Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Super League clubs back policy review

RFL media release

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Honor James

Honor James
  • Coach
  • 1,308 posts

Posted 08 November 2012 - 10:59 PM

The 14 Super League clubs have entered the consultation process to determine policy and direction for the sport's elite competition after the current
licensing period expires in 2015.

At a two-day conference chaired by RFL Interim Chairman Maurice Watkins at Windermere this week, the Super League clubs met with the RFL Executive to
consider key issues including competition structure, promotion and relegation and Super League licensing.

No firm decisions were taken on future policy but RFL Chief Executive Nigel Wood said the discussions with the clubs were a fruitful and positive contribution to
the ongoing Policy Review that he is leading. "The overriding consensus from the conference was that all the clubs share the
desire to improve the performance of Super League as the sport's flagship competition," said Wood.

"I would like to thank the clubs for their openness in outlining what they feel are the biggest issues facing Super League and for their acceptance that the
direction we take has to be in the best interests of the totality of the sport."

A decision was taken to create four Working Groups within Super League (Europe) to determine policy for marketing; commercial; competition structure and
regulation; and player development and performance.

All 14 Super League clubs will be represented across the four Working Groups, which will utilise the expertise of individuals in the clubs as well as members
of the RFL Executive.

"The creation of the Working Groups gives the clubs some control over, and responsibility for the direction and performance of Super League which is
entirely appropriate," added Wood.

The conference featured a comprehensive review of the 2012 season and updates on some aspects of the 2013 season, the fixtures for which will be published on
Monday November 19.

The clubs also received an update on progress made by Rugby League World Cup 2013, and received an address on the importance of international competition
from former Australia captain Darren Lockyer.
-ends-

John Ledger
Communications Ma

“The purpose of life is to live it, to taste experience to the utmost, to reach out eagerly and without fear for newer and richer experience.”  Eleanor Roosevelt


#2 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,173 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:27 AM

The 14 Super League clubs have entered the consultation process to determine policy and direction for the sport's elite competition after the current licensing period expires in 2015. At a two-day conference chaired by RFL Interim Chairman Maurice Watkins at Windermere this week, the Super League clubs met with the RFL Executive to consider key issues including competition structure, promotion and relegation and Super League licensing.

No firm decisions were taken on future policy...


Dontcha just love this sort of stuff?

The latest news on the future of the pro game is that the clubs decided nothing on a two day jolly.

#3 giwildgo

giwildgo
  • Coach
  • 4,048 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:31 AM

Dontcha just love this sort of stuff?

The latest news on the future of the pro game is that the clubs decided nothing on a two day jolly.

No decision is at least a step forward from vetos and cartels with a small minded mentality. Lets hope that positive change is forthcoming.

#4 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,062 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:56 AM

Lets hope that positive change is forthcoming.


Agreed, so...
1. No return to the dark days of single season, purely results-based P and R
2. No return for a GB team
3. A second French SL team
4. The RFL to retain Sky money equivalent to each clubs VAT, NI, players Income tax etc. pay direct to HM R & C
5. Cas , Fev and Wakefield to merge :wacko: :blink: :rolleyes: :) :D :lol:

#5 Ackydave

Ackydave
  • Coach
  • 127 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 08:28 PM

MMMmmmmmm; Yes! Now how does it go?

let's set up a committee to determine what committee's we need. and a few sub committees to report to those committees and don't forget we'll need a sub group to report back to the main committee. We'll also need a policy for each of the committees so we will also need a policy sub group to make recommendations to each committee. Is that clear?

Mmmmm! Wait a minute! What about terms of reference for each committee (and sub committee)?

Do we have a time frame to conclude our findings? Do we need another meeting to determine the time scale?

:huh: :wacko: :unsure: :( :D

On a more frivolous note, it does say that..........." and for their acceptance that the direction we take has to be in the best interests of the totality of the sport."

Really?

#6 markleeds

markleeds
  • Coach
  • 1,645 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 09:04 PM

Agreed, so...
1. No return to the dark days of single season, purely results-based P and R
2. No return for a GB team
3. A second French SL team
4. The RFL to retain Sky money equivalent to each clubs VAT, NI, players Income tax etc. pay direct to HM R & C
5. Cas , Fev and Wakefield to merge :wacko: :blink: :rolleyes: :) :D :lol:


All very sensible ideas, although Cas and Hull KR to go with another making way for Tolouse

#7 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,173 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 10:07 PM

it does say that..........." and for their acceptance that the direction we take has to be in the best interests of the totality of the sport."

Really?


It depends on your definition of the "totality of the sport." Dave.

That could be the e*p*n*i*o*a*z* definition or the F*a*c*p*e* definition....

