Future for Rugby League

[wolfie]

Saints have just reported a ?1/4m loss for the year 2006, the year that they won everything.

Widnes went into administration with debts of ?200,000

What does the future hold for the best team sport in the world. :confused:

[Matty]

Too small a fan base to compete against the now professional Rugby Union, I would say the writing is on the wall as a professional sport.

[Eddie]

The franchise system will be the beginning of the end for Div 1. The authorities are not interested in anything but Super League.

The end of promotion and relegation in the short term will create an era of stability but longer term will lose support as the same teams languish at the bottom.

 

Ten years of Super League and many attempts at setting up teams from Wales, London, Scotland, France and the North East etc has in most cases failed. Teams along the M62 corrider have won everything, while sides from Rugby heartlands like Featherstone, Swinton, Widnes etc have almost died. One of the aims of Super League was to create a stronger and more powerful British side that would compete with Australia ........what a failure.

 

In ten years from now it will be no further forward. Maurice Lindsay in my view was a disaster for Rugby League, and yet there are calls for him to be rewarded in the New years honours list

 

League will plod along, the emphasis on the plod. There may even be a few surprises like Wolves winning the title, or a team from France with all French players but it will continue to be a minority sport with a minority following and no change for the foreseeable future.

[bobshaw235]

The problem is Rugby League sold their soul to Sky T.V. if they still had premiership Rugby League on the BBC (excepting the cup)i feel it would undoubtedly generate more support through the turnstiles and companies would want to invest in sponsorship with advertisments around the ground and more money for names on shirts,also Kids would be able to watch their hero's on a Saturday afternoon,bring back floodlit Rugby League on BBC2 on a Tuesday night,not all so called progress is good.

Cricket solely on Sky will also suffer in the long term.

[Matty]

How come Sky can own sole rights to rugby and cricket but not football?

[Gary]

Because football is in a stronger position to call the tune as it is a global game which everyone wants to screen.

League and cricket by comparison are considered minority sports and can't command the same negotiating rights.

When the league "sold their soul" to Sky it was a lifeline which kept many clubs going.

[Matty]

The monopolies and mergers comission make sky give up the rights to package 'D', used to be known as premiership plus.

 

those games are now shown on Setanta.

[Eagle]

If Rugby League lost the revenue from Sky it would revert to semi-professional within a couple of years.

[KeithR]

Maurice Lindsay in my view was a disaster for Rugby League

Agree entirely. Any clown who thought that it was possible to amalgamate Warrington and Widnes into one Cheshire club obviously knew nothing about Rugby League and its supporters.

He also never forgave Widnes for becoming World Champions and stated his disgust at the time.

[Gary]

But if he hadn't taken the SKY money we probably wouldn't have a professional code and be a million miles behind Rugby Union, which after more than 100 years decided to follow League's lead!

[KeithR]

I totally agree, but even with the sky money we are still a million miles behind Union.

[Eddie]

KeithR Totally agreeing with Gary

[Gary]

Actually he doesn't totally agree as I don't believe league is a million miles behind union - certainly not on the pitch.

Probably 999,999 miles behind as a global sport though!