Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 11 of 20 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 275 of 493

Thread: Issues in the game

  1. #251
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by guns86 View Post
    I'd like to know "what the costs and benefits of the RL/SL split are expected to be?" as it seems like there are now 2 marketing, finance, management etc. teams which can't be cheap if they're trying to do it right. Also "how and when is the success or failure of the split going to be measured? I.e. What are the criteria" as there's never been a list of things they expect to achieve and when. It's all very rugby league of just doing something to give it a go and see what happens.

    You've mentioned League Express further down and I think you should add 40/20 Magazine onto the list of recipients (if it isn't on already) as they've asked similar questions before on their podcast.
    Yep, I like it, I'll add a sentence or two on that, good stuff.

    And yes, 40/20 were on the list, but happy for the reminder!

  2. #252
    In The South Stand KentishBarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,737
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    I forgot to add in the following...

    Governance of the game - we remain confused as to who or what organisation is in charge of taking the game forward. The much publicised RFL-Super League split in 2018 did not seem to resolve any issues, with the remit of advancing the commercial appeal of the sport having seemingly failed. The resignation of the Super League CEO on the eve of the 2021 season leads to questions being asked about his role, how much support he had from the clubs that appointed him, and whether the clubs are still committed to the split that they almost unanimously voted for not so long ago.

    This bit might need beefing up a bit, let me know.
    It does need a bit more. As it stands, it's more of a statement of concern (nothing wrong with it BTW). Perhaps include a few pertinent questions based on what you've already written here?

    I would also take out the references to Lancashire and Yorkshire in the 'Moving the goalposts' section. IMO it sounds a bit 'old world' and 'us and them'.
    Just use The Pennines throughout as your geographical reference.

    Hope this helps!
    Happy to sign it as it stands BTW.

  3. #253
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newport, Shropshire
    Posts
    2,856
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KentishBarry View Post
    It does need a bit more. As it stands, it's more of a statement of concern (nothing wrong with it BTW). Perhaps include a few pertinent questions based on what you've already written here?

    I would also take out the references to Lancashire and Yorkshire in the 'Moving the goalposts' section. IMO it sounds a bit 'old world' and 'us and them'.
    Just use The Pennines throughout as your geographical reference.

    Hope this helps!
    Happy to sign it as it stands BTW.
    I like the references to Lancashire and Yorkshire, which proves we’ll never all agree on every detail. I’ve already PM’d with my name to add to the letter. Premature but I might forget later on.

  4. #254
    In The South Stand KentishBarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,737
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suttoner View Post
    I like the references to Lancashire and Yorkshire, which proves we’ll never all agree on every detail. I’ve already PM’d with my name to add to the letter. Premature but I might forget later on.
    Sorry! I just couldn't possibly sign anything that factually incorrect!!!

  5. #255
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    128
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    That is brilliant. Thanks very much for the time you have taken in putting this together. I'd like to add my name to the letter please so I'll PM you.

    With regards the governance section I'm not sure if this would come across the wrong way. However I'd be interested to know how many people are employed by both the RL and Super League and what their roles and responsibilities are.

  6. #256
    Starting A Programme Collection MachineGunFunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The Sintellins Metropolis
    Posts
    887
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    I forgot to add in the following...

    Governance of the game - we remain confused as to who or what organisation is in charge of taking the game forward. The much publicised RFL-Super League split in 2018 did not seem to resolve any issues, with the remit of advancing the commercial appeal of the sport having seemingly failed. The resignation of the Super League CEO on the eve of the 2021 season leads to questions being asked about his role, how much support he had from the clubs that appointed him, and whether the clubs are still committed to the split that they almost unanimously voted for not so long ago.

    This bit might need beefing up a bit, let me know.
    Excellent work mate, thanks for doing this.

    You could add here that Elstone was the highest paid official in the sport (£400k per year according to Martin Sadler) but wasn't allowed to make any decisions, as any changes had to be agreed by all the member clubs. How is the game meant to move forward when this is the way it's governed and clubs just vote for their own self-interests instead of what's best for the game?
    A glaring example of this is that it was obvious that 22 or 23 games this season should've been the max (home and away plus Magic potentially) to give England the best chance of winning the World Cup. Because if they were to do that it would be the biggest boost the game in this country could get. But the clubs wanted more games, with their stadiums half full, to sell more beer and pies, and put more workload on the players and make it that much harder to achieve the ultimate goal at the end of the season.

