Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Martyn Sadler

New league structure revealed

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

I suspect that is precisely the point. They WILL pick who they want. Rather than who may or may not justify promotion/admission on merit.

And remember, Hiudgell has already stated that there would be major resistance from current SL clubs to Bradford joining SL, should that (currently remote) opportunity ever arise. So, hardly surprising Chalmers is opposing the Junta's intentions?

Which merits?

Everyone uses Salford as a stick to beat SL with, yet it was this structure that saw their survival to the detriment of HKR.

Surely They would pick clubs in merit. I really don't understand this idea that the leaders of this faction are desperate to keep Salford Widnes and Wakefield at the expense of Bradford Toronot and Toulouse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, scotchy1 said:

Which merits?

Everyone uses Salford as a stick to beat SL with, yet it was this structure that saw their survival to the detriment of HKR.

Surely They would pick clubs in merit. I really don't understand this idea that the leaders of this faction are desperate to keep Salford Widnes and Wakefield at the expense of Bradford Toronot and Toulouse. 

"Merit" - i.e. finishing top of the Championship table, or winning whatever form of play-offs may be in place from time to time.

There have been adverse comments from some SL chairmen about "foreign" clubs in SL - I suspect because of the perceived impact on gates, costs etc for their own clubs - and Hudgell made his views on Bradford clear in a recent interview.


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

I suspect it could prove that it is some current SL clubs who may end up wishing they had been careful what they wished for. I can't get this multiquoting to work, but yesterday In reply to you I wrote:

A split is IMO inevitable, sooner or later. And SL will become "by invitation only". Any fudge now will only put the day of reckoning off.

Quite whether a split SL would have the critical mass to survive and thrive on its own in the big bad world out there, without ultimately merging with the Dark Side, is the moot point.  I've said before, it may well end up as some sort of international "Super Rugby league" like the Dark Side has.  If so, the weaker SL clubs (and maybe some of the stronger ones) should maybe be careful what they wish for? Since could you see the likes of Wakey or Hull KR or Huddersfield, or even Cas, making the cut?  When faced with prospective new franchises from the very big cities in the UK, Europe and maybe further afield?

I fully expect that, after 2021 if they cannot effect it earlier, SLE will pull up the drawbridge, make SL by invitation only and retain 100% of the TV money, regardless. And, even if a pretence of P&R IS retained, it will be a de facto 12 + 1 SL, with one club a year taking a (parachute-payment subsidised) sabbatical in the Championship, compared to whose cash-strapped clubs they should win back at a canter.  If I am right, what have the clubs outside of SL to lose by opposing the Junta's intentions?

 

I think that SL will do similar to what you suggest. 

I also think SL will (and should) buy the rights to the lower leagues.

What the lower leagues have to lose is that I don't think the SL clubs are out to get them. At the very worst they are ambivalent toward them. Failing SL buying the rights the lower league could have A) used the next 3 years to build a compelling product (or at least more compelling) that would serve them better if they were cut off and B ) tried to get more money out of SL for that to allow SL to implement their plans earlier.

It's been my biggest question throughout this whole thing. What does a win for the championship look like in 5 years time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

"Merit" - i.e. finishing top of the Championship table, or winning whatever form of play-offs may be in place from time to time.

There have been adverse comments from some SL chairmen about "foreign" clubs in SL - I suspect because of the perceived impact on gates, costs etc for their own clubs - and Hudgell made his views on Bradford clear in a recent interview.

Hudgell may well feel like that but Lenagan et al have publicly said the opposite re: foreign sides especially. If push comes to shove we know that the power doesn't lay with Hudgell.

My point regarding merit was I have no doubt that the SL clubs would invite others in on merit. Just different merit to winning a semi-pro comp 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

And isn't it not so long ago that the same chairmen were complaining about 'loop' fixtures? I'd give any new structure a maximum of 3 years before further changes are 'needed' because it isn't working.

It also wasn't that long ago that clubs outside of SL wanted out of the TV deal so they could go and get their own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

I think that SL will do similar to what you suggest. 

I also think SL will (and should) buy the rights to the lower leagues.

What the lower leagues have to lose is that I don't think the SL clubs are out to get them. At the very worst they are ambivalent toward them. Failing SL buying the rights the lower league could have A) used the next 3 years to build a compelling product (or at least more compelling) that would serve them better if they were cut off and B ) tried to get more money out of SL for that to allow SL to implement their plans earlier.

It's been my biggest question throughout this whole thing. What does a win for the championship look like in 5 years time. 

I don't think anyone is suggesting they ARE?  At all.  Why on earth should they be?

What people ARE suggesting, is that a SL run by the SL club owners must invariably be run in the interests (as they perceive them) of those SL club owners!  Rather than in the interests of the wider game.  A rather different thing.

