Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 66 of 66

Thread: Private equity proposal

  1. #51
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,122
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    I think we all have subjects we like to get on our high horse about now and then ( I was referring to myself)
    Guilty as anyone on that, if you don`t stand for something you fall for anything, what we all seem to feel is the game needs a change of direction.
    RL and our team is obviously in our DNA, the passion and protection we have for it is there for all to see on here.

  2. #52
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    4,821
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallaght Tiger View Post
    Guilty as anyone on that, if you don`t stand for something you fall for anything, what we all seem to feel is the game needs a change of direction.
    RL and our team is obviously in our DNA, the passion and protection we have for it is there for all to see on here.
    Agree. A change of leadership and a change of governance to hold failure to account. In an ideal world there'd be more of a government interest in major sport as sport transcends 'normal business' and is a massive part of many peoples lives. Be that as it may better governance and transparency is key to ensuring the likes of Wood are never allowed to ride the gravy train ever again and if such likes do sneak in their ass is fired into the sun at the earliest convenience.

  3. #53
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    7,750
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddiewaringsflatcap View Post
    Agree. A change of leadership and a change of governance to hold failure to account. In an ideal world there'd be more of a government interest in major sport as sport transcends 'normal business' and is a massive part of many peoples lives. Be that as it may better governance and transparency is key to ensuring the likes of Wood are never allowed to ride the gravy train ever again and if such likes do sneak in their ass is fired into the sun at the earliest convenience.
    It is hard to believe or quantify the negative impact that Wood and his cronies have had on the game. I don't think any other sport (outside of Nigeria) would have tolerated the way they represented the game and lined their own pockets. Yet he is still lurking in the background with Bradford, while we appoint his number two to replace him. I don't think Rimmer comes across as bad as Wood, but he does seem the victim of a personality and imagination transplant gone wrong.

  4. #54
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    4,151
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddiewaringsflatcap View Post
    Agree. A change of leadership and a change of governance to hold failure to account. In an ideal world there'd be more of a government interest in major sport as sport transcends 'normal business' and is a massive part of many peoples lives. Be that as it may better governance and transparency is key to ensuring the likes of Wood are never allowed to ride the gravy train ever again and if such likes do sneak in their ass is fired into the sun at the earliest convenience.
    I find my suspicions hard to explain. To me it seems a wider conspiracy that the people running the sport are doing it on purpose. That is to keep it as a minority, gimmicky northern stereotype that'll never progress.

    Sky treat the sport over here with utter contempt. And the people in charge seem happy to watch the standard on the field decline and the best UK talent go to the NRL, whilst introducing pointless rule changes every season. Yet the rucks will still be policed inconsistently and the Disciplinary process will still be a lottery.

    Then you look at the huge salary Wood was on for dragging the sport into the toilet. Where was that money coming from? They must have some if execs are getting paid that much?

  5. #55
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    152
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I agree with that.
    The RFL are a disgrace.

    But the commentary. I don't think it's bad.
    BBC has a better feel about the whole thing the way its presented I do agree.

  6. #56
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    152
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    A well worded. Straight to the point letter, signed by us all. I'm in

  7. #57
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    152
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddiewaringsflatcap View Post
    That's a bit of a poor post I'm afraid; you're just trying to apply a broad brush to the well thought out critiques of various people on here by writing them off as some sort fashion without making any counter points of your own..

    I'm not exactly sure what a 'northern moaning mentality' (its probably erring on the wrong side of political correctness in these overly sensitive times) but I can tell you what the southern mentality is to SKY RL coverage - they think its hilarious and the sport a joke. And who can blame them? Baz n Tez being becoming a parody of themselves, that ridiculous Try music, commentators who get player names wrong on a regular basis and a WWE presentation that belongs in the last century.

