14 replies to this topic

[PhillH]

This is likely to result in major scale changes folks...... rumour has it that the RFL is minded towards taking out some of the existing Championship One clubs. Time will tell.....have your say here....... http://www.therfl.co...pporters_survey

The RFL have confirmed today that a thorough consultation period is to commence as the sport seeks input into shaping a new strategy for the Championships from 2012 onwards.

All major stakeholders, including supporters, will have the opportunity to submit their views up to mid-December, and the RFL are urging fans of the sport to complete a short questionnaire on the RFL website. click here to view questionnaire

The aim of the review, first announced to clubs in June, is to ‘create the best, viable and competitive semi professional competition possible’ and the RFL are keen on ensuring the clubs have strong management and their levels of investment reflect the level of return to the sport.

Commenting on the consultation process, RFL’s Chief Operating Officer Ralph Rimmer, said:

“At this point we are seeking the views of all the game’s stakeholders including fans, sponsors, players and the media to ensure we are taking into account the informed opinions of these people when constructing a draft model outlining the future structure of the sport underneath Super League.

"The proposed structure will be taken to the clubs for an intense period of consultation before getting it signed off by the end of March 2011.”

The RFL has also entered into a partnership with the Rugby League Players Association (RLPA) to gather the views of players and coaches registered to the union.

“We are delighted that the RLPA, which has over 700 Rugby League professional coaches and players in their union, has entered into a partnership with the RFL to become the driving force in getting its members to input into the process," added Rimmer.

“Whilst the existing clubs will be integral to this, another key aspect of review is that the fans have the opportunity to shape the future and whilst it will be impossible to please everyone, we wish to involve as many people as possible to ensure the new strategy has everyone moving forward from 2012 onwards.”

[marshy1]

This is likely to result in major scale changes folks...... rumour has it that the RFL is minded towards taking out some of the existing Championship One clubs. Time will tell.....have your say here....... http://www.therfl.co...pporters_survey

The RFL have confirmed today that a thorough consultation period is to commence as the sport seeks input into shaping a new strategy for the Championships from 2012 onwards.

All major stakeholders, including supporters, will have the opportunity to submit their views up to mid-December, and the RFL are urging fans of the sport to complete a short questionnaire on the RFL website. click here to view questionnaire

The aim of the review, first announced to clubs in June, is to ‘create the best, viable and competitive semi professional competition possible’ and the RFL are keen on ensuring the clubs have strong management and their levels of investment reflect the level of return to the sport.

Commenting on the consultation process, RFL’s Chief Operating Officer Ralph Rimmer, said:

“At this point we are seeking the views of all the game’s stakeholders including fans, sponsors, players and the media to ensure we are taking into account the informed opinions of these people when constructing a draft model outlining the future structure of the sport underneath Super League.

"The proposed structure will be taken to the clubs for an intense period of consultation before getting it signed off by the end of March 2011.”

The RFL has also entered into a partnership with the Rugby League Players Association (RLPA) to gather the views of players and coaches registered to the union.

“We are delighted that the RLPA, which has over 700 Rugby League professional coaches and players in their union, has entered into a partnership with the RFL to become the driving force in getting its members to input into the process," added Rimmer.

“Whilst the existing clubs will be integral to this, another key aspect of review is that the fans have the opportunity to shape the future and whilst it will be impossible to please everyone, we wish to involve as many people as possible to ensure the new strategy has everyone moving forward from 2012 onwards.”

Phil, this has been known about for quite some time although this is the first official statement made public by the RFL that I am aware.
No doubt thre will be a few clubs aniously looking at the nitty gritty of what this may mean to them.

[PhillH]

Phil, this has been known about for quite some time although this is the first official statement made public by the RFL that I am aware.
No doubt thre will be a few clubs aniously looking at the nitty gritty of what this may mean to them.

As the statement explains, the RFL announced its review to the clubs in June. John Kidd reportedly made reference to the possible outcomes at the public meeting on 25th October.

By far the most interesting passage has to be: "RFL are keen on ensuring the clubs have strong management and their levels of investment reflect the level of return to the sport". If that isn't a pointer to the true reason for reviewing the whole thing I don't know what is!

