Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres 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
* * * * - 4 votes

The never-ending League Restructure debate (Many merged threads)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
4789 replies to this topic

#841 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,905 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:15 PM

He's looking increasingly out of his depth in my opinion.

His one 'significant achievement' since assuming the mantle of leadership has been to completely divert any attention that could and should have been placed on the forthcoming World Cup.

 

Agreed.

 

Anyone with club links should be nowhere near the top job in the UK game, even more so if they failed in those club positions.


Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#842 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,536 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:21 PM

I don't care what links people have as long as they're competent.

#843 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,905 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:24 PM

I don't care what links people have as long as they're competent.

 

Competency is obviously the most important requirement. But in my opinion impartiality at CE level is essential as well.


Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#844 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,536 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:27 PM

Competency is obviously the most important requirement. But in my opinion impartiality at CE level is essential as well.


I see where you're coming from but if you're genuinely competent you should also be capable of leading impartially.

#845 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,329 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 06:28 AM

He's looking increasingly out of his depth in my opinion

 

He's up against a rival code that is the national game and swamps all others, up against two other sports who have had tremendous home grown success very recently, up against a direct rival handling code with a bigger infrastructure and again international success in recent weeks. Only one TV company wants his game at knockdown price, advertisers see no value in it, and to top that he's got a rival league within his own sport who are draining his clubs of quality players. He can't get development money for the grass roots as kids prefer other sports, and he only has a handful of chairmen willing to invest in his flagship SL clubs.

 

So perhaps people may consider actually judging him against the circumstances, and pondering on the idea that somewhere there's someone that can succeed against such massive odds.



#846 Doghead

Doghead
  • Coach
  • 1,049 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 07:22 AM

Glad the penny has dropped. Aside from Sheffield the aspiring clubs below super league don't seem to have grasped this yet.

I agree with the earlier poster too; Davy's two tens + more cup fixtures has a lot of merit and should've been properly discussed.

It just proved that Wood is desperate to push through his latest crackpot schemes. How many of these stupid ideas does wood get to push through before he falls on his sword?

got to agree, a Super League of 2x10 with the right funding must be the aim of all the "shakers and movers" in our game, whether its achievable is a different matter.



#847 Doghead

Doghead
  • Coach
  • 1,049 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 07:30 AM

This is it for me. Hard to miss though unless you ignore the differences between 15,000 crowds and 800 crowds, fully professional teams with stars and dual reg bolstered semi pro teams, or chairmen worth tens of millions against chairmen with nowt to put in.

There will always be clubs with a larger fan base and more money, but they will be in the same lake, swimming with the big fish, tiddlers ot not.



#848 Viking Ste

Viking Ste
  • Coach
  • 246 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 07:48 AM

How do you see the leagues lining up then? I think...

SL 1

Bradford
Catalans
Huddersfield
Hull FC
Hull KR
Leeds
Salford
St Helens
Toulouse
Wakefield
Warrington
Wigan

SL2


Batley
Castleford
Dewsbury
Doncaster
Featherstone
Halifax
Leigh
London
NW Crusaders
Sheffield
Widnes
Workington

#849 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,536 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 08:06 AM

How do you see the leagues lining up then? I think...

SL 1

Bradford
Catalans
Huddersfield
Hull FC
Hull KR
Leeds
Salford
St Helens
Toulouse
Wakefield
Warrington
Wigan

SL2


Batley
Castleford
Dewsbury
Doncaster
Featherstone
Halifax
Leigh
London
NW Crusaders
Sheffield
Widnes
Workington


I'm not going to pick out the names but it's absolutely essential in my eyes that the 24 teams involved initially need to be selected through some form of licensing, rather than arbitrarily as happened in 1996.

