Challenge Cup : Mon Jun 10, 2013 4:59 pm  

Having a good chat whilst walking the dog earlier with a friend of mine and we both agreed on one thing... CAS Tigers in present form will never win the super league.

At a push these days we could possibly make the play-offs. I even feel that's slipped from us in the last few years though and contrary to many people's belief; I think super league has improved drastically in the licensing system (on field).

So, to my point..... Why do we not push more to win the challenge cup? Realistically it could be done and just takes some good fortune in the draw but also fielding our best team no matter what team were playing.... Something I'm not sure we always do?

Discuss?

Re: Challenge Cup : Mon Jun 10, 2013 6:20 pm  

2 years ago we lost in extra time of the semi final against Leeds.
Last year we fell to fev,
this year we lost away to Leeds. I don't think we disrespect the cup, just get beat by the better team on the day.

Re: Challenge Cup : Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:34 pm  

That's what we were talking about. 2yrs ago we were a drop goal away from the final. The experience of that atmosphere when the fans thought Rangi had kicked beat just about anything in years as a CAS fan.

Losing to Fev was a bad result last year, we were awful and the same against Leeds this year.

Re: Challenge Cup : Mon Jun 10, 2013 8:44 pm  

DJKYLE wrote:

and contrary to many people's belief; I think super league has improved drastically in the licensing system (on field)

Honest ?

Re: Challenge Cup : Tue Jun 11, 2013 8:34 am  

I don't think licencing has had time to amke much of an impact. It does need time to develop and the discussions of restructure now will have rendered the last 6 years completely pointless.

That being said, I do believe the league is more competitive. No matter how you structure it, there will always be a team at the bottom.

And the bottom sides this year have pulled off some shock results.

Licencing has made Wakefield, Widnes, Hull KR etc far stronger - it has also given the opportunity for London and Salford to build their clubs - Dr Koukash wouldn't have invested if they weren't in SL and the club would've been lost.

As for the challenge cup, it's no different to any cup competition in the world. Teams can have good fortune with draws, and in a one off game have a level playing field.

Look at us in 2010, Wigan in the FA cup this year... you have to beat some decent teams along the way, but there's always a team in the last four that surprise people.

In football you never get Manu Man C Chelsea Arsenal in the alst four.
In RL you never get Wigan Warrington Huddersfield Leeds in the last four.

This year Widnes have a chance to take Wigan on - who they lost to by 1 point on Friday.

I don't think we take the cup as a hinderance - we los to Fev because they turned up and dug in, as they did in their next game against Wigan.

I always say there's no disgrace at losing in a cup match to anyone - especially Fev who are a decent team and will have dreamt all month about beating us.

I dare say, if we had Widnes' draw this year, we would've made the semi final too (on paper)

Re: Challenge Cup : Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:18 pm  

I'm sorry but there is no way SL is half the competition it was ten years ago excitement wise or talent wise. Franchising is killin the sport and while we're at it make the play-offs top 6 again.

Re: Challenge Cup : Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:42 pm  

I think the Challenge Cup is played far too early. If you get knocked-out early and are below tenth/eleventh in the league with no relegation - what is there to play for ? We have effectivly got 9 games left - all meaninless.

Re: Challenge Cup : Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:59 pm  

I don't see how it is CTID....

At that time SL was notorious to be the graveyard of NRL stars. The tag that old Aussies signed over here for a payday to end their career - those days have long since gone.

Clubs are turning out with 80% English players, and teams like Cas are producing better quality juniors in the last ten years than they did 20 years ago at the start of SL, as are most clubs.

That's why these days we have an England team that boasts competition for places all over the field, and I genuinesly believe we have a better pack than the aussies - it's only centres really where they do for us.

Licencing also spared Cas - we wouldn't have survived another relegation, no way.

why was the competition more exciting? it was Bradford and Saints winning everything - there will always be the elite dominant teams, and there will always be a whipping boy team.

Hull, Huddersfield, Warrington... All these teams have improved their fortunes. Plus the Salford investment wouldn't have materialised but for licencing. The demise of Wakefield, Bradford and Crusaders was through bad management at club level (ie tax bills) which cannot be attributed to licencing.

