is something that's hard to cultivate. It's based on many factors - local rivalry, reactions to on-field events, what's at stake, etc. It's something that we should try to preserve but to say that it relies on away fans to do that isn't accurate. Some of the best atmosphere's I have been in, in many different sports, have been where there have been no away fans in the ground.

Matchday experience is something that a club can influence. It can be something such as pre-match or post-match entertainment (that's what the South Stand concourse live music was refering to, not the bloke with the trumpet). It can be influenced by things such as the choice of food and refreshment - is there a good choice or is it the usual crap of boiled burgers and toilet water Carlsberg and Carling are bottling these days, for example? It can be influenced by the quality of facilities and views, for example - all stuff that is in the control of the clubs irrespective of away fans.



Two things here.

Firstly, the decision to pick that game probably has little to do with how many away fans are there and more to do with the overall appeal of the fixture itself. Wigan v St Helens/Warrington, St Helens v Warrington and Leeds v Bradford/Castleford would usually (Leeds' recent form excepted) have something big riding on it - that is what draws in the punters.

Secondly, the recent fan fatigue around loop fixtures suggests that "more of that" is not the right approach. Fans aren't chosing to go to those derbies because, the chances are, there is another one along very soon.



That fall in crowds isn't inevitable if the clubs can make those games something that locals want to buy. Yes, derbies will always hold more appeal but that doesn't mean that clubs cannot sell any given fixture with the right approach. There is so much attention and focus placed on the notion of away fans which, whether you approach it from either a financial perspective or more intangible perspective, is too small a factor in my view to be allowed to dictate the direction of travel for this sport.

There are so many assumptions of what will or won't happen but these are largely based on how clubs are promoting themselves now - and the consensus for many years seems to be that those methods need to change. Why not start that change now?