[eclecticsheep]

Will this herald the end of the Rugby League Private Limited Company PhillH?

[PhillH]

Will this herald the end of the Rugby League Private Limited Company PhillH?

I would love to see them adopt the Bundersliga approach to club ownership, but very much doubt that the RFL would be brave enough to impliment it. The RFL has shown time and time again that it lacks confidence in the financial sustainability of its own game without the input of sugar daddies at various clubs and therefore tends to roll over to the private benefactors or other speculated sources of money, often with disasterous effects - the latest one being Crusaders.

The key problem being that the RFL is incapable of distinguishing between the "good guys" like Ken Davy, John Wilkinson, David Hughes, Eamon McManus and the rogues like Leighton Samuels (or at Championship level Bobby no-Hope).

About the best we can hope for is a more stringent set of minimum standards for club governance, consistently applied.

[Jonty]

About the best we can hope for is a more stringent set of minimum standards for club governance, consistently applied.

I think that is essential, Phill - maybe along the lines of the director/owner criteria employed by the FA - do they call it the fit and proper person test?

Hopefully there will be further encouragement and incentives for supporter ownership - it's worth noting that Supporters Direct, in partnership with the RFL, now employ a f/t RL Development Officer for RL Supporters Trusts. That's progress in itself. A few years ago the fear was that supporter ownership meant that you'd end up with 1,300 people picking the team by ballot!

The achievement of FC United in gaining both council support and permission for their stadium in Newton Heath within five years of their formation is an excellent example of what supporter ownership can achieve at a club of similar size (revenue-wise; slightly larger supporter-wise) to a Championships club.

Bramley has certainly proven to be sustainable (albeit at NL3 level), Rochdale have had challenges, but seem to be better off under supporter ownership than they were previously.

Maybe the biggest challenge, and one that neither FC United or AFC Wimbledon, the other major soccer example, faced was that of clearing previous debt, particular directors loans. FCUM and AFC Wimbledon started from scratch as new clubs. At many clubs in Championship RL the burden of Director investment may be too difficult to overcome as part of a supporter buy-out, particularly when it comes to bailing out failed directors as we saw with Blackpool.

Edited by Jonty, 25 November 2010 - 01:03 PM.

[PhillH]

I think that is essential, Phill - maybe along the lines of the director/owner criteria employed by the FA - do they call it the fit and proper person test?

Hopefully there will be further encouragement and incentives for supporter ownership - it's worth noting that Supporters Direct, in partnership with the RFL, now employ a f/t RL Development Officer for RL Supporters Trusts. That's progress in itself. A few years ago the fear was that supporter ownership meant that you'd end up with 1,300 people picking the team by ballot!

The achievement of FC United in gaining both council support and permission for their stadium in Newton Heath within five years of their formation is an excellent example of what supporter ownership can achieve at a club of similar size (revenue-wise; slightly larger supporter-wise) to a Championships club.

Bramley has certainly proven to be sustainable (albeit at NL3 level), Rochdale have had challenges, but seem to be better off under supporter ownership than they were previously.

Maybe the biggest challenge, and one that neither FC United or AFC Wimbledon, the other major soccer example, faced was that of clearing previous debt, particular directors loans. FCUM and AFC Wimbledon started from scratch as new clubs. At many clubs in Championship RL the burden of Director investment may be too difficult to overcome as part of a supporter buy-out, particularly when it comes to bailing out failed directors as we saw with Blackpool.

Director "investment" in the shape of loans ought to be banned. If such a ban had been enforced prior to loans commonly being raised against club assets we may not have lost so much of the game's infrastructure in the last 20 years.

Of course there is a way that historic director's loans can be written off at no cost whilst continuing in professional rugby league..... without even resorting to supporter ownership..... simply enjoy the tag of an "expansionist" club and market yourself as being loved by Sky. First we had the Harlequins take that route and today the same story applies to the Crusaders, allowed into Super League 2011 quelle suprise.

What for the Crusaders is described by Nigel Wood as "a hiccup" was the terminal blow for the Blackpool Panthers, as the RFL has not applied the same rules!