 


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I think that SL will do similar to what you suggest. 

I also think SL will (and should) buy the rights to the lower leagues.

What the lower leagues have to lose is that I don't think the SL clubs are out to get them. At the very worst they are ambivalent toward them. Failing SL buying the rights the lower league could have A) used the next 3 years to build a compelling product (or at least more compelling) that would serve them better if they were cut off and B ) tried to get more money out of SL for that to allow SL to implement their plans earlier.

It's been my biggest question throughout this whole thing. What does a win for the championship look like in 5 years time. 

What, so like Sky they can then not provide any meaningful TV exposure, but at the same time prevent anyone else from doing so?  What benefit to SLE of buying the rights otherwise?


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I think that SL will do similar to what you suggest. 

I also think SL will (and should) buy the rights to the lower leagues.

What the lower leagues have to lose is that I don't think the SL clubs are out to get them. At the very worst they are ambivalent toward them. Failing SL buying the rights the lower league could have A) used the next 3 years to build a compelling product (or at least more compelling) that would serve them better if they were cut off and B ) tried to get more money out of SL for that to allow SL to implement their plans earlier.

It's been my biggest question throughout this whole thing. What does a win for the championship look like in 5 years time. 

Survival.


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

I don't think anyone is suggesting they ARE?  At all.  Why on earth should they be?

What people ARE suggesting, is that a SL run by the SL club owners must invariably be run in the interests (as they perceive them) of those SL club owners!  Rather than in the interests of the wider game.  A rather different thing.

 

The point I was trying to make there was that the SL clubs, the junta as you call them, have a more pragmatic approach than perhaps they are given credit for. What they are trying to do is what's best for themselves rather than to hurt the lower leagues. That pragmatism is something the lower leagues could have used had they been a little more pragmatic themselves.

If as you suggest SL want franchising, and they are likely to get it, then give them it now in exchange for a bit more money and give yourself the opportunity to, in 3 years time when you leverage pretty much disappears a better shot at going it alone.

Instead we look like getting some sort of fudge which pretty much demands we have this same issue in a few years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

What, so like Sky they can then not provide any meaningful TV exposure, but at the same time prevent anyone else from doing so?  What benefit to SLE of buying the rights otherwise?

Streaming. My guess is that in 3 years time we see Sky take 2-3 SL games a week, 3-4 are streamed. 

3-4 SL games plus championship games plus league 1 games (plus in the future possibly NRL games, Queensland cup games etc etc) for £15 A month is a pretty compelling product for an RL fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

The point I was trying to make there was that the SL clubs, the junta as you call them, have a more pragmatic approach than perhaps they are given credit for. What they are trying to do is what's best for themselves rather than to hurt the lower leagues. That pragmatism is something the lower leagues could have used had they been a little more pragmatic themselves.

If as you suggest SL want franchising, and they are likely to get it, then give them it now in exchange for a bit more money and give yourself the opportunity to, in 3 years time when you leverage pretty much disappears a better shot at going it alone.

Instead we look like getting some sort of fudge which pretty much demands we have this same issue in a few years. 

I think you will see, from comments on this thread, that there is very considerable scepticism over the objectivity of any future licensing, franchising or whatever.  Not least, given the "licensing" experience (which I see many have used as an opportuity to kick Cas and Wakey). If the owners of the current SL clubs are the ones in charge of any future franchising or licensing, how likely is it that they would implement a process that could see their own club ejected from SL? Large flightless ugly avians and yuletide spring to mind...?

And i'll say again, where has anyone suggested the Junta's actions are intended to hurt the lower leagues?  Whilst hurt may well be a consequence of their actions, their intent is surely to do whatever is best for them.  And the Devil take the hindmost.


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Streaming. My guess is that in 3 years time we see Sky take 2-3 SL games a week, 3-4 are streamed. 

3-4 SL games plus championship games plus league 1 games (plus in the future possibly NRL games, Queensland cup games etc etc) for £15 A month is a pretty compelling product for an RL fan.

I ask again, what would be in it for SLE? Paying for streaming rights for a separate competition, which they could then sell on to a broadcaster, would seem to be a distraction from their own competition and operations. Why would the non-SL clubs sell their broadcast rights to a competing (for viewers) business that intemds to then on-sell the rights to a broadcaster at a (presumed) profit?


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Not a particularly convincing argument to focus resources and finances in that direction is it?

It is if you are a Championship club, given the alternative.


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

I think you will see, from comments on this thread, that there is very considerable scepticism over the objectivity of any future licensing, franchising or whatever.  Not least, given the "licensing" experience (which I see many have used as an opportuity to kick Cas and Wakey). If the owners of the current SL clubs are the ones in charge of any future franchising or licensing, how likely is it that they would implement a process that could see their own club ejected from SL? Large flightless ugly avians and yuletide spring to mind...?