    And one minor thing, in the opening paragraph, should the second of the 2 issues you refer to be Structure/Governance as you've got Structure labelled as issue 2 further down?
    "Never write off the Saints!!"

  7. #257
    In The West Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    5,517
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MachineGunFunk View Post
    Excellent work mate, thanks for doing this.

    You could add here that Elstone was the highest paid official in the sport (£400k per year according to Martin Sadler) but wasn't allowed to make any decisions, as any changes had to be agreed by all the member clubs. How is the game meant to move forward when this is the way it's governed and clubs just vote for their own self-interests instead of what's best for the game?
    A glaring example of this is that it was obvious that 22 or 23 games this season should've been the max (home and away plus Magic potentially) to give England the best chance of winning the World Cup. Because if they were to do that it would be the biggest boost the game in this country could get. But the clubs wanted more games, with their stadiums half full, to sell more beer and pies, and put more workload on the players and make it that much harder to achieve the ultimate goal at the end of the season.

    And one minor thing, in the opening paragraph, should the second of the 2 issues you refer to be Structure/Governance as you've got Structure labelled as issue 2 further down?
    Fully agree with this. Particularly the season structure and how it could affect WC preparations for England

  8. #258
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,178
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MachineGunFunk View Post
    Excellent work mate, thanks for doing this.

    You could add here that Elstone was the highest paid official in the sport (£400k per year according to Martin Sadler) but wasn't allowed to make any decisions, as any changes had to be agreed by all the member clubs. How is the game meant to move forward when this is the way it's governed and clubs just vote for their own self-interests instead of what's best for the game?
    A glaring example of this is that it was obvious that 22 or 23 games this season should've been the max (home and away plus Magic potentially) to give England the best chance of winning the World Cup. Because if they were to do that it would be the biggest boost the game in this country could get. But the clubs wanted more games, with their stadiums half full, to sell more beer and pies, and put more workload on the players and make it that much harder to achieve the ultimate goal at the end of the season.

    And one minor thing, in the opening paragraph, should the second of the 2 issues you refer to be Structure/Governance as you've got Structure labelled as issue 2 further down?
    Do we know what decisions he was stopped from making, other than selling out to private equity?

  9. #259
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,178
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    My timelines are drawing a bit more narrow now. Season starts on Fri 26, I want this done and dusted, posted, all the other stuff well before then. I don't want us to be dealing with this when Saints are playing games and we're more focused on cheering for the team. Ideally I'd want this done by the end of this week (Fri 12) so that I can get it posted to the relevant people this weekend with the hope of getting a response before the start of the season. I also think it should be emailed to various organisations such as RL Express, Daily Mirror etc. RL Express may ignore it as it may not chime with their 'RL is greater than ever' narrative but if they did want to print it in the letters page for the paper that comes out on Monday 22nd it'll need to be with them next week I reckon. So, the deadline is nearly on us.

    As I've said before, I'm only sending this out if it has support. We've had over 11,000 views of this thread and around 250 responses. If 50 or more of the 250 responding agree to put their name to it I think it could have legs. If any of the 'guests' who have read the thread but aren't signed up members want to put their name to it please sign up and PM me. If we can't get 40-50 signatures then I probably don't think it should be sent. I really think it needs weight of numbers behind it. Edits, opinions, suggestions, additions etc, please let me know by the end of Wednesday, then after that I'll stick the final draft on here and I will ask for names via PM. By the end of the week I'll see if we've got enough numbers and I'll let you know.

    Thanks all.
    Good work pulling this lot together. How would you like us to provide our names as signatories? Would it be worth having a word of the record with Saints to see if they are in support of the letter, if so would they email it to ST holders for signature to get the numbers up. I like the idea of sending it to RL journalists. Just one point on the Lancs/Yorkie split, are we risking alienating some fans by naming those two clubs? We all know where the outdated stadia are without names.. Anyway with or without cahnges I am happy to put my name to it.