Quelle suprise once again as Wood shows more neck than a giraffe to spout the line about "rugby league in Wales" being in a great shape etc. A huge irony being that the demise of Blackpool Panthers has led to the one truly Welsh remaining professional rugby league club, the Scorpions, being elbowed out of the Northern Rail Cup to keep the fixture planning feasible! You really couldn't make it up.

Let's face another irony - Blackpool Panthers are hardly non-expansionist from a geographical viewpoint. I'd even hazard a guess that the Crusaders are closer to Widnes than Blackpool Panthers were to any other professional side. However Blackpool Panthers happened to be on the other side of a border labelled as Fylde, whereas the Crusaders happen to be the other side of a border labelled "Wales" - makes all the difference to how each club is valued or otherwise and the rules that will thenceforth be applied. Just so long as you are not so far into Wales as to make a journey from the M62 too difficult for visiting supporters!

These buffoons at the RFL still fail to recognise that every time they bend the rules in this crass manner they alienate masses of supporters and make the game weaker. Absolute joke.

[marshy1]

Director "investment" in the shape of loans ought to be banned. If such a ban had been enforced prior to loans commonly being raised against club assets we may not have lost so much of the game's infrastructure in the last 20 years.

Of course there is a way that historic director's loans can be written off at no cost whilst continuing in professional rugby league..... without even resorting to supporter ownership..... simply enjoy the tag of an "expansionist" club and market yourself as being loved by Sky. First we had the Harlequins take that route and today the same story applies to the Crusaders, allowed into Super League 2011 quelle suprise.

What for the Crusaders is described by Nigel Wood as "a hiccup" was the terminal blow for the Blackpool Panthers, as the RFL has not applied the same rules!

Quelle suprise once again as Wood shows more neck than a giraffe to spout the line about "rugby league in Wales" being in a great shape etc. A huge irony being that the demise of Blackpool Panthers has led to the one truly Welsh remaining professional rugby league club, the Scorpions, being elbowed out of the Northern Rail Cup to keep the fixture planning feasible! You really couldn't make it up.

Let's face another irony - Blackpool Panthers are hardly non-expansionist from a geographical viewpoint. I'd even hazard a guess that the Crusaders are closer to Widnes than Blackpool Panthers were to any other professional side. However Blackpool Panthers happened to be on the other side of a border labelled as Fylde, whereas the Crusaders happen to be the other side of a border labelled "Wales" - makes all the difference to how each club is valued or otherwise and the rules that will thenceforth be applied. Just so long as you are not so far into Wales as to make a journey from the M62 too difficult for visiting supporters!

These buffoons at the RFL still fail to recognise that every time they bend the rules in this crass manner they alienate masses of supporters and make the game weaker. Absolute joke.

Phil, this may come as a suprise but I agree totally with your comments regarding the treatment of Blackpool and the Crusaders.I suspect crusaders will be dealt a points punishment which will mean absolutely nothing as of course they are members of a closed shop.Phil, the rugby league beggar belief!!

[Steve the Roughyed]

Phil, this may come as a suprise but I agree totally with your comments regarding the treatment of Blackpool and the Crusaders.I suspect crusaders will be dealt a points punishment which will mean absolutely nothing as of course they are members of a closed shop.Phil, the rugby league beggar belief!!

Totally agree Marshy1 and have just tried to say the same thing when completing the on-line questionnaire. Just what is the point of a 6 point reduction apart from making play-off place more difficult? And yes this whole set up is alienating me and the other 3 RL supporters in this family. Definitely questioning whether to bother any more or to do something else on summer Sundays.

[PhillH]

Reportedly the debts run up by the Hope regime at Blackpool Panthers were in the region of £70k. Having failed to prevent the man who previously took Leigh to the brink of oblivion wrecking another of its clubs, the RFL ruled that a new team of backers (apparently including Bill Quinn and Martin Crompton's cousin) would not be allowed to write off that amount and start afresh.