Looking at your list I'm also even more convinced that the RFL and its c

#850 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,806 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 08:09 AM

He's up against a rival code that is the national game and swamps all others, up against two other sports who have had tremendous home grown success very recently, up against a direct rival handling code with a bigger infrastructure and again international success in recent weeks. Only one TV company wants his game at knockdown price, advertisers see no value in it, and to top that he's got a rival league within his own sport who are draining his clubs of quality players. He can't get development money for the grass roots as kids prefer other sports, and he only has a handful of chairmen willing to invest in his flagship SL clubs.
 
So perhaps people may consider actually judging him against the circumstances, and pondering on the idea that somewhere there's someone that can succeed against such massive odds.


Very fair comment.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#851 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,536 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 08:14 AM

He's up against a rival code that is the national game and swamps all others, up against two other sports who have had tremendous home grown success very recently, up against a direct rival handling code with a bigger infrastructure and again international success in recent weeks. Only one TV company wants his game at knockdown price, advertisers see no value in it, and to top that he's got a rival league within his own sport who are draining his clubs of quality players. He can't get development money for the grass roots as kids prefer other sports, and he only has a handful of chairmen willing to invest in his flagship SL clubs.

So perhaps people may consider actually judging him against the circumstances, and pondering on the idea that somewhere there's someone that can succeed against such massive odds.


Your defence of Nigel is admirable with Parky and you're right: whoever is top dog at the RFL is going to be faced with some monumental challenges.

However, the harsh reality is that Nigel's every whim has been backed by the clubs (clubcall, licensing etc) and he's now not only gone completely about face and is telling us that the sport NEEDED p&r after all. Not only this but he's also shoehorning in another of his daft schemes.

I just don't see how he has any credibility left given his previous position on licensing.

Moreover, this whole process has been handled so clumsily in the full glare of the public and has completely detracted from the build up towards the World Cup.

#852 getdownmonkeyman

getdownmonkeyman
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:06 AM

Your defence of Nigel is admirable with Parky and you're right: whoever is top dog at the RFL is going to be faced with some monumental challenges.

However, the harsh reality is that Nigel's every whim has been backed by the clubs (clubcall, licensing etc) and he's now not only gone completely about face and is telling us that the sport NEEDED p&r after all. Not only this but he's also shoehorning in another of his daft schemes.

I just don't see how he has any credibility left given his previous position on licensing.

Moreover, this whole process has been handled so clumsily in the full glare of the public and has completely detracted from the build up towards the World Cup.

 

 

Licensing was introduced under Lewis' stewardship. Clubcall is indeed one of Wood's stunning innovations.



#853 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,536 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:20 AM

Licensing was introduced under Lewis' stewardship. Clubcall is indeed one of Wood's stunning innovations.


Was Wood anti-licensing? Or did he defend the process with the same banal management speak as he employs to champion P&R?

#854 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,914 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:26 AM

He's up against a rival code that is the national game and swamps all others, up against two other sports who have had tremendous home grown success very recently, up against a direct rival handling code with a bigger infrastructure and again international success in recent weeks. Only one TV company wants his game at knockdown price, advertisers see no value in it, and to top that he's got a rival league within his own sport who are draining his clubs of quality players. He can't get development money for the grass roots as kids prefer other sports, and he only has a handful of chairmen willing to invest in his flagship SL clubs.

 

So perhaps people may consider actually judging him against the circumstances, and pondering on the idea that somewhere there's someone that can succeed against such massive odds.

 

This is an excellent post. Pragmatism may be at odds with old business thinking but it is actually the one thing keeping many businesses afloat.



#855 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,329 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:30 AM

However, the harsh reality is that Nigel's every whim has been backed by the clubs and he's now not only gone completely about face and is telling us that the sport NEEDED p&r after all.


Perhaps you'd like to consider when Mr. Wood and "the clubs" get in a room who actually makes the final decision? I don't know for sure and would welcome anyone telling us the answer. those who make the final decision are ultimately culpable but.......

Perhaps you'd also like to consider that if a policy like licensing is not working and the clubs go back to P & R it is not good business practice to admit the game failed under system one, and introduced system two which failed as well. Would you have Mr. Wood say to the world "P & R was no good and we found licensing to be worse so we're going back to P & R which still won't work"??

