Franchise system : Thu Aug 04, 2011 5:52 pm  

Now that the dust is begining to settle on who is in SL for the next 3 years. As supporters of RL, should we try and do something to put pressure on the RFL to abandon the system altogether and revert to P/R.

Re: Franchise system : Thu Aug 04, 2011 6:06 pm  

No

Re: Franchise system : Thu Aug 04, 2011 6:07 pm  

So you would enjoy watching Wakefield yo yo-ing back and forth from SL to the lower league if wakey finished bottom? I wouldn't with cas that's for sure

Re: Franchise system : Thu Aug 04, 2011 6:52 pm  

Franchising has benefited Cas imo , so i am more than happy to stay as we are . Turin is absolutely right , when we were in that position it was very hard to stop the up, down , up , down rut . The problem being that the team going down can stay full time for a year and be at a big advantage over established championship teams , resulting almost inevitably in a return to super league the following year , only to find that by the time they are promoted any decent players from relegated side have been snapped up already , hence a season of struggle just to survive in SL . Franchising has meant Cas can focus on building on all aspects for the future ( despite critcism from other fans we have made giant strides on the stadium front obtainig FPP on GH and if recession hadn't hit we would have had enough money to build from the sale of WR for housing ) . The rewards are there for all to see , 7th in SL this season having finished bottom prior to franchising , and a place in the last 3 of the CC ( ok last 4 , but by the time we play on Sunday we will be in the final 3 ) a good marketing and community set up , and a fantastic selection of young homegrown players for the future . Would all this have happened prior to franchises , I don't think so

Re: Franchise system : Thu Aug 04, 2011 7:39 pm  

Be carefull suggesting that Franchises don't work.....I once suggested that the numbers didn't add up at the Crusaders and nearly got lynched. I've since baked the dreamers a humble pie, yet not one taker so far!!

Anyway...with yo-yo'ing being the obvious concern, how about putting a relegation safety net in place as the RFL did with Catalan, for say...2 seasons with such as a plus 10% salary cap to help re-build the promoted team up to a more competitive standard?

Don't shoot me though it's just an idea for discussions sake!

Re: Franchise system : Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:32 pm  

No, I like the franchising system. It makes club aspire to be better and improve rather than settling for mediocrity.

Re: Franchise system : Fri Aug 05, 2011 6:49 am  

They aren't too keen on franchises in Halifax, Barrow, Leigh, Fev, Wales (although they will no doubt return)

Re: Franchise system : Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:10 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Now that the dust is begining to settle on who is in SL for the next 3 years. As supporters of RL, should we try and do something to put pressure on the RFL to abandon the system altogether and revert to P/R.

No, why would we want to sport to take a backward step?

Re: Franchise system : Fri Aug 05, 2011 8:15 am  

I would like to see this question answered by the top brass at the RFL. If Crusaders hadn't have pulled out, would they have been given a licence? If the answer is yes, then the franchise system is a joke!

Re: Franchise system : Fri Aug 05, 2011 8:22 am  

In my view and some people I know within the sports employ, there is nothing inherently wrong with franchising: BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!

It has got to be more transparent, not an invisible panel who present the results and some of the details and information related to it, but an open assessment of the criteria and the grading of each clubs submission and make that public.

That should be a condition of the application that you consent to having the assessment published.

Then, at that stage, there is nothing to argue about - at least everyone knows why one club is selected above any other, as it is based on opinion and people's assessment too, you could also include a clause that said by submitting an application you waive the right to challenge the decision legally and the panel decision is final.

That way you protect the process, but also allow people to see why and how decisions are made in a transparent way.

(Only my opinion, but the furore each time seems to be over perceived dodgy deals or if's and ands, at least this way if you agree or not, it is transparent.)