People against licencing... What is it that you want that is lacking???

Clubs to me have better opportunities to blood young players BECAUSE there is no pressure of relegation. The bottom clubs don't need to sign some 35 year old Aussie to keep them in the league.

I shudder to think we need to sign any more Nutley's or Guttenbiel's or Tookey's

I'd rather see us get beat fielding 14 local lads than win 2/3 more games doing that

Re: Challenge Cup : Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:26 pm  

DAVE@CAS1990 wrote:

I don't see how it is CTID....

At that time SL was notorious to be the graveyard of NRL stars. The tag that old Aussies signed over here for a payday to end their career - those days have long since gone.

Clubs are turning out with 80% English players, and teams like Cas are producing better quality juniors in the last ten years than they did 20 years ago at the start of SL, as are most clubs.

That's why these days we have an England team that boasts competition for places all over the field, and I genuinesly believe we have a better pack than the aussies - it's only centres really where they do for us.

Licencing also spared Cas - we wouldn't have survived another relegation, no way.

why was the competition more exciting? it was Bradford and Saints winning everything - there will always be the elite dominant teams, and there will always be a whipping boy team.

Hull, Huddersfield, Warrington... All these teams have improved their fortunes. Plus the Salford investment wouldn't have materialised but for licencing. The demise of Wakefield, Bradford and Crusaders was through bad management at club level (ie tax bills) which cannot be attributed to licencing.

People against licencing... What is it that you want that is lacking???

Clubs to me have better opportunities to blood young players BECAUSE there is no pressure of relegation. The bottom clubs don't need to sign some 35 year old Aussie to keep them in the league.

I shudder to think we need to sign any more Nutley's or Guttenbiel's or Tookey's

I'd rather see us get beat fielding 14 local lads than win 2/3 more games doing that

All that is well and good , as long as you are one of the elite chosen clubs. We have seen the debacle of Crusaders and the continuing farce in London while old and famous clubs struggle and even go to the wall while the elite are protected.
Would you have the same opinion if we were in the same position as Fev or Fax ?
In my opinion , the game needs promotion and relegation ,the county cups and a revamped regal style trophy to generate income for the less fortunate (dumped by the RFL) clubs and it needs doing now before the game contracts even further.

Re: Challenge Cup : Tue Jun 11, 2013 6:34 pm  

DAVE@CAS1990 wrote:

I don't see how it is CTID....

At that time SL was notorious to be the graveyard of NRL stars. The tag that old Aussies signed over here for a payday to end their career - those days have long since gone.

Clubs are turning out with 80% English players, and teams like Cas are producing better quality juniors in the last ten years than they did 20 years ago at the start of SL, as are most clubs.

That's why these days we have an England team that boasts competition for places all over the field, and I genuinesly believe we have a better pack than the aussies - it's only centres really where they do for us.

Licencing also spared Cas - we wouldn't have survived another relegation, no way.

why was the competition more exciting? it was Bradford and Saints winning everything - there will always be the elite dominant teams, and there will always be a whipping boy team.

Hull, Huddersfield, Warrington... All these teams have improved their fortunes. Plus the Salford investment wouldn't have materialised but for licencing. The demise of Wakefield, Bradford and Crusaders was through bad management at club level (ie tax bills) which cannot be attributed to licencing.

People against licencing... What is it that you want that is lacking???

Clubs to me have better opportunities to blood young players BECAUSE there is no pressure of relegation. The bottom clubs don't need to sign some 35 year old Aussie to keep them in the league.

I shudder to think we need to sign any more Nutley's or Guttenbiel's or Tookey's

I'd rather see us get beat fielding 14 local lads than win 2/3 more games doing that

Quality wise England are churning out better players but the overall quality of the competition isn't at all IMO. The amount of boring games we have to endure at the end of the season is frightening and driving fans away, 3k at home widnes would be nearer 8 if P&R existed and tge loss of revenue to the club is crippling it due to the amount of boring games. i know more than a couple of people that dont bother to use season tickets so how can we hope people pay 20 quid ???. My personal choice would be 12x2 and a protected first year for any promoted club to allow a squad to be built (like widnes in franchising). Surprised you shudder at imports like Nutley... Of only we could find another of him !!!