Meanwhile in Wrexham the RFL reportedly has exposure of its own of no less than £700k, having already had to prop up the Crusaders to that amount in order to save face and get them through last season. This being but one amount owing by the Crusaders, much of which goes back to Leighton Samuels and the rushed programme of getting a Super League team in South Wales at the beginning of licensing, whilst breaking a number of RFL rules and employment laws in the process. Of course the RFL was all for this unsustainable business model being followed at the time and turned a blind eye to indiscretions that the Home Office later took action on!

So the answer is apparently to ditch the Panthers and withdraw professional RL from the town that hosts the 9s and other "show piece" non-SL occasions, derive an utterly bizarre fixture plan for Championship One on the back of a fag packet, kick South Wales Scorpions out of the Northern Rail Cup, and try desperately to keep the Crusaders going, as if there is any chance of the £700k being recouped!!!

What planet are they on, this lot?

[Jonty]

Reportedly the debts run up by the Hope regime at Blackpool Panthers were in the region of £70k. Having failed to prevent the man who previously took Leigh to the brink of oblivion wrecking another of its clubs, the RFL ruled that a new team of backers (apparently including Bill Quinn and Martin Crompton's cousin) would not be allowed to write off that amount and start afresh.

Meanwhile in Wrexham the RFL reportedly has exposure of its own of no less than £700k, having already had to prop up the Crusaders to that amount in order to save face and get them through last season. This being but one amount owing by the Crusaders, much of which goes back to Leighton Samuels and the rushed programme of getting a Super League team in South Wales at the beginning of licensing, whilst breaking a number of RFL rules and employment laws in the process. Of course the RFL was all for this unsustainable business model being followed at the time and turned a blind eye to indiscretions that the Home Office later took action on!

So the answer is apparently to ditch the Panthers and withdraw professional RL from the town that hosts the 9s and other "show piece" non-SL occasions, derive an utterly bizarre fixture plan for Championship One on the back of a fag packet, kick South Wales Scorpions out of the Northern Rail Cup, and try desperately to keep the Crusaders going, as if there is any chance of the £700k being recouped!!!

What planet are they on, this lot?

Without knowing the nitty-gritty of the apparent Quinn package, it is difficult to compare the two situations accurately, but I agree that it does sound like one rule for one, another rule for another.

Perhaps a compromise could have been reached if the Bobby Hope "debt" was the sticking point. Was a deal ever on the table for a new Blackpool company to service the outstanding debt to suppliers, staff etc. but to wipe out that owed to Hope, therefore ensuring that RL in Blackpool can salvage some of it's reputation. My understanding is that Crusaders have wiped out the Leighton Samuels debt, whilst honouring other debt (including the RFL contribution that you mention). Either way, both clubs seem to have had poor governance over the recent years and we all accept that Blackpool are far from blameless.

A club at the Blackpool level is sustainable without the presence of a sugar daddy. I reckon that you can live within your means on around a 250 attendance in CC1, based on current RFL contributions to core operational costs. Obviously it would be getting by with minimal growth, but that IMO, is better than reliance upon one or two benevolent, and often impatient, individuals.

[juliancaine]

bet crusaders dont get docked points for going into administration like we did and i do hope the players get their pension payments paid as many people know and me that one tackle can end a career and you need the pension

[PhillH]

bet crusaders dont get docked points for going into administration like we did and i do hope the players get their pension payments paid as many people know and me that one tackle can end a career and you need the pension

The penalty for Crusaders going into administration has already been announced Julian - 6 points.

[marshy1]

The penalty for Crusaders going into administration has already been announced Julian - 6 points.

Meaningless penalty that is Phil, as I am sure you will agree.

[PhillH]

Meaningless penalty that is Phil, as I am sure you will agree.

No right minded bookmaker would offer anything other than odds-on Crusaders to be granted a license for another 3 years next time around, inspite of the so-called "hiccup" and even if they finish bottom next season.

It would also be a very short price indeed that if Wakefield, Castleford, Hull KR, etc had trodden a similar path they would have been thrown out of Super League forthwith.

On this issue, as with quite a few others, the RFL is too close to the (Nigel) Wood to see the trees - and too fixated with worshiping the Sky!