  10. #260
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    Good work pulling this lot together. How would you like us to provide our names as signatories? Would it be worth having a word of the record with Saints to see if they are in support of the letter, if so would they email it to ST holders for signature to get the numbers up. I like the idea of sending it to RL journalists. Just one point on the Lancs/Yorkie split, are we risking alienating some fans by naming those two clubs? We all know where the outdated stadia are without names.. Anyway with or without cahnges I am happy to put my name to it.
    PM me your name if you're happy to sign mate, same for anyone else.

    I suppose Cas and Wakey fans may get annoyed, but frankly they are the fanbases that I think will ignore most of the letter anyway. The history of RLFans (and why I gave up on it years ago) is littered with fans of those clubs complaining about their teams having to play meaningless games in the last third of the season because we hadn't made the play-offs big enough to include everyone. I already predict that if this letter got into the pages of RL Express that within a week it'd be shot down by fans of certain clubs for being an over-demanding whinge from fans of a big club. This is one of the problems we face. Sky and the clubs have pushed a line for years that our sport will only be great when every club has a chance every year of winning the GF, and that has led to daft play off systems, a low salary cap, etc. Fans of clubs that simply fail to achieve their potential now have the attitude that it is the games responsibility to make their clubs as relevant as possible, and I imagine any calls for increases in salary caps or fairer and smaller play offs will be met with a 'what about our club?' narrative from them. So, my attitude is to name and shame the clubs that have been given loads of breaks, loads of second chances, loads of opportunities and have had systems in place to allow them to artificially succeed, yet have consistently failed. The game is still too focused on making sure that Wakefield are relevant and have a chance of playing relevant games all season, at the expense of making sure that Saints and Wigan are having games as important as possible.

  11. #261
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Wirral
    Posts
    2,662
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    PM me your name if you're happy to sign mate, same for anyone else.

    I suppose Cas and Wakey fans may get annoyed, but frankly they are the fanbases that I think will ignore most of the letter anyway. The history of RLFans (and why I gave up on it years ago) is littered with fans of those clubs complaining about their teams having to play meaningless games in the last third of the season because we hadn't made the play-offs big enough to include everyone. I already predict that if this letter got into the pages of RL Express that within a week it'd be shot down by fans of certain clubs for being an over-demanding whinge from fans of a big club. This is one of the problems we face. Sky and the clubs have pushed a line for years that our sport will only be great when every club has a chance every year of winning the GF, and that has led to daft play off systems, a low salary cap, etc. Fans of clubs that simply fail to achieve their potential now have the attitude that it is the games responsibility to make their clubs as relevant as possible, and I imagine any calls for increases in salary caps or fairer and smaller play offs will be met with a 'what about our club?' narrative from them. So, my attitude is to name and shame the clubs that have been given loads of breaks, loads of second chances, loads of opportunities and have had systems in place to allow them to artificially succeed, yet have consistently failed. The game is still too focused on making sure that Wakefield are relevant and have a chance of playing relevant games all season, at the expense of making sure that Saints and Wigan are having games as important as possible.
    Exactly right mate. It's crazy, could you see SKY or the FA trying to make the Premier League a competition that teams like WBA or Brighton would ever have a chance of winning? Of course not. Occassionally an outsider comes to the fore as in Blackburn, Leicester or Liverpool (ha!), but mainly the comp is dominated by the usual suspects, as indeed it should be.

  12. #262
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    near leigh
    Posts
    3,057
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Gray77 you are one of the bosses on this forum so i will give you my permission to put my name to that letter , i am not good at these private messages but you will know my name , i will leave it there .

  13. #263
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newport, Shropshire
    Posts
    2,856
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrum Down View Post
    That is brilliant. Thanks very much for the time you have taken in putting this together. I'd like to add my name to the letter please so I'll PM you.

    With regards the governance section I'm not sure if this would come across the wrong way. However I'd be interested to know how many people are employed by both the RL and Super League and what their roles and responsibilities are.
    I’ve only just noticed that this is your first post. Welcome.

  14. #264
    In The West Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    5,517
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Regards the Expansion v Heartlands stuff...is it worth mentioning how a traditional RL area like Cumbria seems to be ignored these days?

