Archived

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

Padge

DR K and Lenigan Interviews on Radio Manchester Now

46 posts in this topic

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 !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Throughout pro RU they have maintained P&R.

 

 

 

But with minimum standards, so not automatic.

 

Clubs wishing to play in the Premiership must fulfil a list of criteria set down by the Professional Game Board and agreed with the RFU Championship. This covers areas such as stadia, club administration and other key roles, community development programmes, ground tenure and ground moves, facilities, medical and safety, marketing, plans to increase attendances, adherence to the squad cap and playing and contractual commitments. The purpose of the minimum criteria is to set a standard for all clubs to operate by, which all will benefit from.

 

Promotion and relegation is however subject to the Minimum Standards Criteria being fulfilled by the club finishing top of the RFU Championship as outlined above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet the RFU actually implement their minimum standards too yes?  Unlike the RFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet the RFU actually implement their minimum standards too yes?  Unlike the RFL.

THEY DO....well, they do until they are threatened with legal action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THEY DO....well, they do until they are threatened with legal action.

D n f t t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THEY DO....well, they do until they are threatened with legal action.

 

Yes that great Oxford club, London Welsh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that Dr K has just had to fork out a grand in fines because Nigel Wood won't tolerate people expressing an opinion contrary to the corporate speil, especially if an f bomb is dropped into the mix. So I would imagine we won't be hearing/reading anymore interesting stuff from Dr K. He's certainly been very quiet on Twitter since his fine.

What a shame. I think he's been great news for rugby league.

He has been great news, the best in a while. He is however a "self made man" and has never had to answer to anyone.

He now has collective responsibility to contend with. If you are part of the management of an organisation and the vote goes against you, you swallow hard and shut up.

That would apply from a tiny company to the cabinet.

It's a lesson he needs to learn quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017