    As well as this you then mention you'd 'rather listen to Bill Arthur than that guy with the lisp;' I assume thats Stuart Pyke who is also an RL commentator. Thanks for just adding weight to the argument that the commentary team needs a seismic change!
    Fair enough on the bottom bit

    My point though is, everyone moaned about Eddie and stevo
    I always though Eddie was brilliant.
    I know this is unpopular but I never had a problem with stevo either.

    Carney has done a great job stepping is as host.
    The whole he didn't sing the national anthem reason to moan. COME ON its pathetic.

    I'm not saying sky are great.
    This sport is in dire need of change.

    The commentary just isn't bad as everyone makes out in my Opinion.
    But I also agree it could be a hell of a lot better.

    Wilkin is clearly worth giving a shot in some role.
    Although BBC do tend to use him quite a lot

  8. #58
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    36
    Posts
    7,869
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CGSaint View Post
    I agree with that.
    The RFL are a disgrace.

    But the commentary. I don't think it's bad.
    BBC has a better feel about the whole thing the way its presented I do agree.
    BBC keep it very simple, I think that's what most people like about it

  9. #59
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,857
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulscnthorpe View Post
    BBC keep it very simple, I think that's what most people like about it
    I also think that the choice of presenter helps. Mark Chapman doesn't assume he is the star of the show and allows the ex pros to be the ones giving opinions and analysis, which Claire Balding was good at as well. On Sky Eddie Hemmings and now Brian Carney see themselves less as hosts but as one of the analysts and it blurs the line. Hemmings I thought was a good commentator when he actually just commentated. He had a good knack for knowing when stuff was important and when it was time to shut up and let Stevo give his thoughts. Unfortunately Hemmings wasn't just your standard commentator, he was also the presenter and also blurred the lines by giving his opinions on lots of stuff (his derogatory remarks about the Cup the worst) on air whilst supposedly being the commentator. It led to one man thinking he was the voice of the entire sport because he had far too much influence as a presenter who could express his thoughts and as a commentator who again didn't just commentate. Before he stepped back from the studio work an average Friday night game was 2 hours of the Eddie Hemmings show.

  10. #60
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    4,821
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CGSaint View Post
    Fair enough on the bottom bit

    My point though is, everyone moaned about Eddie and stevo
    I always though Eddie was brilliant.
    I know this is unpopular but I never had a problem with stevo either.

    Carney has done a great job stepping is as host.
    The whole he didn't sing the national anthem reason to moan. COME ON its pathetic.

    I'm not saying sky are great.
    This sport is in dire need of change.

    The commentary just isn't bad as everyone makes out in my Opinion.
    But I also agree it could be a hell of a lot better.

    Wilkin is clearly worth giving a shot in some role.
    Although BBC do tend to use him quite a lot
    That's a better response. Personally I didn't like Hemmings at all. In his later years he seemed to think he was Lord of the game and his dumbing down of the Challenge Cup was a disgrace. He was a failed football commentator who pretended to love RL. What I will say in defence is he was a competent presenter, regardless of his attitudes, and a mile better than either Arthur or Pyke so we agree on that.

    Generally I also agree on Carney. Whether he did/did'nt stand / sing the national anthem has nothing to do with his abilities as a presenter. My view on this one is a couple of us have let personal feeling of something they value colour every facet of what he offers the sport in his media role and that's quite a bit in my opinion.

    Steve was horrendously outdated. When your so called expert can only offer 'they need to get the link going' and 'try something different; a chip over the top' then you know time has passed them by. Great bloke who loves RL but time has passed him by and offered no insight whatsoever in the end.

    Those were just one of many problems: the 'robot' opening sequences which confirmed every negative stereotyping of the sport as one dimensional, the stupid try music that belongs in 1991, the 'shouty' coverage, the Punch and Judy Northerners. Its all horrible and needs to go.

    The final insult was the BLM episode. The sport enabled itself to be characterised as 'having a problem' to fit in with the attempt to project America's problems on a British society.

