Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

DR K and Lenigan Interviews on Radio Manchester Now

Could be controvertial

  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#21 Heritage XIII

Heritage XIII
  • Coach
  • 141 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 02:28 AM

Someone has to find out how the hell a RU club who normally struggle to get 7,000 to a home game can attract 83,000 this weekend? We need to get these people behind this type of event.


Edited by Heritage XIII, 24 March 2014 - 02:29 AM.


#22 bamfordsbeans

bamfordsbeans
  • Coach
  • 238 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 07:23 AM

Whilst Dr K is probably right in that the game has not moved forward much in the last 10 years -neither has it gone back.In the present climate with so much competition for the "leisure pound" from both other sports and outside interests -just stabilising the game is a minor achievement.Not very ambitious I know -but reality.



#23 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 07:39 AM

Whilst Dr K is probably right in that the game has not moved forward much in the last 10 years -neither has it gone back.In the present climate with so much competition for the "leisure pound" from both other sports and outside interests -just stabilising the game is a minor achievement.Not very ambitious I know -but reality.

 

Brilliant observation, be careful your not called negative.

 

The RFL have a major struggle, and it's easy for the "other side" to play on that but what do they offer??

 

Lenegan wanted 12 SL clubs to be given all the money. Highly ambitious.

 

Dr. K wants the Marquee system but does not explain:-

 

a. Which ambitious Rugby Stars would want to play in a struggling English pro-league on vastly higher salaries than jealous team mates and why?

 

b. Which Superleague chairmen would actually want to put hundreds of thousands of their own money into these ambitious Rugby Stars pockets?

 

c. How much would it grow crowds at the end of the day?? Which individual will draw thousands to matches??

 

No matter who runs the sport they have a big struggle and no easy answers. Great observation BB.



#24 bamfordsbeans

bamfordsbeans
  • Coach
  • 238 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 07:52 AM

I've been following the game since the late 70,s and in that time every time we take a step forward we seem to take a step back and vice versa.for whatever reasons we never seem to take 2 steps forward but due to the loyalty of the game by players and fans we also don,t go 2 steps backwards.

I thought the "legacy" of last years world cup would provide a big boost but so far it has only been lukewarm.



#25 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,461 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 07:57 AM

Someone has to find out how the hell a RU club who normally struggle to get 7,000 to a home game can attract 83,000 this weekend? We need to get these people behind this type of event.

 

By throwing lots of money at it and spending months promoting it.

 

That club has improved its losses to £4m per year, incidentally.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#26 Saint Toppy

Saint Toppy
  • Coach
  • 2,669 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 08:15 AM

Was the cutting of the U20s voted for by the clubs?

Sadly yes, only Saints opposed it !

 

And thats part of the reason why Eamon McManus voted against the good Doctor's marquee proposal. Where's the logic in cutting an entire competition tier to save less than £100K a year only to then go out and spend hundreds of thousands on one single (probably overseas) player where the money goes straight into their pockets - Crazy thinking !



#27 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,964 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 08:27 AM

Given how much power the clubs hold I'm unsure what "change at the top" would achieve.  I'm pretty certain change for changes sake would probably result in more of the same.

 

Unless of course the clubs are going to "invest" in the structure by allowing the governing body to retain more of the TV money to invest in attracting higher calibre individuals in to the key roles and then perhaps back this investment by giving up some of the power the hold for the greater good of the game.



#28 iangidds

iangidds
  • Coach
  • 381 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 08:49 AM

Whilst Dr K is probably right in that the game has not moved forward much in the last 10 years -neither has it gone back.In the present climate with so much competition for the "leisure pound" from both other sports and outside interests -just stabilising the game is a minor achievement.Not very ambitious I know -but reality.

The reality is that other sports have moved forward whilst we have stood still therefore we have gone further backwards from these sports , take RU they started with the same salary cap as us 15 years ago, theirs is now 5 million ours has just about stayed the same! They have stars such as eastmond, burgess, tompkins,ford, farrell, burrell, ashton, thats a game moving forward!!!!