  15. #265
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    Regards the Expansion v Heartlands stuff...is it worth mentioning how a traditional RL area like Cumbria seems to be ignored these days?
    Maybe, but I'd say no unless loads disagree. My attitude to this is that I wanted it to be issues that lots of us agree with. Expansion-Heartlands isn't one of those issues judging my debates on here in the past few years. Some favour expansion, some think it's pointless. Some think improving the lot of Cumbrian clubs would be a great idea, some would think it would be a waste of resources. My aim was to try to avoid issues that we cannot rally behind, and so I've steered clear of it.

  16. #266
    In The West Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    5,517
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    Maybe, but I'd say no unless loads disagree. My attitude to this is that I wanted it to be issues that lots of us agree with. Expansion-Heartlands isn't one of those issues judging my debates on here in the past few years. Some favour expansion, some think it's pointless. Some think improving the lot of Cumbrian clubs would be a great idea, some would think it would be a waste of resources. My aim was to try to avoid issues that we cannot rally behind, and so I've steered clear of it.
    Can't argue with that Gray, fair enough

  17. #267
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    New edit... Part One

    We are Rugby League fans, passionate and loyal towards our sport. Between us it would be hard to even begin to calculate how many games we have collectively been to, how many miles we have collectively travelled and how much money we have collectively spent following this great sport of ours.
    The aim of this is not to simply air our grievances but to challenge the people in charge of our game to answer some fundamental questions about the state of Rugby League in 2021. This is our challenge to you, to take this letter in the spirit that it is intended and respond to it with answers or proposed solutions.
    What are the main issues that have prompted us to write? We believe they can be grouped into three categories...

    • Commercial presentation and profile
    • Structure
    • Governance

    We have framed it this way in the hope that the questions we ask can be answered in relation to the other questions within the same category.

    Issue 1 – Commercial presentation

    Sponsorship and Marketing – we are concerned that the sport continues to struggle to attract top tier sponsorship for its major events. There have been confident words expressed by people in the game about the commercial viability of the sport, yet the people in charge of attracting sponsorship were responsible for the 2012 deal with a sponsor who didn’t pay any money, and their successors are responsible for reportedly only managing to obtain a deal in 2017 with the current sponsor for just over £1m a year (now extended to include the Challenge Cup). In contrast, the Rugby Union Premiership’s current deal is reportedly around £10m annually. This despite club Rugby League consistently attracting higher television audiences on a bigger broadcaster and despite Rugby League having a marquee end of season championship decider that is watched by a bigger audience.

    Television coverage – we are of the opinion that the sport’s main television partner has too much influence over the game, and we do not believe that Rugby League is getting value for money from its main television deal. Rugby League is a mainstay of Sky’s weekend coverage for eight months a year, and the sport also provides Sky with important content in the summer months. Yet we believe that the finances involved in the Super League television contract do not resemble this.
    If we estimate that the upcoming proposed Sky deal for Super League is around £30m per annum for around 80 games, that equates to no more than £375,000 per game. Some will say that Rugby League is a minority sport and is not in a position to haggle for anything better, but the evidence suggests otherwise. Sky are paying more per annum for the five-week long Hundred cricket competition (despite ten of those games, including the Final, also being live on the BBC), whilst their deal for The Open Championship equates to one weekend of golf costing them the same as half of a Super League season.
    Whilst these examples would indicate that Super League is relatively unimportant to Sky, another explanation could be that Sky do value Rugby League, but never have to truly prove it financially because they are never forced into competition for the rights.
    In addition, we also remain perplexed that Rugby League doesn’t have a nationally broadcast prime-time highlights show on a free-to-air channel. Why do fans who do not have pay-tv have to wait until late on Monday night for highlights of games? And why do fans outside of the North have to wait until Tuesday afternoon? Showing highlights of the big Thursday and Friday night games on a Monday night or Tuesday afternoon would be like football fans having to wait until Wednesday or Thursday to watch the weekends biggest games on Match of the Day. They wouldn’t stand for it, so why do we?

