Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

flyingking

Nigel Wood- London must improve

355 posts in this topic

Quite. The reaction to Dr Koukash is a perfect example of that.

I'm not in 100% agreement on that (I can't as I have criticised Koukash on here :D )

People in his position will be open to criticism, and he has come into the game with all guns blazing and really quite aggressive - that's his choice and I suspect he has done it intentionally, but he has pretty much invited debate and got it. I don't think anybody doesn't want him involved, and it was one of the most positive stories of the last 12 months him taking over Salford (and OK at Bradford).

Challenging what somebody publicly actually says is quite different to not being friendly and accepting of new people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quite so, but much of the negative reaction came over as "who does he think he is, an outsider, mate of Nigel's, coming in here, shouting the odds and splashing his money around!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quite so, but much of the negative reaction came over as "who does he think he is, an outsider, mate of Nigel's, coming in here, shouting the odds and splashing his money around!"

I'd disagree - he made some quite outrageous statements and came in like a tasmanian devil (I suspect intentionally) but it is always going to get people disagreeing with him.

I have certainly disagreed with much of what he has said so far, but I'm delighted he is involved in RL and will hopefully do a brilliant job at Salford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite. The reaction to Dr Koukash is a perfect example of that.

The reaction to Dr Koukash's statements and the reaction to his involvement are two very different beasts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd disagree - he made some quite outrageous statements and came in like a tasmanian devil (I suspect intentionally) but it is always going to get people disagreeing with him.

I have certainly disagreed with much of what he has said so far, but I'm delighted he is involved in RL and will hopefully do a brilliant job at Salford.

That's better than I could have put it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reaction to Dr Koukash's statements and the reaction to his involvement are two very different beasts.

Thanks for summing up my view perfectly, I went for the rambling approach!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 1995 we had the second most popular pro winter sport at club level. Today since Union went pro we don't even have the distinction of being the second most supported sport at any time of the year. Union has usurped our spot and we've let them by vacating the space. Some of the reasons for the shift to summer were that we wouldn't have soccer and Union commanding the headlines - so there'd be more room for us - but every summer there's something. This summer there's Ashes cricket and the Lions are touring Oz. Next summer will be the European soccer championships, last summer was the Olympics. Plus soccer has almost become a year round preoccupation with the media anyway. But the fact is that Union has remained a winter sport and at club level has increased its crowds and its media status enormously and we haven't. The increase in media status has IMO been at our expense. Plus of course we've lost the Aussie tour, home and away, we've lost the advantage of our top players being able to guest with Aussie clubs. All round I'd say that summer rugby has been a huge mistake. Whether reverting to winter would be a cure is debateable - the damage has been done. But I reckon the move to summer was a bad one all round.

I'm sorry but this is a terrible case of post hoc reasoning.

Much has changed since 1995 and before, for instance you completely ignore the fact that Union has gone professional. It hasn't vacated our space as it doesn't compete with us geographically almost anywhere, it has grown of its own back. Also off the fact that it already had 80,000 ready made fans going to Twickers for every game and a huge network of amateur players and fans.

We had some pretty serious problems in 1995 that you have just ignored. The reality is that we would have continued to fall behind the Aussies as the Union converts dried up resulting in many of the same problems we have had with the international game. We competed in 1997 with the exact same players that we would have done regardless of the switch to summer and crowds were comfortably down. This would have still happened whilst Union was still massively growing it's international, European and domestic competitions.

Then I could start on the huge growth of the Premier League and Champions League but I think I've made my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but this is a terrible case of post hoc reasoning.

Much has changed since 1995 and before, for instance you completely ignore the fact that Union has gone professional. It hasn't vacated our space as it doesn't compete with us geographically almost anywhere, it has grown of its own back. Also off the fact that it already had 80,000 ready made fans going to Twickers for every game and a huge network of amateur players and fans.

We had some pretty serious problems in 1995 that you have just ignored. The reality is that we would have continued to fall behind the Aussies as the Union converts dried up resulting in many of the same problems we have had with the international game. We competed in 1997 with the exact same players that we would have done regardless of the switch to summer and crowds were comfortably down. This would have still happened whilst Union was still massively growing it's international, European and domestic competitions.

Then I could start on the huge growth of the Premier League and Champions League but I think I've made my point.

exactly

Rugby League was the second best(and an extremely poor second best) by default.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

exactly

Rugby League was the second best(and an extremely poor second best) by default.

Doesn't alter the fact that they've grown support for their club game in winter and we've abandoned winter. The question is why did we do it? Nobody I know was consulted. It was a fait acompli.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't alter the fact that they've grown support for their club game in winter and we've abandoned winter. The question is why did we do it? Nobody I know was consulted. It was a fait acompli.