Edited by iangidds, 24 March 2014 - 08:50 AM.


#29 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,782 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 09:22 AM

Throughout pro RU they have maintained P&R.

 

The huge advantage they had was having no elite club game prior to professionalism, ie they could place clubs geographically, and look at the fall out from early days eg Orrell, Bedford etc

 

The narrow minded RL massive actually deters the rich men needed to fund elite clubs, look at the stick given to Koukash as a newcomer to the sport willing to put his hand into his pocket.



#30 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,461 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 09:36 AM

Throughout pro RU they have maintained P&R.

 This is true.  Although they have repeatedly tried to ring fence the upper tier (London Welsh had to go to court to get promoted etc) and the whole pyramid is littered with bankruptcies and clubs who've lost all their players freefalling (and conversely, clubs with new sugar daddies winning 80-0 every week).


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#31 BenGilesRL

BenGilesRL
  • Twitter
  • 41 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 09:59 AM

On Koukash -

The most controversial thing he could say is somerhing positive nowadays. He's becoming predictable and we've all heard it all before. As someone's said he doesn't expand with how and who. Also he mentioned Brian Barwick and he's very new Iin his post - which leads me to think Koukash doesn't really know what he is talking about. I think he is one track minded to get a grip on the game for his own gain and the only way to do that is to run down the RFL who are there for a whole game approach and control it with that in mind. It's hardly surprising people as powerful in the business world as Koukash and Lenagan don't like feeling controlled - but it is for the greater good in my opinion.
On Lenagan -

Again heard it before, and I personally think that the sky deal is good for these reasons:

1. All clubs will be spending the full cap next year I believe.
2. The viewing figures for BT are awful - the only other serious financial competitor to Sky at the moment. Going with them would be like joining Sky back when it started and a major step backwards as we woild have to wait for the channel to grow.
3. Sky are excited abiut rl again, we're already getting more gameshigher viewing figures, and more coverage, and this will increase next year too.

After the world cup success let's poout our faith in these people and back the changes - if they work as well as that did - which Nigel Wood was a major player in - then we'll all be pleased.fIf it doesnt change them then

#32 chrisl1

chrisl1
  • Coach
  • 588 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 10:07 AM

Dr. K says game hasn't moved on in 10 years, need to change the people at the top to get fresh ideas and a better direction for the sport.

 

IL said that committing to an 8 year TV deal in this current media climate, especially when you only see the benefits in 3-4 years is silly.

 

Dr. K says game hasn't moved on in 10 years, need to change the people at the top to get fresh ideas and a better direction for the sport.

 

IL said that committing to an 8 year TV deal in this current media climate, especially when you only see the benefits in 3-4 years is silly.

But Lenagan voted to accept the TV deal.



#33 Red John

Red John
  • Coach
  • 227 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 10:13 AM

Marwan may or may not have firm ideas about the changes he thinks the RFL needs to make, but a two minute interview on Radio Manchester doesn't give enough time to expound on those ideas. Maybe what's needed is for someone from a Rugby League publication to sit him down and do a thorough interview.



#34 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 10:17 AM

For me, the problem is that the clubs dominate with no credible national or international governing body that can enforce long term plans. If something isn't working in a year or two in RL then it's abandoned regardless of promise.

The clearest evidence of that is the international scene, I can go online and find any other sports' international calendar for this and next year, can I find anything on RL? No.

Unless you give a governing body the power to overrule clubs in their own interests then we'll never move forward.

Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#35 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 5,050 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:38 PM

Again heard it before, and I personally think that the sky deal is good for these reasons:

 

1. All clubs will be spending the full cap next year I believe.

After the world cup success let's poout our faith in these people and back the changes - if they work as well as that did - which Nigel Wood was a major player in - then we'll all be pleased.

 

I understand Lenaghan's viewpoint when it comes to the length of the contract and how early it has been negotiatated; it's a huge risk in my opinion and only time will tell if the short term gain i.e. immediate £300k per club, is in the long term interests of the sport.