    Branding – we believe that the branding of our sports main competition as Super League has had a detrimental effect on Rugby League’s abilities to retain a unique position in the UK sporting landscape. It has meant that the media and broadcasters now refer to our league competition (and therefore at times our sport) without using the word rugby, which has given Rugby Union a free pass is their attempts to colonise the name for their own benefits. And whilst Super League may have been a unique name for a competition in 1996 it is now also used by numerous sports such as Netball and women’s Football. We have ended up in a situation where our main competition now has a name which doesn’t contain the word rugby and is also no longer unique.

    We have the following questions.
    • Do you believe that rugby league is currently achieving its potential in terms of attracting sponsors into the game?
    • Are you concerned that the sport is now reliant on a betting company for the sponsorship of both Super League and the Challenge Cup at a time when restrictions on such sponsorship may come into place in the near future?
    • Do you believe that the television deals signed with Sky represent good value for money for the game?
    • Do you believe that the sport has gone into television negotiations in a position of strength or in a position whereby it has simply acceded to Sky’s proposals? Has there been an open process to gauge interest in the Super League television rights elsewhere?
    • Why are free-to-air highlights only shown in the small hours of Monday night in the North and then on Tuesday afternoons nationally?
    • Do you still believe that the brand-name Super League is helping the sport to define itself as the premier Rugby League competition in the country?
    • Has any consideration been made to changing the name to incorporate the word rugby?

    Issue 2 – Structure

    Competition structure – we believe that the constant changes in the structure of the league season have harmed the image and integrity of the sport. Since the move to a play-off system in 1998 we have had six different play-off formats. In addition, the removal and then re-introduction of promotion and relegation, the short-term policy of franchising and the four-year concept of the Super / Middle 8s has meant that the league has looked amateurish in its thinking. Changes made and publicised as being widely supported throughout the game have then be universally abandoned within a few years on several occasions. The decision in 2019 to revert to a 12-team competition with a top-5 play-off meant that we ended up back where we began in 1998. Two decades of short-term initiatives and ideas led us exactly nowhere.

    Salary Cap - whilst the salary cap has been increased (in addition to the introduction of the marquee rule) in recent years, it has not prevented some of our best players from leaving for the NRL. Whilst we cannot compete financially with Australian Rugby League, there are clubs in our game who could spend more than they are currently permitted, which would enable us to retain some of our best talent and also increase the standards at the top of the game. We believe that the salary cap should be increased by a significant amount because we believe that it will be those at the top of the game that will drive the future success of the sport, and not those who have consistently failed to compete despite artificial barriers being placed to allow them to do so.
    Whilst some will see this as us promoting a system of 'haves' and 'have nots', we would argue that the decisions to incorporate both a relatively low salary cap and a play-off system have meant that every club has been a 'have' given that all clubs caps has been covered by the television deals and given that the bar set to reach the play-offs has allowed every club a chance at success. Yet despite this double attempt at achieving some artificial parity in our game, nearly every season we have ended up with the same end-result, with the same clubs at the top despite having hardly any financial advantage. We believe that the clubs at the bottom have had ample opportunities to close the gap, and that the clubs that consistently set the standards should be allowed to spend a bit more on retaining the elite players and increasing competition at the top of the game.

    We have the following questions.

    • Why has the play-off format changed so often in little over two decades, when the initial top-five concept was not only the fairest but gave the greatest share of rewards to the most consistent sides over the regular season?
    • Have the constant changes in the structure of the league season been influenced by television partners?
    • Why are we not using the top-five system in 2021? The decision to revert to a top-six knock-out system in 2020 was understandable but was announced as a one-off. So why are we using it again in 2021 despite scheduling a 25-week regular season?
    • Why are we allowing our best players to leave for the NRL when an increase in the salary cap would go some way to stopping it?

  18. #268
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Part Two...

    Issue 3 - Governance of the game

    RFL-Super League - we remain confused as to who or what organisation is in charge of taking the game forward. The much-publicised RFL-Super League split in 2018 did not seem to resolve any issues, with the remit of advancing the commercial appeal of the sport having seemingly failed. The resignation of the Super League CEO on the eve of the 2021 season leads to questions being asked about how much power he had commensurate with his reportedly high salary, how much support he had from the clubs that appointed him, and whether the clubs are still committed to the split that they almost unanimously voted for not so long ago.
    We would like to know what the costs and benefits have been/should be of the RFL-Super League split, as it seems like there are now two separate entities dealing with the marketing, finance and management of the sport. In a World Cup year it would be preferable for the game to speak with one united voice, with the main aim of England winning the tournament and providing the sport with the greatest shot in the arm possible. The scheduling of a physically demanding condensed 25-game regular season with a Grand Final only a fortnight before England’s World Cup opener leads us to doubt that this is happening.