And i'll say again, where has anyone suggested the Junta's actions are intended to hurt the lower leagues?  Whilst hurt may well be a consequence of their actions, their intent is surely to do whatever is best for them.  And the Devil take the hindmost.

Why would Wigan Warrington st Helens etc want to protect Salford? No doubt Salford want to protect Salford but why would anyone else.

Wigan aren't in danger of being kicked out, ever, so why are they going to allow rules protecting Salford. Especially if that ends up being to the detriment of Wigan (by stopping other, bigger clubs with more potential to make the pie bigger getting in)

And I'm not suggesting people are arguing the SL clubs are trying to destroy the lower leagues. I'm saying that they aren't using the fact they aren't trying to do so to their benefit. 

Edited by scotchy1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

It is if you are a Championship club, given the alternative.

I can't agree. Surely the lower leagues aim for more than mere survival. If they aren't I have to be honest, losing them is no hardship. If clubs want more some of the games meagre resource they have to be aiming to add more than just their existence. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

I ask again, what would be in it for SLE? Paying for streaming rights for a separate competition, which they could then sell on to a broadcaster, would seem to be a distraction from their own competition and operations. Why would the non-SL clubs sell their broadcast rights to a competing (for viewers) business that intemds to then on-sell the rights to a broadcaster at a (presumed) profit?

They would sell those rights on through a package, I expect direct to the customer or in conjunction with a broadcaster rather than a some resale.

Championship and l1 rights are pretty much valueless. SL doesn't have enough content to really justify a package on its own.

Put them together and you have a bigger market, a better product and one would expect more customers.

Think of it another way, there is L1 RL on the our league app. It's free cos no-one will pay for it. Roll it up in to a subscription that includes championship and SL rugby and you will have people who will pay for that package. 

Edited by scotchy1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

They would sell those rights on through a package, I expect direct to the customer or in conjunction with a broadcaster rather than a some resale.

Championship and l1 rights are pretty much valueless. SL doesn't have enough content to really justify a package on its own.

Put them together and you have a bigger market, a better product and one would expect more customers.

Think of it another way, there is L1 RL on the our league app. It's free cos no-one will pay for it. Roll it up in to a subscription that includes championship and SL rugby and you will have people who will pay for that package. 

Er...you mean just like the current deal with Sky? Who own the rights, but have declined to provide a package? In any case, it would HAVE to be a resale of rights - since they would be selling their OWN rights to a broadcaster.

Whether the (unencumbered) rights to non-SL RL have any or no value is currently unable to be tested.

Edited by Adeybull

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I can't agree. Surely the lower leagues aim for more than mere survival. If they aren't I have to be honest, losing them is no hardship. If clubs want more some of the games meagre resource they have to be aiming to add more than just their existence. 

Er...I am sure they would like to aim for considerably more than that.  But, when faced with a dominant and monied SL, then in the context of the current restructuring intentions a win would be anything that avoided facing them with an existential crisis. It is probably the best they can hope for in a situation where the game is likely to split - to the detriment of all, but to that of the weakest (and that includes clubs that may in due course get ejected from SL, once the Junta have their votes) most of all.

A REAL win would be someone taking hold of ALL the game, removing ANY vested interests from a position of control, and coming up with a realistic strategy to signifiantly improve the financing of the whole game. But that potential "win" option has been precluded by the SL Junta electing instead to pursue that goal solely for themselves. As I said, I fear ultimately to the detriment of everyone.


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

Er...you mean just like the current deal with Sky? Who own the rights, but have declined to provide a package? In any case, it would HAVE to be a resale of rights - since they would be selling their OWN rights to a broadcaster.

According to Lenagan SL currently pay about £5m a year to the lower leagues as a payment noted in the accounts as for 'resources' which is pretty much the 8s (apparently Sky don't pay for the bash just rent the stadium as a kind of contra deal) 

What I'm suggesting is that SL sells the rights to sky for 2-3 games a week that are screened live on Sky.

They could carry on paying the lower leagues roughly what they are paying now for the rights to the lower leagues. They roll those up in to a package with the 3-4 SL games not screened on Sky every week and sell them through (for instance) the ourleague app. 

Assuming the SL deal stays the same. And we get 100k subs at £15 per month, we bring in an extra £18m a year. And we assume it costs about £8m a year to broadcast and run the app, and we share 50% with sky to use their infrastructure, expertise, advertise on their platform, loss of exclusivity etc, then the SL clubs would basically have got their £5m invested in the lower leagues back. Money they were giving them anyway. Cut costs or increase and they are making more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Why would Wigan Warrington st Helens etc want to protect Salford? No doubt Salford want to protect Salford but why would anyone else.

Wigan aren't in danger of being kicked out, ever, so why are they going to allow rules protecting Salford. Especially if that ends up being to the detriment of Wigan (by stopping other, bigger clubs with more potential to make the pie bigger getting in)

And I'm not suggesting people are arguing the SL clubs are trying to destroy the lower leagues. I'm saying that they aren't using the fact they aren't trying to do so to their benefit. 

Who said they did?

But Salford will want to protect Salford. And, for such time that each SL club has one vote on the board of SLE, the weaker clubs will be able to attempt to veto anything to their detriment.

Various proponents of the Junta's proposals have said that the current deal was only passed by a small majority of SL clubs in 2014. And even then, after dangling carrots of various natures. The delicious - if tragic - irony of it all would - WILL - be when they have to resort to precisely the same to force through future proposals to replace the likes of Salford with clubs more to their liking.


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

Er...I am sure they would like to aim for considerably more than that.  But, when faced with a dominant and monied SL, then in the context of the current restructuring intentions a win would be anything that avoided facing them with an existential crisis. It is probably the best they can hope for in a situation where the game is likely to split - to the detriment of all, but to that of the weakest (and that includes clubs that may in due course get ejected from SL, once the Junta have their votes) most of all.

A REAL win would be someone taking hold of ALL the game, removing ANY vested interests from a position of control, and coming up with a realistic strategy to signifiantly improve the financing of the whole game. But that potential "win" option has been precluded by the SL Junta electing instead to pursue that goal solely for themselves. As I said, I fear ultimately to the detriment of everyone.

If your choices are death or mere survival you are already in an existential crisis.

This is my problem with the lower leagues position. It is in no way a forward looking position, it's not trying to address any of the problems the game faces.

It basically boils down to keep giving us your money and we will keep trying to replace you so you can struggle like we do. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Adeybull said:

Who said they did?

But Salford will want to protect Salford. And, for such time that each SL club has one vote on the board of SLE, the weaker clubs will be able to attempt to veto anything to their detriment.

Various proponents of the Junta's proposals have said that the current deal was only passed by a small majority of SL clubs in 2014. And even then, after dangling carrots of various natures. The delicious - if tragic - irony of it all would - WILL - be when they have to resort to precisely the same to force through future proposals to replace the likes of Salford with clubs more to their liking.

That line between big enough and not is a moveable feast and rightly so.

You can pick off the smaller clubs as the game grows. And you will hit a point where you won't need to subtract to add. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Kayakman said:

Spidey i understand your points and get that Toronto and Toulouse knew they were 'guests' and would not get a vote.  You miss my my point, its not about complaining about it not being fair (which it isn't but so what; thats life). Its far more about it not 'being right'. 

Every team should have a voice; no matter how small: its the principle of the thing.  I think this is especially important since there seems to be an element of a certain "nativism" in the sport in general.  No one has replied to my fundamental question as to WHY Toronto and Toulouse have not been given a vote.     T Bone says having an entering period of five years (fine) as long as that rule would apply to all clubs regardless of geographic location (which it does not).

I think that the reason they don't get a vote is because many people are afraid of foreigners taking over RL; this is clearly an unfounded illogical fear and should not be entertained.for obvious reasons.

You’re making too much out of this.  The RFL Council has its constitution, which will lay out the rules for voting rights. I’m sure clubs from outside of England could apply to be full members if they so desired and there are mechanisms for this. It’s really nothing more than that.  You can go on all you want about foreigners etc  that’s not the driving force at all it’s simply that some clubs are not full members, That’s how the organisation is set up

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

According to Lenagan SL currently pay about £5m a year to the lower leagues as a payment noted in the accounts as for 'resources' which is pretty much the 8s (apparently Sky don't pay for the bash just rent the stadium as a kind of contra deal) 

What I'm suggesting is that SL sells the rights to sky for 2-3 games a week that are screened live on Sky.

They could carry on paying the lower leagues roughly what they are paying now for the rights to the lower leagues. They roll those up in to a package with the 3-4 SL games not screened on Sky every week and sell them through (for instance) the ourleague app. 

Assuming the SL deal stays the same. And we get 100k subs at £15 per month, we bring in an extra £18m a year. And we assume it costs about £8m a year to broadcast and run the app, and we share 50% with sky to use their infrastructure, expertise, advertise on their platform, loss of exclusivity etc, then the SL clubs would basically have got their £5m invested in the lower leagues back. Money they were giving them anyway. Cut costs or increase and they are making more. 

Why would it take a SL intermediary to sell games not selected by Sky?

Why would Sky be prepared to allow a competitive broadcaster in, when they currently do not?

Why would Sky elect to show non-SL games now, when they have not done so hitherto?

What makes you think Sky will offer the same deal next time round? (I expect it to be less).

Do you think 100k extra subs at £15/month (£12/month income, as - like pretty well everyone else, you seem to forget VAT) is realistic?


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...