Arguably it could be in the "best interests of the totality of the sport." one way or the other....

Which way do you see it?

#8 Ackydave

Ackydave
  • Coach
  • 127 posts

Posted 10 November 2012 - 10:54 PM

It depends on your definition of the "totality of the sport." Dave.

That could be the e*p*n*i*o*a*z* definition or the F*a*c*p*e* definition....

Arguably it could be in the "best interests of the totality of the sport." one way or the other....

Which way do you see it?


Not sure really....I'm still waiting for a report from the sub committee that's responsible.

Any bets on how long it takes 'em?

#9 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,173 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 12:23 PM

Not sure really....I'm still waiting for a report from the sub committee that's responsible.

Any bets on how long it takes 'em?


How long it takes them to be pretty sure of which way to go??

If so I guess they are there now.

If it's how long before they announce how they have agonized long and hard and have had to come to a decision which cannot suit everyone then I guess it's many more pleasant evenings of beer and sandwiches at various locations.....

#10 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,080 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 02:26 PM

Why do Championship clubs not get a say in the matter, surely they should get a say considering they are a part of the sport and this affects them?

#11 jt

jt
  • Coach
  • 1,696 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 02:56 PM

There not going to do that as clubs outside S/Lmight put something forward that could not be in the best interest of some of the clubs that are already in

#12 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,173 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:19 PM

Why do Championship clubs not get a say in the matter, surely they should get a say considering they are a part of the sport and this affects them?


In theory yes but in practice it's Superleague that attracts the £18M a year TV contract upon which these talks have to base their priorities. It's a business not a democracy, and some years ago now I seem to recall the top division clubs getting two votes and the second division clubs one so the smaller clubs got stitched up years ago.

It's their sport they can do what they want, not supporting anything here just reflecting how it is.....

#13 Steve Slater

Steve Slater
  • Coach
  • 1,856 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 09:17 PM

What confuses me is the talk of reducing the size of Super League! If they kick out another 2 clubs from the heartlands won't Sky subscriptions go down after a year or two? If theis happens won't Sky be wanting to reduce the amount they pay to the RFL?
Oh! I forgot for a moment, if this happens the SL clubs will simply vote to pay themsleves the same and reduce the amount paid to the Championship clubs, blaming the fans of the recently excluded clubs for being disloyal to the game (expecting Cas or Wakey fans to switch their loyalty to the Rhinos)!

#14 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,173 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:27 AM

1. What confuses me is the talk of reducing the size of Super League! If they kick out another 2 clubs from the heartlands won't Sky subscriptions go down after a year or two? If this happens won't Sky be wanting to reduce the amount they pay to the RFL?

2. Oh! I forgot for a moment, if this happens the SL clubs will simply vote to pay themsleves the same and reduce the amount paid to the Championship clubs, blaming the fans of the recently excluded clubs for being disloyal to the game (expecting Cas or Wakey fans to switch their loyalty to the Rhinos)!


1. It's a leap of faith to think that if two clubs leave the Superleague subscriptions to SKY will go down??

Do failing SL clubs who can't compete in SL really attract subscribers to watch SKY? My guess it's the top clubs who attract the vast majority of people who pay to watch RL on SKY. I do not see how people will be cancelling their subscriptions in any great number, after all most of those who will be disappointed go to the games and don't necessarily watch them on SKY.

Also SKY limit what they pay, we get great viewing numbers, and are not paid enough anyway. If the number of people who watch our game on SKY is how we are paid we should be paid more.

2. I think SL take the vast majority of SKY money anyway. I don't think anyone in SLE or RFL would expect Castleford and Wakefeld fans to switch en masse to the Rhinos.

I do think that SLE/RFL/SKY are happy everyone in Leeds now goes watches Leeds. They'd be happy if as many people in the Cas/Wakey/Fev area went to watch one team and everyone in Hull went to watch one team. That would not happen tomorrow. But over the generations it probably would.

The economics of our game is that the fans are not the "lifeblood" we think they are. If you don't have enough they help you go bust.

Wakefield went bust on 7,000 fans, Cas are heading the same way on 7,000 fans and would be bust if they had not slashed players spending (which depresses crowds anyway), Fev on 2,000 or even 4,000 fans would go bust - they run at a loss in the Championship.

18,000 RL fans is a great turnout for the Calder area but the way it's all set up means none of them could compete and losses all round.

There's a good chance if say Castleford became the only SL club in the area playing out of Glasshoughton in 20 years time they'd be profitable, competitive and on 12,000+ crowds.

However if the Wakey and Fev people of tomorrow would rather watch soccer than Cas that's their choice.


HOWEVER if the idea is pro- RL would then die in Wakefield and Fev then so what? It's hardly alive anywhere in the area now.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users