: Sun Jul 26, 2009 10:10 pm  

littlerich wrote: Super League: The holy grail. Is this what we seek? Salford just loving the experience......... If/when we go up we better have the financial clout and the squad to compete because i don't want this: ...just about as bad as it gets. ".........like mentioned in other posts,we are at the stage with nothing to play for and no relegation,most of that team tonight didn't look interested in playing " - quote from a fan. My thoughts as well , that is why with the utmost respect there is only Widnes that are a viable SL club at the moment outside the top flight Your fan base has been so badly damaged by your last couple of years in SL that it will take a long term period of success to get it back where it needs to be Unfortunatley the timing of this is paramount , get it wrong and you could end up missing the boat

littlerich wrote: Super League: The holy grail. Is this what we seek? Salford just loving the experience......... If/when we go up we better have the financial clout and the squad to compete because i don't want this: ...just about as bad as it gets. ".........like mentioned in other posts,we are at the stage with nothing to play for and no relegation,most of that team tonight didn't look interested in playing " - quote from a fan. My thoughts as well , that is why with the utmost respect there is only Widnes that are a viable SL club at the moment outside the top flight Your fan base has been so badly damaged by your last couple of years in SL that it will take a long term period of success to get it back where it needs to be Unfortunatley the timing of this is paramount , get it wrong and you could end up missing the boat

: Sun Jul 26, 2009 10:39 pm  

Starbug wrote:

My thoughts as well , that is why with the utmost respect there is only Widnes that are a viable SL club at the moment outside the top flight

Your fan base has been so badly damaged by your last couple of years in SL that it will take a long term period of success to get it back where it needs to be

Unfortunatley the timing of this is paramount , get it wrong and you could end up missing the boat

Agree but funny thing is Salford are like Widnes, Barrow and Huddersfield in that they rely heavily on a RICH CHAIRMAN.
So why are they so bad, yer its their first year up after promotion but they were odds on to go up so should have been better prepared.
Puzzled.

It also makes me wonder why the RFL allow clubs to be so dependent on rich chairmen, its a risky game to play.
Makes a mockery of their own criteria rules really.

: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:20 pm  

Fax4Life wrote:

Agree but funny thing is Salford are like Widnes, Barrow and Huddersfield in that they rely heavily on a RICH CHAIRMAN.
So why are they so bad, yer its their first year up after promotion but they were odds on to go up so should have been better prepared.
Puzzled.

It also makes me wonder why the RFL allow clubs to be so dependent on rich chairmen, its a risky game to play.
Makes a mockery of their own criteria rules really.

They actively encourage it , Bramley will never get back into the ' big time ' because they are run by the supporters of the club

The RFL want ' sugar daddies '

More time spent on trying to get more fans to all our clubs would be better

: Mon Jul 27, 2009 6:39 am  

Starbug wrote:

Your fan base has been so badly damaged by your last couple of years in SL that it will take a long term period of success to get it back where it needs to be

Its a bit of a common untuth this is. The crowds started dropping when we were still at Thrum Hall and by the time we got down the Shay they dropped even more. When we finished 3rd in 98 i think someone posted on here the average was little over 5500.

: Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:51 am  

Fax4Life wrote:

Agree but funny thing is Salford are like Widnes, Barrow and Huddersfield in that they rely heavily on a RICH CHAIRMAN.
So why are they so bad, yer its their first year up after promotion but they were odds on to go up so should have been better prepared.
Puzzled.

It also makes me wonder why the RFL allow clubs to be so dependent on rich chairmen, its a risky game to play.
Makes a mockery of their own criteria rules really.

Where is your proof that we rely heavily on a rich chairman? We've hardly bought our way to success this year.

We need the books to be balanced and there was never a problem with this in Super League. We only went bust trying to get back into Super League and over-spending in the process.

In Super League we would have crowds of around 7000 whereas yours would likely be nearer 5000. Therefore it would be Halifax who would need cash from elsewhere to be able to be competitive.

: Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:59 am  

Maximus Decimus wrote:

Where is your proof that we rely heavily on a rich chairman? We've hardly bought our way to success this year.

We need the books to be balanced and there was never a problem with this in Super League. We only went bust trying to get back into Super League and over-spending in the process.

In Super League we would have crowds of around 7000 whereas yours would likely be nearer 5000. Therefore it would be Halifax who would need cash from elsewhere to be able to be competitive.

5 super league loan players to win the NRC might just answer that question.

: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:09 pm  

Fax4Life wrote: Not seen many London lads yet??? hope these help. Both Cockneys and Both capped by England.

Fax4Life wrote: Not seen many London lads yet??? hope these help. Both Cockneys and Both capped by England.

: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:10 pm  

gutterfax wrote: hope these help. Both Cockneys and Both capped by England. Two, wow after how many years having a SL team??? One appearance for England in a game against Wales is hardly that good. Yer come back at me if they make the team against the Aussies and Kiwis this Autumn.

gutterfax wrote: hope these help. Both Cockneys and Both capped by England. Two, wow after how many years having a SL team??? One appearance for England in a game against Wales is hardly that good. Yer come back at me if they make the team against the Aussies and Kiwis this Autumn.

: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:20 pm  

Fax4Life wrote:

Two, wow after how many years having a SL team???

14 years of Superleague.......making them 9 and 10 years old when SL started. Not converted Union players, but League players. Not sure what was expected in 1996? Like, let's put a team in the Capital and they will IMMEDIATELY produce cockney RL internationals?
Not having a pop, just responding to someone who said he hadn't seen any Londoners make the grade? We had 5 cockneys on the pitch when we plaid the French 2 weeks ago. There are another 9 in the reserves.......Rome wasn't built in a day........kind of like that stand at your place

: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:33 pm  

People wouldnt be so bothered if the 14 seasons hadnt been propped up with money that should have been used on heartland clubs. What sort of system lets its roots fall apart while branching out into a futile and pointless quest for RL in the capital just to appease Sky. There is nothing wrong with RL in London but it should be done the right way. Bramley went to the wall while the RL watched on and pumped money into clubs that IMO are not gonna work long term. I personally think that teams should start at the bottom and work their way up. Quins and Celtic are in an entirely false position...thats what gets people IMO. Not knocking you for supporting your team its just that it always appears to be concession after concession, year in year out.