    The sport should have released a statement; off the bat something like: "we deprecate our broadcaster's context of our sport in the debate on racial tension. As a sport with a proud heritage of welcoming all creeds and colours we would suggest this history is showcased to outline what open mindedness and genorosity of spirit adds to human life and why it should be celebrated."

  11. #61
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,049
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    No surprises here, Leeds dead against, Carter at Wakefield desperate for the cash

    https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/spor...ir-say-3126397

    In the thread on TRL.com we had this little gem

    “Where I would question Hetherington's position is that I wonder if it's too easy for a well run and well capitalised club like Leeds to expect other clubs to grow their operations in the same way. It never works out like that.•“

    An attitude that sums up why RL is in such a poor state in this country.

    It does appear that Leeds and Saints were dead against this but other clubs pushed it, so any whinging over the introduction fee is their own making.

  12. #62
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    4,821
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bostik Bailey View Post
    No surprises here, Leeds dead against, Carter at Wakefield desperate for the cash

    https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/spor...ir-say-3126397

    In the thread on TRL.com we had this little gem

    “Where I would question Hetherington's position is that I wonder if it's too easy for a well run and well capitalised club like Leeds to expect other clubs to grow their operations in the same way. It never works out like that.•“

    An attitude that sums up why RL is in such a poor state in this country.

    It does appear that Leeds and Saints were dead against this but other clubs pushed it, so any whinging over the introduction fee is their own making.
    I tend to favour Hethrington on this one. The key argument for me is "Our game does need extra investment, but only to fund growth – not to give to clubs to simply shore up their shortcomings."

    For too long I've heard lines such as the so-called 'big clubs only looking after themselves' but this is an argument made with tunnel vision and oversentimentality. For a start it those asking it fail to ask why they are not 'big' in the first place. Their answer would likely be they are being somehow 'held back' by the 'big clubs' but a more likely explanation is that have failed to create the conditions to grow their club.

    Being a big club isn't enshrined in some tablet of stone: i.e were Bradford considered 'big' in the late 80's/early 90's before 'Bullmania?' were Warrington considered big before their CC Cup wins when they were a laughing stock through the late 90's/early 00's? (The Bradford example is a perfect case of how bad decisions can lead to a quick fall from grace and proves the point that to be 'big' needs good, stable and consistent club management).

    The logical conclusion may be to ask how one could credibly trust many of the owners not to squander the opportunities afforded by extra investment. Many clubs do not look well run both on or off the field; they are not running strong youth academies, they are'nt attracting big names to invest in them (many appear to be living hand to mouth) and they are not growing the sport in their community outside reducing the pricing for their product to little more than a Blue Peter badge and 100 Tesco points. Should we really cede a significant part of control of the sport to an equity fund when you'd probably trust Father Dougal Maguire to make a sensible decision than most of them....?

    Its an important question to ask because it highlights SLE/RFL's failure to create growth and hold poor performers to account over the years alongside the fact that there are too many clubs ran poorly in the first place. Sadly the sport has allowed the lowest common denominator to have too much of a say over the future of the game. When the likes of Batley were at one point having an equal say as Saints and Wigan on key issues then you know there are fundamental problems in the sport. To me its driven by weak leadership and bad governance. In the end those leading the game don't do that at all; instead they seemingly exist to try to broker deals or curry favours across the areas they should be leading with inevitable conflicts of interest and consequent lack of direction.
    Last edited by eddiewaringsflatcap; 7th February 2021 at 14:56.

  13. #63
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,857
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddiewaringsflatcap View Post
    I tend to favour Hethrington on this one. The key argument for me is "Our game does need extra investment, but only to fund growth – not to give to clubs to simply shore up their shortcomings."

