The RFL's rocky road

[League Express]

League Express Editorial, Monday 13th May 2013

Get the online edition now on PC/Mac, Apple/Android

Click here to view the article

[nadera78]

Fantastic editorial. I just hope someone with some authority reads it and takes notice.

[Larry the Leit]

Well done LE.

[T Dub]

Youre right with that lot, LE.

The new proposal looks a right dogs breakfast

[gingerjon]

The clubs are not the experts in what is good for rugby league as a whole and should not be treated as such.

[Gruff]

So, these plans are there to please a few disgruntled clubs?  Surely then, if all clubs have say in whether the proposals go ahead then they will go with the majority - i.e. not a few disgruntled clubs.

 

Since when has a coach been a stakeholder?  I would have thought the clubs chairmen were the stakeholders?  

 

Everyone has their own agenda, with very few unbiased views being reported.

 

Whatever happens, like everything the RFL implements, will have the support of the majority of real stakeholders, not the vocal minority fringe moaners.

[Gruff]

The clubs are not the experts in what is good for rugby league as a whole and should not be treated as such.

 Completely agree.

 

Tony Smith is interested in what is good for Warrington.  LE are interested in selling papers and playing up to their audience.

 

Sky are interested in making money, and the RFL are interested in having a sustainable game.

 

They are all at odds with one another.  

[Bearman]

There is a lot of common sense being spoken at the moment, unfortunately it's not coming out of Red Hall. I hope someone there is listening

[Just to be clear]

In fact we have had absolutely no positive response from any of our readers"

Just to be clear, does that line mean you have checked that those who have posted positively on this forum are not also readers, or is it just an outright lie to further your own agenda? Just to be clear.

When one of those stakeholders, a Super League coach, openly criticises the direction of the RFL, it is time to be concerned.

Given Tony Smith, rightly or wrongly, moans about something every other hour I do not see any reason to be more concerned this time than on any of those other occasions. And given Smith's position was in support of licensing, which pretty much every journalists is against and goes at great length to point out at the most tenuous of opportunities, and what seems to be a majority of fans are either against or supported but now think has failed, then giving him credence surely contradicts your notion that we should automatically dismiss anything that is not supported by a self-selected group of readers and anonymous uncited stakeholders.

Gruff said it perfectly: "Everyone has their own agenda, with very few unbiased views being reported."

Personally I agree that the RFL leadership is weak, but that is because as a sport the balance of power is with the clubs as we have no international presence of note. It is that money that allows other governing bodies to keep control of their respective games.

Does anyone really think that if Nigel Wood just said "this is the solution, and this is what we'll do whether you like it or not, judge me on my results" that all the stakeholders (and what an insidious term that it as it gets used to cover any opponent without having to specify their relevance to a decision) will suddenly support him because of his strong leadership? All those fans of Championship clubs will suddenly come rushing back to the game without automatic promotion, or those Super League clubs will invest in youth development despite the risk of relegation?

Every idea I have seen, from those on forums to ones suggested by ranking figures in the game, have failed to unite the separate needs of a Super League that allows clubs to develop and the need of a Championship where clubs, and more importantly their fans, feel invested in their competition. Every idea, some deliberately, resolves one (at best) at the expense of the other. To dismiss the idea their is a major problem in the game balancing this two positions is disingenuous.

And if you truly believe the game's only problem is marketing but that it is "not too difficult." then why are you not offering constructive ideas? Why are you not putting together a proposal to present to the RFL that they would hire you on the sport. Why as supporters of the game are you not just implementing them, even from a position of self-interest the growth of the game benefits LPL. I can understand blinkered fans who think that because they love the game then everyone else must too, they just have not been given the chance. But I would expect better from professional journalists. Absolutely the game can be helped by better promotion, but the idea that it would see millions flocking to the game and all our problems would be solved is naive to the extreme. Or that the game has the money necessary to make it stand out in a country dominated by football.

It was a terrible editorial. It successfully targets both those opposed to the split league because they want licensing, those opposed to the split league because they want promotion and relegation, and those who like moaning about the RFL because their tea was too strong in the services on the M4 that one time while saying absolutely nothing. It completely ignores the issue of why a split league is being proposed, neither standing for either but simply opposing the acceptance there is a problem and then making an attempt to address it.

If you truly believe we should listen to Tony Smith, that we should carry on as we are and that licensing is best then say so. Then tell us how you received absolutely no negative response from any of your readers for that position. As I am sure there would not be, after all, the only problem in the game is a marketing one.