    Moving the goalposts – off the field, it appears that a great big line titled ‘required facilities and standards’ has been drawn on the Lancashire-Yorkshire border, with clubs to the west of the border being judged on the strictest criteria and the clubs to the east of the border escaping much of that same judgement. It appears that clubs in what is traditionally still known as Lancashire met their ground obligations whilst those in Yorkshire (outside of Leeds) have faced barely any pressure to meet theirs. When 2009-11 Super League licenses were handed out, both Castleford and Wakefield were making financial projections based on moving to new stadiums, which neither have done well over a decade later. The warnings from the RFL at that time seemingly went nowhere, as did both clubs’ projections of moving to new grounds. Meanwhile St Helens and Salford (who were given similar warnings) met their obligations and moved to new improved grounds, at great expense.
    To the west of the Pennines the Super League era has seen the deaths of Central Park, Knowsley Road, Naughton Park and Wilderspool, as Lancashire’s main clubs either pre-empted or met demands to modernise. Yet in 2021 we still see grounds to the east of the Pennines like Belle Vue and Wheldon Road failing to provide more than basic facilities, especially for away fans. Why did we end up with threats and demands only applying to one set of clubs?
    Meanwhile, on the field the constant rule changes have meant that things that were part-and-parcel of the game in one year where then removed the next, with no real explanation as to their benefits. Soundbites such as: “Super League always welcomes changes that add excitement for our fans and showcase the unique qualities of our players” mean nothing when fans haven’t actually been consulted in the process. A sport which constantly feels that it needs to reinvent itself is subconsciously telling the world that it doesn’t believe in itself.

    We have the following questions.

    • Can clarification be given as to how the RFL and Super League clubs now interact on major issues in the game?
    • How and when is the success or failure of the RFL-Super League split going to be measured? How are fans going to able to gauge whether the split was beneficial or detrimental to the sport?
    • Did Super League and the clubs consult the RFL and Shaun Wane about the decision to play a condensed 25-game regular season in a World Cup year?
    • Why were demands for ground improvements and increased standards not met by several Yorkshire clubs when all Lancashire clubs met their obligations? What measures are being taken to ensure that top-flight grounds in Yorkshire are on a par with grounds in Lancashire?
    • Why are there constant rule changes to the sport?

    We hope that you are able to take as much time answering our questions as we have put in to asking them. We want the best for the sport and we wish those in charge the best of luck in taking us into the future successfully. But as fans of the game we believe that we have the right to ask questions and hold those in charge accountable. We look forward to hearing from you.

    Regards,

    Names to be included.

  19. #269
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    I should also add in the end bit...

    We will be sending this letter to several media outlets that cover the game. We do not do this to pressure you but to hopefully start a debate within the game about these issues.

  20. #270
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    199
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Let’s hope it gets the audience it deserves. Getting it discussed on the 40/20 podcast would be a great platform as they’ve obviously got Garry Schofield and Phil Caplan as presenters who like a good debate and also they’ve had the likes of Rimmer and Wood on as guests in the past so obviously hold some kudos in the circles that matter.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  21. #271
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    near leigh
    Posts
    3,057
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Well done , i have had my grumbles about these things on here and am willing to back up with my name .

  22. #272
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,178
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    PM me your name if you're happy to sign mate, same for anyone else.