 

All clubs spending the full cap is not necessarily a good thing; London have recently done it and have still been poor. It is the structure of the clubs which need improving and I am concerned the new TV contract monies are simply going to be wasted. I have seen nothing (other than a few soundbites from Castleford and St Helens) that any monies are going to be invested into the community game to drive the development of the sport. The game's priorities are wrong in my opinion; simply propping up some professional clubs is NOT the direction the game should be heading in.

 

Put faith in the game's current leaders? People have been doing that since 2008 and has seen the game struggle hugely under poor decision making from the RFL and the clubs. Whilst the RLWC was a success (it is arguably one of just two under the Wood regime - Champions Schools the other), the long term benefits have been wasted already; the momentum from that competition has already disappeared with no coherent international structure for England or anyone else put in place.

 

Whilst I am sure there is a lot of self-interest in the views of Koukash and Lenaghan, after arguably six years of strategic failure at the domestic level and no building on ANY gains made in other areas of the game, we can't afford to simply 'put faith in people' who ultimately have failed to command that faith and confidence in the past; success has to be a given as the game can't afford another strategic failure.


Edited by GeordieSaint, 24 March 2014 - 02:17 PM.

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


#36 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:58 PM

I understand Lenaghan's viewpoint when it comes to the length of the contract and how early it has been negotiatated; it's a huge risk in my opinion and only time will tell if the short term gain i.e. immediate £300k per club, is in the long term interests of the sport.

 

All clubs spending the full cap is not necessarily a good thing; London have recently done it and have still been poor. It is the structure of the clubs which need improving and I am concerned the new TV contract monies are simply going to be wasted.

 

Great shout for me. If clubs aren't developing players, then when when they get £300K extra dropped on them they end up just paying the same players more money.

 

The clubs were badly struggling money wise despite the "Close up north" programme stating this being poo pooed on the basis that Soccer and RU are heavier in debt.

 

I never felt the vote to accept quick extra money was anything but desperate clubs grabbing at the quick fix. The danger is the extra money will run out and it's back to square one. Or is that forward to only eight Superleague clubs in reality.

 

Great point about the structure of the clubs being the problem and not the structure of the league.

 

P & R as a radical four up and four down was done years ago. If were going to give something new "a chance" fine, but this isn't really new. After 14 Jeopardy games so far crowds are down to 5383 against the average for the same games last year of 6418.



#37 Futtocks

Futtocks
  • Coach
  • 21,891 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:59 PM

For me, the problem is that the clubs dominate with no credible national or international governing body that can enforce long term plans. If something isn't working in a year or two in RL then it's abandoned regardless of promise.

The clearest evidence of that is the international scene, I can go online and find any other sports' international calendar for this and next year, can I find anything on RL? No.

Unless you give a governing body the power to overrule clubs in their own interests then we'll never move forward.

And the clubs will never give the RFL that power.

 

Steve Mascord has a similar view of the NRL clubs.


A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it isn’t open. Frank Zappa (1940 - 1993)


#38 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 02:06 PM

The narrow minded RL massive actually deters the rich men needed to fund elite clubs, look at the stick given to Koukash as a newcomer to the sport willing to put his hand into his pocket.

 

That's not much evidence Craiq is it, besides the salary cap prevents rich men having much effect. Removing it won't help clubs build either. Foe me rich men aren't the solution unless they buy stadiums and fund serious  junior development



#39 GIANTSTRIDES

GIANTSTRIDES
  • Coach
  • 1,610 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:08 PM


There are a few ways to make a business successful, You have a captive market, You fill a need etc. If you are fighting for a share of a market , It is essential to have the right people in the right places.
Dont expect anything from a pig but a grunt

#40 Gav Wilson

Gav Wilson
  • Coach
  • 3,310 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:17 PM

Someone has to find out how the hell a RU club who normally struggle to get 7,000 to a home game can attract 83,000 this weekend? We need to get these people behind this type of event.

 

We did. The very same company sold the 'Big Hit' weekend in the RLWC.


Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users