#856 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,329 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:50 AM

I'm not going to pick out the names but it's absolutely essential in my eyes that the 24 teams involved initially need to be selected through some form of licensing, rather than arbitrarily as happened in 1996.


I do apologise for too many opposite views but if the policy decision is we go back to P & R then it breaks the policy to then start using licensing again.

To abandon licensing and then allow Toulouse or London to be given their own individual licence as London and Catalans were 2006 would rightly cause outrage amongst the clubs who look like voting for a return to P & R.

As for licensing across the board the problem was only five clubs came up to the original license standard of an "A" after six years. Several of the "C" grade chairmen started to give up hope and that's what I see as the reason for it's abandonment.

P & R puts no pressure on anyone to have to grow the business or invest their own money. Licensing did and those pressures to me were too much.

Edited by The Parksider, 18 July 2013 - 09:51 AM.


#857 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,536 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:51 AM

Licensing hasn't failed; it needed tweaking and, at times, has been poorly managed (eg, the Crusaders debacle, expanding to 14 clubs) but to say it's failed entirely would be wrong.

The issue for me is Nigel Wood, as one of the architects of the licensing system, is allowed to come out and publicly state that it didn't work. Yet we're still supposed to trust him to implement
a new system that, in its own way, is equally radical.

If licensing was a failure, surely he has to shoulder some of the blame and surely he's not to be trusted to implement an effective alternative.

#858 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,329 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:02 AM

Licensing hasn't failed; If licensing was a failure, surely he has to shoulder some of the blame and surely he's not to be trusted to implement an effective alternative.


It was Ralph Rimmer who explained that licensing was required to create a stable environment for clubs to grow as professional clubs. The clubs agreed and went for that.

Wakefield then went bust, Bradford went bust, Salford nearly dissapeared, London went backwards and the chairmen of Cas, HKR and Widnes started to declare no more investment from them.

Half the league. Now Wood was behind it, as was Lewis, as was Rimmer, as were the SL clubs themselves who voted for the principle.

I wouldn't trust any of them to "implement an effective alternative". I do though leave the floor open for anyone on here to tell us what that may be?

Edited by The Parksider, 18 July 2013 - 10:03 AM.


#859 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,914 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:05 AM

The grade A clubs would be grade A without licencing. There are no grade C clubs now grade A so how has it not failed utterly?



#860 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,536 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:07 AM

I do apologise for too many opposite views but if the policy decision is we go back to P & R then it breaks the policy to then start using licensing again.

To abandon licensing and then allow Toulouse or London to be given their own individual licence as London and Catalans were 2006 would rightly cause outrage amongst the clubs who look like voting for a return to P & R.

As for licensing across the board the problem was only five clubs came up to the original license standard of an "A" after six years. Several of the "C" grade chairmen started to give up hope and that's what I see as the reason for it's abandonment.

P & R puts no pressure on anyone to have to grow the business or invest their own money. Licensing did and those pressures to me were too much.

The problem, as always, is that we always seem to be drawn towards 'innovative' (I'm growing to hate that word!) and radical solutions.

It's always a case of revolution rather than evolution and 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater.'

They could have announced that, after a review, they had decided to modify the licensing process and create an extra six licenses in 2015, with a move towards promotion and relegation between two 10-team leagues.

This would've achieved the same outcomes and would've pleased pretty much everyone, whilst still maintaining off-field standards and avoiding the sort of desperate free-for-all we're likely to witness next year.

Moreover, it would also have allowed us to implement a fairer funding model which would've made p&r between the two divisions much more manageable and sustainable.

Instead we've had a succession of 'radical' and intrinsically flawed ideas floated, quite clear disparity in the proposed funding and a clumsy debate that has rumbled on for far too long and totally detracted from the build-up towards the World Cup.

Edited by Pottsy, 18 July 2013 - 10:13 AM.