    I suppose Cas and Wakey fans may get annoyed, but frankly they are the fanbases that I think will ignore most of the letter anyway. The history of RLFans (and why I gave up on it years ago) is littered with fans of those clubs complaining about their teams having to play meaningless games in the last third of the season because we hadn't made the play-offs big enough to include everyone. I already predict that if this letter got into the pages of RL Express that within a week it'd be shot down by fans of certain clubs for being an over-demanding whinge from fans of a big club. This is one of the problems we face. Sky and the clubs have pushed a line for years that our sport will only be great when every club has a chance every year of winning the GF, and that has led to daft play off systems, a low salary cap, etc. Fans of clubs that simply fail to achieve their potential now have the attitude that it is the games responsibility to make their clubs as relevant as possible, and I imagine any calls for increases in salary caps or fairer and smaller play offs will be met with a 'what about our club?' narrative from them. So, my attitude is to name and shame the clubs that have been given loads of breaks, loads of second chances, loads of opportunities and have had systems in place to allow them to artificially succeed, yet have consistently failed. The game is still too focused on making sure that Wakefield are relevant and have a chance of playing relevant games all season, at the expense of making sure that Saints and Wigan are having games as important as possible.
    With second thoughts I think you may be right. The number of fans that attend at those clubs is not great anyway.

  23. #273
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,178
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    New edit... Part One

    Great letter. Comments are me being pedantic.

    We are Rugby League fans, passionate and loyal towards our sport. Between us it would be hard to even begin to calculate how many games we have collectively been to, how many miles we have collectively travelled and how much money we have collectively spent following this great sport of ours.
    The aim of this is not to simply air our grievances but to challenge the people in charge of our game to answer some fundamental questions about the state of Rugby League in 2021. This is our challenge to you, to take this letter in the spirit that it is intended and respond to it with answers or proposed solutions.
    What are the main issues that have prompted us to write? We believe they can be grouped into three categories...

    • Commercial presentation and profile
    • Structure
    • Governance

    We have framed it this way in the hope that the questions we ask can be answered in relation to the other questions within the same category.

    Issue 1 – Commercial presentation

    Sponsorship and Marketing – we are concerned that the sport continues to struggle to attract top tier sponsorship for its major events. There have been confident words expressed by people in the game about the commercial viability of the sport, yet the people in charge of attracting sponsorship were responsible for the 2012 deal with a sponsor who didn’t pay any money, and their successors are responsible for reportedly only managing to obtain a deal in 2017 with the current sponsor for just over £1m a year (now extended to include the Challenge Cup). In contrast, the Rugby Union Premiership’s current deal is reportedly around £10m annually. This despite club Rugby League consistently attracting higher television audiences on a bigger broadcaster and despite Rugby League having a marquee end of season championship decider that is watched by a bigger audience.

    Television coverage – we are of the opinion that the sport’s main television partner has too much influence over the game, and we do not believe that Rugby League is getting value for money from its main television deal. Rugby League is a mainstay of Sky’s weekend coverage for eight months a year, and the sport also provides Sky with important content in the summer months. Yet we believe that the finances involved in the Super League television contract do not reflect this.
    If we estimate that the upcoming proposed Sky deal for Super League is around £30m per annum for around 80 games, that equates to no more than £375,000 per game. Some will say that Rugby League is a minority sport and is not in a position to haggle for anything better, but the evidence suggests otherwise. Sky is (are) paying more per annum for the five-week long Hundred cricket competition (despite ten of those games, including the Final, also being live on the BBC), whilst their deal for The Open Championship equates to one weekend of golf costing them the same as half of a Super League season.
    Whilst these examples would indicate that Super League is relatively unimportant to Sky, another explanation could be that Sky do value Rugby League, but never have to truly prove it financially because they are never forced into competition for the rights.
    In addition, we also remain perplexed that Rugby League doesn’t have a nationally broadcast prime-time highlights show on a free-to-air channel. Why do fans who do not have pay-tv have to wait until late on Monday night for highlights of games? And why do fans outside of the North have to wait until Tuesday afternoon? Showing highlights of the big Thursday and Friday night games on a Monday night or Tuesday afternoon would be like football fans having to wait until Wednesday or Thursday to watch the weekends biggest games on Match of the Day. They wouldn’t stand for it, so why do we?

    Branding – we believe that the branding of our sports main competition as Super League has had a detrimental effect on Rugby League’s abilities to retain a unique position in the UK sporting landscape. It has meant that the media and broadcasters now refer to our league competition (and therefore at times our sport) without using the word rugby, which has given Rugby Union a free pass in (s)their attempts to colonise the name for their own benefits. And whilst Super League may have been a unique name for a competition in 1996 it is now also used by numerous sports such as Netball and women’s Football. We have ended up in a situation where our main competition now has a name which doesn’t contain the word rugby and is also no longer unique.