2 + 2 = 5.

Why would they necessarily consult people? Do you think it is an unpopular decision now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't alter the fact that they've grown support for their club game in winter and we've abandoned winter. The question is why did we do it? Nobody I know was consulted. It was a fait acompli.

We've grown support for our club game in summer. What's the issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 + 2 = 5.

Why would they necessarily consult people? Do you think it is an unpopular decision now?

the clubs were consulted, but yes you are right. The governing body exists to govern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what ever happen to the london colonials team I always thought it was such a great name for a team in london

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've grown support for our club game in summer. What's the issue?

Mud. The issue is the need for mud and Bovril.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't alter the fact that they've grown support for their club game in winter and we've abandoned winter. The question is why did we do it? Nobody I know was consulted. It was a fait acompli.

I think the problem is that starting in feb and ending in nov with internationals its not really a summer sport. The season needs to be shortened

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the clubs were consulted, but yes you are right. The governing body exists to govern.

Surely the governing body should take account of what the customers want. Any business that doesn't do that is on the road to ruin. Perhaps such attitudes explain a lot. There were occasional rumours of summer rugby from the early sixties - but it never happened. Suddenly in March 1995 we were having summer rugby. No studies, no polls, no focus groups, nothing. Just like it or lump it. Many people I speak to don't like it. I personally am ambivalent. But TBH I can't see the advantages. The disadvantages are clear - the end ot the tour party. The first live game of RL I saw live was the famous Boxing Day derby between Leeds and Wakey - 14000 people there. But then the following few years the games were abondoned because of frozen ptiches. As I say I'm ambivalent but I think there should have been some consultation - there wasn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mud. The issue is the need for mud and Bovril.

and grittiness

never forget grittiness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the governing body should take account of what the customers want. Any business that doesn't do that is on the road to ruin. Perhaps such attitudes explain a lot. There were occasional rumours of summer rugby from the early sixties - but it never happened. Suddenly in March 1995 we were having summer rugby. No studies, no polls, no focus groups, nothing. Just like it or lump it. Many people I speak to don't like it. I personally am ambivalent. But TBH I can't see the advantages. The disadvantages are clear - the end ot the tour party. The first live game of RL I saw live was the famous Boxing Day derby between Leeds and Wakey - 14000 people there. But then the following few years the games were abondoned because of frozen ptiches. As I say I'm ambivalent but I think there should have been some consultation - there wasn't.

If you can't see the advantages then you are not looking for them. I would say a clear majority are in favour and you very rarely hear a view that wishes us to to go back to playing in winter.

The governing bodies job is not to do what the fans want but to do what is best for the game. There are many walks of life where we aren't consulted because that isn't how life works. Leadership and vision is what is important especially because people are naturally conservative and dislike uncertainty.

i wonder how many fans were consulted when they brought the play the ball in, the 6 tackle rule or reduced the number of players to 13? How many were consulted when they split into 2 divisions and brought in promotion and relegation? I suspect that you are only annoyed because it is something you disagree with, which you clearly do despite claiming to be ambivalent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suddenly in March 1995 we were having summer rugby. No studies, no polls, no focus groups, nothing. Just like it or lump it. Many people I speak to don't like it.

Wasn't it done to accommodate SKY whom pay a lot of money......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and irony, bucketfuls of irony.

corrugated and rusty; goes without saying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it done to accommodate SKY whom pay a lot of money......

Apparently not - according to Vic Wakeling (sp?), their negociator, the only real condition was a club in London (France wasn't an issue as they wouldn't have the TV rights).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently not - according to Vic Wakeling (sp?), their negociator, the only real condition was a club in London (France wasn't an issue as they wouldn't have the TV rights).

lol,even the sky presenters openly admit ,it was sky who wanted summer rugby to fill there void in summer scheduling .

Sky pay the bills and dictate all fixtures and scheduling .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently not - according to Vic Wakeling (sp?), their negociator, the only real condition was a club in London

I'd be interested in this point CoC.....

SKY wanted london to be in Superleague as a condition of the deal???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be interested in this point CoC.....

SKY wanted london to be in Superleague as a condition of the deal???

No not as a condition. Wakeling said London were one of Sky's preferred teams but there was no compulsion on the RFL to include them. However, just to clarify, he was clear that London were only of any real value to Sky as a successful club, so it doesnt neccessarily apply to the current situation. He also said he was not in favour of having a French team in and would have preferred a Welsh team instead. It's all there in Phil Caplan's excellent book which remains the best one written about SL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017