[Celtic Rooster]

I think I've just about had enough of Rugby League now. I used to like the idea that we were often an innovative sport that had other sports following our example, but the powers that be seem to revel in that and now just impose changes to the laws and systems for the sake of it. I gave up on Super league around the third season in when I realised that it was more about money than sport, and that they play by a different set of laws to the rest of Rugby League, but now that the Super league clubs are ruining the championships as well with this dual registration nonsense I am seriously considering just sticking to my amateur game on Saturdays and saving my money on Sundays.

[Ponterover]

Just to be clear, does that line mean you have checked that those who have posted positively on this forum are not also readers, or is it just an outright lie to further your own agenda? Just to be clear.Given Tony Smith, rightly or wrongly, moans about something every other hour I do not see any reason to be more concerned this time than on any of those other occasions. And given Smith's position was in support of licensing, which pretty much every journalists is against and goes at great length to point out at the most tenuous of opportunities, and what seems to be a majority of fans are either against or supported but now think has failed, then giving him credence surely contradicts your notion that we should automatically dismiss anything that is not supported by a self-selected group of readers and anonymous uncited stakeholders.

Gruff said it perfectly: "Everyone has their own agenda, with very few unbiased views being reported."

Personally I agree that the RFL leadership is weak, but that is because as a sport the balance of power is with the clubs as we have no international presence of note. It is that money that allows other governing bodies to keep control of their respective games.

Does anyone really think that if Nigel Wood just said "this is the solution, and this is what we'll do whether you like it or not, judge me on my results" that all the stakeholders (and what an insidious term that it as it gets used to cover any opponent without having to specify their relevance to a decision) will suddenly support him because of his strong leadership? All those fans of Championship clubs will suddenly come rushing back to the game without automatic promotion, or those Super League clubs will invest in youth development despite the risk of relegation?

Every idea I have seen, from those on forums to ones suggested by ranking figures in the game, have failed to unite the separate needs of a Super League that allows clubs to develop and the need of a Championship where clubs, and more importantly their fans, feel invested in their competition. Every idea, some deliberately, resolves one (at best) at the expense of the other. To dismiss the idea their is a major problem in the game balancing this two positions is disingenuous.

And if you truly believe the game's only problem is marketing but that it is "not too difficult." then why are you not offering constructive ideas? Why are you not putting together a proposal to present to the RFL that they would hire you on the sport. Why as supporters of the game are you not just implementing them, even from a position of self-interest the growth of the game benefits LPL. I can understand blinkered fans who think that because they love the game then everyone else must too, they just have not been given the chance. But I would expect better from professional journalists. Absolutely the game can be helped by better promotion, but the idea that it would see millions flocking to the game and all our problems would be solved is naive to the extreme. Or that the game has the money necessary to make it stand out in a country dominated by football.

It was a terrible editorial. It successfully targets both those opposed to the split league because they want licensing, those opposed to the split league because they want promotion and relegation, and those who like moaning about the RFL because their tea was too strong in the services on the M4 that one time while saying absolutely nothing. It completely ignores the issue of why a split league is being proposed, neither standing for either but simply opposing the acceptance there is a problem and then making an attempt to address it.

If you truly believe we should listen to Tony Smith, that we should carry on as we are and that licensing is best then say so. Then tell us how you received absolutely no negative response from any of your readers for that position. As I am sure there would not be, after all, the only problem in the game is a marketing one.

 

Excellent post.

 

I also thought that it was clear the LE were pushing their own agenda. 

 

This was not a balanced piece of journalism.

 

I frankly do not believe that no support was received by LE, a quick trawl through this forum shows that there are plenty who like the idea.

[Marauder]

Gary Hetherington at Sheffield Eagles, Mark Ashton at Sheffield Eagles, Jeff Fletcher at Huyton and I'm sure there will be a few more somewhere.

So, these plans are there to please a few disgruntled clubs?  Surely then, if all clubs have say in whether the proposals go ahead then they will go with the majority - i.e. not a few disgruntled clubs.

 

Since when has a coach been a stakeholder?  I would have thought the clubs chairmen were the stakeholders?  

 

Everyone has their own agenda, with very few unbiased views being reported.

 

Whatever happens, like everything the RFL implements, will have the support of the majority of real stakeholders, not the vocal minority fringe moaners.

[Marauder]

 Completely agree.

 

Tony Smith is interested in what is good for Warrington.  LE are interested in selling papers and playing up to their audience.

 

Sky are interested in making money, and the RFL are interested in having a sustainable game.

 

They are all at odds with one another.  

The people at Red Hall are interested in keeping a job and if that means keeping a small portion of the game happy and in the limelight for the major paymaster then that's what they will do.

[brooza]

In fact we have had absolutely no positive response from any of our readers"

Did you ask for feedback or did you just go by the people that are more likely to write in to a newspaper letters page (ie, people complaining)?