    For too long I've heard lines such as the so-called 'big clubs only looking after themselves' but this is an argument made with tunnel vision and oversentimentality. For a start it those asking it fail to ask why they are not 'big' in the first place. Their answer would likely be they are being somehow 'held back' by the 'big clubs' but a more likely explanation is that have failed to create the conditions to grow their club.
    Agreed, and I've raised this loads of times. We are lucky that RL actually has clubs that are considered 'big' given the handcuffs that have been placed on them. We introduced a salary cap to make sure that the underachieving clubs could match the better ones in terms of wages, then we double handcuffed the successful clubs by implementing a play off system that allowed the same underachieving clubs to then compete unfairly by turning the season into a semi cup competition at the end of the season were consistency and planning could be blown up over 80 minutes. If Wakefield, Huddersfield, Hull KR cannot compete in the current system they have nobody to blame but themselves. They've not had to compete financially because the system was structured so that the bigger clubs couldn't blow them out of the water, and then they didn't even have to match the big clubs on the park week by week because we brought in a system whereby they could lose close to half their games and still be a few wins in September away from being champions. In such a system it's amazing that we have 'big clubs' at all.

  14. #64
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    4,821
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    Agreed, and I've raised this loads of times. We are lucky that RL actually has clubs that are considered 'big' given the handcuffs that have been placed on them. We introduced a salary cap to make sure that the underachieving clubs could match the better ones in terms of wages, then we double handcuffed the successful clubs by implementing a play off system that allowed the same underachieving clubs to then compete unfairly by turning the season into a semi cup competition at the end of the season were consistency and planning could be blown up over 80 minutes. If Wakefield, Huddersfield, Hull KR cannot compete in the current system they have nobody to blame but themselves. They've not had to compete financially because the system was structured so that the bigger clubs couldn't blow them out of the water, and then they didn't even have to match the big clubs on the park week by week because we brought in a system whereby they could lose close to half their games and still be a few wins in September away from being champions. In such a system it's amazing that we have 'big clubs' at all.

    That's a clear example of what I was inferring but what I'd also add is that the salary cap has remainded basically static for decades. Again do the likes of Hull kR (and in honesty Hull FC) really care about the young talent going to the NRL when they are unaffected by such cases; they can't even be arsed to run (or more accurately finance) a proper junior section and it almost feels like they want the 'big' clubs to lose players so they can take a punt on importing a few B- / C+ grade Aussie has been's to try to exploit the damage to Saints, Wigan etc when those players go.

    EDIT: Just found this gem which is a brialliant expose of the small mindedness, backsliding self importance and bumbling idiocy that plagues the sport:
    https://www.totalrl.com/hull-u-turn-...y-cap-dispute/

  15. #65
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,711
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Lots of good insights here. I have no preference or real view on the private equity thing, other than that something has to change...what that is, who knows!?!

    Is the private equity deal the right one, maybe not. Would giving every club owner £2m for their share of the rights actually be beneficial, unless SL leadership was able to dictate what it was spent on. What would clubs like Cas and Wakey actually spend that money on?

    Some of it would be taken by the owners as what they see as a return on investment of what they put into the clubs historically, you would potentially see a sudden influx of bigger name NRL players coming to the smaller clubs for a couple of years and wage inflation throughout the competition, you would probably see a reduction in season ticket prices at some clubs as they implement new "innovative" marketing ideas to increase crowds - but really what would be left when the money runs out?? Cas and Wakefield would still be playing in third world death traps, Huddersfield and Salford still playing in front of 2000 people, and Saints/Leeds/Wigan contribution 90% of the youth development in the sport.

    The only for any investment to grow the game is to mandate what each club actually spends it on, with minimum investment levels into academies, coaching, youth development and marketing - along with centralised investment in marketing and commercial development. Which the smaller clubs don't want and no-one at SL HQ is willing to grasp the nettle and implement what is needed.
    "If you're going to strive for a change then you have to keep going upwards,"
    Keiron Cunningham, 2016

  16. #66
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    152
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Why do sky sports insist having the Burgess story headlining in the sky sports section.
    It's been in the main bit for ages.

    Idiots.
    Last edited by CGSaint; 8th February 2021 at 23:36.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •