Disco - Expansion of the game is a good thing, undoubtedly, but in the main what people simply want to assert is that you don't kill the roots to spread the tree.
The Curtism - The battles are fought on the field and the friends are made in the bar. There's no hatred among real men.
I often wonder where we'd be now if the three clubs had bought into the 'Calder' idea that was mooted back when SL first kicked off?
Watching a plastic team and not showing as much passion about it as we do at present. The rivalry we enjoy is because of our seperate identitiies, and the fight within to keep them just that...Seperate.
They shouldn't - you're absolutely right! My original post was deliberately inflammatory, however, if you switch the club names around, many of the people who have disagreed might find themselves agreeing. i.e one of us has got the capacity, but both at the same time haven't.
Cas have got quite a big catchment for SL because east we've got halfway to Hull and north we've got loads quite frankly, as well as decent road links to the new stadium location, so provided the marketing is done well enough, we have a huge capacity to expand.
bren2k wrote:
The serious point I was making (not very well, I accept) is that the WMD can't support two SL clubs and I still believe that's the case, for several reasons: a) the governing body don't want us both in the top tier b) the supporter base isn't big enough and c) producing two SL compliant, shiny stadiums 8 miles away from each other, is simply too big an ask in any financial climate, let alone this one.
If both clubs can get themselves to a position where they can't be kicked out of SL, the RFL have no option, whether they want us in or not. ATEOTD, if the RFL makes a decision on the franchises that doesn't stack up against their guidelines, they can be in court over the matter. Now call them devious, conniving, crooked or whatever, but I don't believe they're stupid enough to get rid rid of a team and subject themselves to an expensive and potentially embarrassing court case.
ATEOTD, if the RFL makes a decision on the franchises that doesn't stack up against their guidelines, they can be in court over the matter.
We've just been debating this one on the Wakey board - the general consensus seems to be that whilst on paper there may seem to be a powerful legal case, the reality is that no SL club has the financial resource or the will to take on the RFL - certainly not WTW or CTRLFC. The legal costs would be astronomical and the repercusions for the club involved would be too far-reaching - that club would, for all intents and purposes, bar itself from SL forever. Much more likely to do a Widnes - roll over, have your belly tickled, then hope that your master throws you a bone next time around.
We've just been debating this one on the Wakey board - the general consensus seems to be that whilst on paper there may seem to be a powerful legal case, the reality is that no SL club has the financial resource or the will to take on the RFL - certainly not WTW or CTRLFC. The legal costs would be astronomical and the repercusions for the club involved would be too far-reaching - that club would, for all intents and purposes, bar itself from SL forever. Much more likely to do a Widnes - roll over, have your belly tickled, then hope that your master throws you a bone next time around.
But then it's all speculation until the moment arrives. The other problem for the RFL would be that the general public would see that an injustice had been done, and many of them would vote with their feet. You've mentioned the "Calder" situation in your previous post. The RFL did a huge U turn on the mergers idea after the supporters took that one up. And remember, it wasn't just Cas/Fev/Wakefield: there was also Cumbria, Manchester, Hull United et al. Not only did it show that the people running the RFL clearly didn't understand the reason that we support our teams, but also the fact that many fans were incensed that London Broncos got a place in spite of the traditional supporters losing their teams. Similarly, if it was to be done on a truly "regional" basis why not merge Leeds/Bradford and Wigan/Leigh/St Helens?
In the end it was the supporters that got that ridiculous idea stopped. It could happen again.
But then it's all speculation until the moment arrives. The other problem for the RFL would be that the general public would see that an injustice had been done, and many of them would vote with their feet. You've mentioned the "Calder" situation in your previous post. The RFL did a huge U turn on the mergers idea after the supporters took that one up. And remember, it wasn't just Cas/Fev/Wakefield: there was also Cumbria, Manchester, Hull United et al. Not only did it show that the people running the RFL clearly didn't understand the reason that we support our teams, but also the fact that many fans were incensed that London Broncos got a place in spite of the traditional supporters losing their teams. Similarly, if it was to be done on a truly "regional" basis why not merge Leeds/Bradford and Wigan/Leigh/St Helens?
In the end it was the supporters that got that ridiculous idea stopped. It could happen again.
All fair points, but is that last one strictly true? My recollection is that Castleford and Featherstone refused the merger, whereas Wakefield were willing; did they refuse it because of a supporter movement, or for some other reason(s)?
I'm not sure how I feel about the merger idea myself to be honest - if I wasn't intimately involved in the situation, I'd probably say yes, it's the only sensible thing to do. Because I am however, I can't see how I'd support the team. It's a head says yes, heart says no kind of scenario.
Having said that, given 10 years or so for all the bitterness to dissipate, would a merger create a WMD super-club that could dominate the sport? Given that the rhubard triangle is a fertile production ground for RL players and that there is massive latent support for the game all over the district, I'd say yes - I imagine that a few SL titles and a challenge cup or two would persuade most of those people who might walk away in disgust from a merged team to come back.
All fair points, but is that last one strictly true? My recollection is that Castleford and Featherstone refused the merger, whereas Wakefield were willing; did they refuse it because of a supporter movement, or for some other reason(s)?
I'm not sure how I feel about the merger idea myself to be honest - if I wasn't intimately involved in the situation, I'd probably say yes, it's the only sensible thing to do. Because I am however, I can't see how I'd support the team. It's a head says yes, heart says no kind of scenario.
Having said that, given 10 years or so for all the bitterness to dissipate, would a merger create a WMD super-club that could dominate the sport? Given that the rhubard triangle is a fertile production ground for RL players and that there is massive latent support for the game all over the district, I'd say yes - I imagine that a few SL titles and a challenge cup or two would persuade most of those people who might walk away in disgust from a merged team to come back.
For once Bren i fully support you on this, I would support a merged club.
If you think about the long term and consider "Start with an end in mind" then yes in 10 years the people who are resistant to change will have disapeared and will have been replace by a young fertile fanbase that would grow anlong with a club that could harness THE greatest RL hotbed in the world.
But as always people will only consider themselfs and whats good for them now and the merger will never happen?
If that's the case, why has WTWRLFC failed to capture the imagination of Wakefield residents over the years of its residency in Super League.
what have the Wildcats done to capitalise on their on-field advantage over their neighbours?
How can anyone blame Castleford for Wakefield's failure to pull an average crowd of more than 7000 in any of those seasons? What capacity is being developed by WTWRLFC? Why can't a team that has had playoff qualifications under its belt pull in larger crowds?
This isn't really the sort of statistic that backs up your argument.
So my question is why should people accept that Castleford hasn't got the capacity to develop and that Wakefield has? It's got absolutely no foundation in terms of how the clubs have cultivated their support over the past few years.
Over to you...
Some good points. Clearly Castleford are in no way to blame for the lack of progress of Wakefield. 40 years of underperformance, poor management and sheer bad luck combined with a stadium that has been increasingly unfit for purpose for the last 30 years has done all that.
We have lost 2 or 3 generations of fans due to having a run-down stadium in a not very desirable area of the city which is unattractive to new fans. Winning one play-off game in 12 years is hardly the kind of success that inspires the new breed of supporters.
To me, what your statistics show is the characteristics of core support; how difficult it is to increase and also how resiliant it is during hard times. The timescale is not really long enough to show the real trends. It takes decades, rather than years, to build support. Cas's relative success through the 80s and 90s has stood them in good stead right up to the present day. The same period saw the decline of success and support for Trinity, from which we are only just starting to recover. If you look at the attendance figures from 98 to present you will see a gradual increase. That's how core support grows, not in sudden booms, they tend to be just glory seekers (cough Bradford cough).
A good example would be Huddersfield, who share a similar lack of success for decades and now, despite being in a modern stadium with a fairly successful team, their crowds are only just starting to increase towards the magical 10K.
For the future: Trinity in a new stadium with regular appearances in the play-offs would definitely average 10k+ in 10 years. Unfortunately the demographics and increased population of the catchment area is inaccessible in the current conditions, and as such, has yet to be tapped.
On Castleford: their crowds are, to be fair, nothing short of remarkable from a local population of 40k. I've previously worked in Castlleford and the Tigers are very much a part of what it means to be from Cas and an important part of people's identity (which is not true, at present, in Wakefield). However, to acheive 10k average crowds I think they would need the new stadium (obviously) and be in or around the top 4 with regular visits to Wembley i.e. the level of success would have to be greater than that for Trinity.
Alternatively, if Wakefield were expelled indefinitely to the lower divisions then, as the only SL club in the district, the catchment area could slowly expand and guarantee those bigger gates.
So, in summary, are you holding us back? No. Are we holding you back? Possibly.
I've previously worked in Castlleford and the Tigers are very much a part of what it means to be from Cas and an important part of people's identity...
I think that's part of the reason that Cas's gates are so good, and were very good in NL1. It's also a very strong factor as to why a merger would be bad for the supporters. (Unless the merged team was called, and played in, Castleford!)
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 95 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...