[Ackroman]

You take 1 weeks' worth of response in LE as a straw poll of peoples views but do not take any steps to review opinion from this board as you regularly do for other subjects. The choice not to do that just undermines any argument and clearly shows which side of the line LE is on.

[gingerjon]

Now Widnes have an opinion: http://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_11946-widnes-ceo-urges-rfl-to-stick-with-current-structure.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[Marauder]

I think I've just about had enough of Rugby League now. I used to like the idea that we were often an innovative sport that had other sports following our example, but the powers that be seem to revel in that and now just impose changes to the laws and systems for the sake of it. I gave up on Super league around the third season in when I realised that it was more about money than sport, and that they play by a different set of laws to the rest of Rugby League, but now that the Super league clubs are ruining the championships as well with this dual registration nonsense I am seriously considering just sticking to my amateur game on Saturdays and saving my money on Sundays.

That's exactly what I do, I've gone from being a season ticket holder at Hull FC & Doncaster (Have also sponsored players) I also took in just about any other game that looked like it could be a good watch, I now follow my local amateur side, any amateur game that looks like it could be good when my side are not playing and a handful of pro games, I can't even be bothered to go to the challenge cup final anymore (Could be because I can't do a full weekend at drinking anymore)

Edited May 13, 2013 by Marauder

[RLRatings]

I keep banging my own little drum - we need a pathway in, but not necessarily a pathway out again, and therefore we need NFL-style organisation where the number of teams in the top tier can be flexible.

It would be a horrible decision to reopen the trap door and further jeopardise the investment and development that the likes of Widnes and Catalan have been able to make.

[The Future is League]

A 12 team super league with no P & R, but if a super league team go's into adminstration they are Relegated at the end of the season, and the team that wins the championship Grand Final gets promoted if they meet the criteria. Have a 8 team straight KO play off system, no second chances.

An easy system that everybody would understand.

[Dave T]

A 12 team super league with no P & R, but if a super league team go's into adminstration they are Relegated at the end of the season, and the team that wins the championship Grand Final gets promoted if they meet the criteria. Have a 8 team straight KO play off system, no second chances.

An easy system that everybody would understand.

TBH I don't understand your system.

So if no team goes into administration, the SL just keeps growing? Or does a new team just get added each year?

[hindle xiii]

It's all about money, we'd be fine if we weren't 8 or 9 millionaires short(bread)...

 

[The Future is League]

TBH I don't understand your system.

So if no team goes into administration, the SL just keeps growing? Or does a new team just get added each year?

NO. A team only gets promoted from the championship, if a super league club go's into administration and is relegated.

[Dave T]

It is also too easy for people to say things like 'our game is undersold'.

 

We hear this a lot. We have had some pretty well qualified people in charge of the governing body and individual clubs. What have they done about it? Maybe it isn't actually that easy.

 

Maybe they are trying to do this by making games as intense as possible by getting teams into tiers that suit their level.

 

They will have a few key points of the season to market and get the media interested:

 

1 - The cut after 11 rounds. There will be games in that 11th round which will probably determine whether a club plays in the 1st or 2nd tier, or 2nd or 3rd tier. If this was done at Magic Weekend, we could see a much bigger crowd at an event which is always one of the bigger events of the year. This could be brilliant sporting drama in front of massive crowds.

 

2 - The end of the regular season.

 a ) Tier 1 will see the battle for the playoff spots - top teams playing top teams. Great stuff and surely where the focus should be?

  Tier 2 will see teams clamouring for that top 4 which will see them make it into SL1 for the next season (and I assume the playoffs)

 

3 - The playoffs and Grand Final series. Where the champions are decided.

 

So based on the above, I suspect they will have an easier job selling those games.

 

We hear everybody banging on about meaningless games in the regular season, this solution goes a long way to addressing that.

 

I do agree that strong leadership is needed and get the challenges around allowing clubs to rule the game, but I don;t think the proposal is a bad one at all.

[hindle xiii]

Just a randon thought, and probably verging on gimmick...

 

But it was outlined on the BBC graphic that the top-8 after the split would have their points carried over, somewhat obviously, however, what about if the bottom 4 of SL1 and the top 4 of Championship, in this second tier 8 had their points carried over too...? This would then put the 4 Championship clubs ahead and the Super League clubs would be playing catch up almost on a handicap basis.

 

It's probably a crock of ship but at least this is the place for it!!

[hindle xiii]

... i.e. purely hypothetical say the bottom four in Super League are London 9, Hull KR 8, Castleford 8, Salford 6. And the top of Championship are Halifax 20, Featherstone 16, Sheffield 16, Leigh 15. The full-time clubs then have ground to make up instead of simply running away on an even keel, but also would add spice to try harder in the first 11 games...