No they are solvent because they have a smart Chairman and GM who are not continually bleating. Of course they wuld like more central funds but do not moan about it. I get to half a dozen games there a year and it is good club. They seem to work well with the Giants and will have some dual registered players in 2010.

So the Giants ' hordes ' will not be descending on the mount then to watch your juniors play the Bulldogs

Thought so

They certainly have , I like Kevin , I have spoken many times with him about the problems facing the clubs outside SL , he does well , making the mount the favourite away venue in the Championships , many others could do well to follow his lead

Not true. Making things up about the Giants team is futile.

The Bulldogs have been happy with the repeat fixture even if you have a problem with it.

I agree. More clubs need to employ a good quality CEO / GM and work within tight budgets.

I dont have any problem with it , you brought the subject up telling us how all Championship clubs benifit from their local SL counterparts being forced to play NL/Championship clubs , mmm Forced , you used that word negatively earlier when I suggested clubs were forced to collaborate on other things

You are happy to pour scorn on other clubs not doing things because they lack the finance to do it , when your club cannot seem to achieve the same things when they do have the finance to do it

Strange and hypocritical

Anyway bedtime for me and you've shown your arris enough tonight so I'll leave it there

But the point is that the lower leagues dont even get 'buttons' to spend freely they get nothing and thats wrong when they are attracting a healthy amount of the sky audience. the fact that the lower leagues are not on tv as much is down to sky, its a product that is proven to be well liked so sky should put more games on.

Who said anything about taking anything from a sl clubs academy and giving it to lower league clubs? i was suggesting that the championships should get there fair share of tv monies if every club in championship 1 got 25k and every championship club got 75k of the tv money it would hardly be noticed by sl clubs but would make a big differance to clubs below sl, improving youth development and playing standards, something which will reap its own dividends in increased crowds number and sponsorship. I was also making the point that championship clubs are going to struglle to bring top youngsters through whilst the gap between the leagues remain so large, and at the moment the rfl are doing nothing to shrink that gap.

Who said i have anything agaisnt sugar daddies? i wish more of them would come along to money into rl. But not all clubs are fortunate enough to have one, and these clubs should be helped out with central funding to strengthen rl at levels below sl which is for the good of the game.

you really think the RFL makes hundreds of thousands of pounds profit from the Challenge Cup final?

and do you really believe that taking the money from the SL grand final isnt taking from SL, or were you thinking the NL grand finals were making hundreds of thousands of pounds?

Have I? oh dear. i suppose you like trying to showing people their 'arris'. Did you learn that at a roadshow

Good for you.

Please do show me where I said all championship clubs benefit froma game with their SL counterpart. {Do not spend too much time looking because it was never said. It is something that exists only inside your head

}

I have not 'poured scorn' on other clubs. I do think many are poorly managed and offer a product / service that local people are not too keen on. Once again you need to pretend I am saying something I am not.

I know to a big time Charlie like you 8K gates, play offs and CC Finals may appear like a club failing to achieve. However i have enjoyed it.

and neither should they! why would you expect one group of businessmen to give lots of money to another group of businessmen with the specific clause that this money doesnt need to be spent on things that will benefit both parties?

thats ridiculous!

almost as ridiculous as you claiming that the championship clubs deserve money for attracting a 'healthy audience' for their games on sky, then blaming sky because they arent on tv more and that somehow this means they should get more money for it, crazy talk




fine, make sure it is specifically spent on youth structures, coaching and marketing! oh, hang on, your against that arent you, they should be able to spend it on other things like paying players more so the money never comes back

you must be absolutely mental to think an extra £75k in funds for players (where are these players going to be attracted from with this extra £75k i dont know) is going to bring in more sponsorship and advertising revenue than a full time marketeer



and money is given to them, to improve, 'for the good of the game' but you are against this, you want them to be able to waste this money on what ever they want, even though a fair amount of these chairmen are being proved not upto the job

In 1997 we (sorry, the Bears) lost to NQC 54-16 and Adelaide 42-14 in Aus.

We then beat NQC in Oldham 20-16 and lost 18-2 to Adelaide.

I think thats it.

No you will probably crawl back from whence you came 2 years ago!!!!!

Oldham were one of the very few GB sides that beat an Oz team.

I don't know what profits the RFL do make from the finals, do you? But that wasn't the question I wanted Marsden to answer, which he hasn't yet, what ammount do CC and CC1 get from the SKY money the RFL receive? Does he know or is he just "presuming" this is what happens?

I have watched since pre KD and SL. For some sorry reason you need to pretend I have only supported them a couple of years. It is very sad that you need to think that...never mind.

I know the RFL have central funding. A major guarenteed contributor is Sky money. Some of the central funding is distributed to C teams. there are some standardised distributions + individual cases.

If you are desperate to think the sky money is not used do so. If you want to know what a specific club gets. Ask them or the RFL - do your own research.HTH

I think from your posts that you haven't any experience of other than SL and most of your comments to pyeman's post could also be directed at SL clubs. If SL clubs are struggling with the Sky handouts they get then how do you think Championship clubs manage to keep going?

You talk about why should central funds be given to clubs who don't pay their bills which is exactly what happened when London Broncos became Harlequins, isn't it?

You need to get into the real world and stop knocking the good men (and women) who work damned hard to keep the game of rugby league going outside the comfort zone that is SL.

Ahh so you don't know then. Well you could just have said. I'm not desperate to know what this amount is. But you orignally posted CC and CC1 get SKY money. But you don't know the figures so you were just presuming this is the case.

No. It's not even what happened when London Broncos' (not the club) parent company liquidated, and the club played out the rest of the season as London Broncos. There was no money given to the club. By anyone. And certainly not by the RFL.

Still … however many times that is pointed out, they myth lives on: it's almost as if some fans want it to have been the case.

Give it a couple of years, it'll change to "when the RFL gave £73gazillion to Celtic Crusaders".

It's the flatcapper version of Creation theory, no matter how much you show it up for being bullsh*t they still won't let go of it.

£100k – subject to strings regarding a full time professioinal chief executive and marketing operation, iirc.

Apart from the money they get to appoint certain fulltime backroom staff what money do they get? how much money do championship clubs get that they can decide how it is spent? Why is the idea of putting more lower league games on sky ridiculous? last time i saw the figures they were getting about 60% of the viewing figures for saturday sl games, are you seriously telling me that sky cant make a profit with vieing figures like this? its far from there least viewed sporting entertainment.

Only a handful in of clubs in sl would actually need that 75k and it would do far more down in the lower leagues than it would in sl. how the hell do you know what that money will be spent on? and if that money is used to keep the club afloat in hard times then it is money well spent. You dont think better playing standards and more local players would result in more attending and more player sponsorship? how strange. And in a league where the cap is 300k 75 k or a proportion of it will make a differance, its the equivelent of a sl club being given several hundred thousand.

Plenty of sl clubs have run up debts but have had sky money to help pay them off, something which championship clubs do not get.

So I assume you were around when your club was bailed out via the so-called "merger"with Sheffield?

You reckon taking £75k out of the annual budget of all SL clubs wouldn't have an adverse impact on their finances?

Or are you suggesting that SL clubs should cut their cloth accordingly so they don't need the £75k but that the lower leagues shouldn't have to work in the same way?