    We have the following questions.
    • Do you believe that rugby league is currently achieving its potential in terms of attracting sponsors into the game?
    • Are you concerned that the sport is now reliant on a betting company for the sponsorship of both Super League and the Challenge Cup at a time when restrictions on such sponsorship may come into place in the near future?
    • Do you believe that the television deals signed with Sky represent good value for money for the game?
    • Do you believe that the sport has gone into television negotiations in a position of strength or in a position whereby it has simply acceded to Sky’s proposals? Has there been an open process to gauge interest in the Super League television rights elsewhere?
    • Why are free-to-air highlights only shown in the small hours of Monday night in the North and then on Tuesday afternoons nationally?
    • Do you still believe that the brand-name Super League is helping the sport to define itself as the premier Rugby League competition in the country?
    • Has any consideration been made to changing the name to incorporate the word rugby?

    Issue 2 – Structure

    Competition structure – we believe that the constant changes in the structure of the league season have harmed the image and integrity of the sport. Since the move to a play-off system in 1998 we have had six different play-off formats. In addition, the removal and then re-introduction of promotion and relegation, the short-term policy of franchising and the four-year concept of the Super / Middle 8s has meant that the league has looked amateurish in its thinking. Changes made and publicised as being widely supported throughout the game have then be universally abandoned within a few years on several occasions. The decision in 2019 to revert to a 12-team competition with a top-5 play-off meant that we ended up back where we began in 1998. Two decades of short-term initiatives and ideas led us exactly nowhere.

    Salary Cap - whilst the salary cap has been increased (in addition to the introduction of the marquee rule) in recent years, it has not prevented some of our best players from leaving for the NRL. Whilst we cannot compete financially with Australian Rugby League, there are clubs in our game who could spend more than they are currently permitted, which would enable us to retain some of our best talent and also increase the standards at the top of the game. We believe that the salary cap should be increased by a significant amount because we believe that it will be those at the top of the game that will drive the future success of the sport, and not those who have consistently failed to compete despite artificial barriers being placed to allow them to do so.
    Whilst some will see this as us promoting a system of 'haves' and 'have nots', we would argue that the decisions to incorporate both a relatively low salary cap and a play-off system have meant that every club has been a 'have' given that all clubs caps has been covered by the television deals and given that the bar set to reach the play-offs has allowed every club a chance at success. Yet despite this double attempt at achieving some artificial parity in our game, nearly every season we have ended up with the same end-result, with the same clubs at the top despite having hardly any financial advantage. We believe that the clubs at the bottom have had ample opportunities to close the gap, and that the clubs that consistently set the standards should be allowed to spend a bit more on retaining the elite players and increasing competition at the top of the game.

    We have the following questions.

    • Why has the play-off format changed so often in little over two decades, when the initial top-five concept was not only the fairest but gave the greatest share of rewards to the most consistent sides over the regular season?
    • Have the constant changes in the structure of the league season been influenced by television partners?
    • Why are we not using the top-five system in 2021? The decision to revert to a top-six knock-out system in 2020 was understandable but was announced as a one-off. So why are we using it again in 2021 despite scheduling a 25-week regular season?
    • Why are we allowing our best players to leave for the NRL when an increase in the salary cap would go some way to stopping it?


    Great letter. The three minor comments on red are me being pedantic.

  24. #274
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post

    Great letter. The three minor comments on red are me being pedantic.
    Happy to have it read properly and my errors to be highlighted, thanks. After this I've had the letter amended and proof read by the missus because she has an English Lit degree and proof reads loads of documents, and there ended up being alot more than three minor changes! It looks a bit more polished now.

  25. #275
    In The South Stand Tabasco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Rivington Road, St Helens
    Posts
    2,903
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    Happy to have it read properly and my errors to be highlighted, thanks. After this I've had the letter amended and proof read by the missus because she has an English Lit degree and proof reads loads of documents, and there ended up being alot more than three minor changes! It looks a bit more polished now.
    As long as your wife hasn’t translated it into Chaucerian syntax, I’m sure it will read superbly.

Posting Permissions

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