Mr. Davey now turns on the RFL

[The Parksider]

"Time for a dramatic re-think,"   He says...

 

"It's significant that two years ago when this was introduced, a significant number of SL clubs were against this in principle" (Huddersfield, HKR. Hull, Salford, Wire and Wigan) 

 

"Three of the four SL clubs in the qualifiers.........ourselves, HKR & Huddersfield...........have consistently relied on the support of individuals.....People like Neil Hudgell and I have invested £Millions.....

 

....."Dr. Koukash has put his own money into Salford"

 

"they call it the Million Pound game, but the reality is it's almost a £2,000,000 loss to the club that gets relegated.

 

"I don't think it does anything to attract players to the game at the highest level, I don't think it has any merits whatsoever, it is a commercial disaster"

 

Before anyone accuses him of anything just remember how many £Millions he's put into the game, same for the other "rebel" clubs chairmen, those stated above, and including Mr. Pearson, Mr. Moran, and Mr. Lenegan, of which only Simon Moran has yet to come out with a statement openly saying he's unhappy. But there is time yet.

 

Far from Saturdays drama being the making of the system, the "commercial disaster" looks like it will be the breaking of the system and the RFL will have to listen hard. What does anyone think these six guys put into SL from their own pockets annually?? 

 

The RFL can plough on if they want and the rich men can stop funding their clubs if they want.

 

Is this a signal that Hudgell is unhappy he's put all that money in and his club has been dumped?

[Saint Toppy]

"Time for a dramatic re-think,"   He says...

 

"It's significant that two years ago when this was introduced, a significant number of SL clubs were against this in principle" (Huddersfield, HKR. Hull, Salford, Wire and Wigan) 

 

"Three of the four SL clubs in the qualifiers.........ourselves, HKR & Huddersfield...........have consistently relied on the support of individuals.....People like Neil Hudgell and I have invested £Millions.....

 

....."Dr. Koukash has put his own money into Salford"

 

"they call it the Million Pound game, but the reality is it's almost a £2,000,000 loss to the club that gets relegated.

 

"I don't think it does anything to attract players to the game at the highest level, I don't think it has any merits whatsoever, it is a commercial disaster"

 

Before anyone accuses him of anything just remember how many £Millions he's put into the game, same for the other "rebel" clubs chairmen, those stated above, and including Mr. Pearson, Mr. Moran, and Mr. Lenegan, of which only Simon Moran has yet to come out with a statement openly saying he's unhappy. But there is time yet.

 

Far from Saturdays drama being the making of the system, the "commercial disaster" looks like it will be the breaking of the system and the RFL will have to listen hard. What does anyone think these six guys put into SL from their own pockets annually?? 

 

The RFL can plough on if they want and the rich men can stop funding their clubs if they want.

 

Is this a signal that Hudgell is unhappy he's put all that money in and his club has been dumped?

Another one complaining but failing to present any credible alternative. 

We've had licencing that ironically saved Huddersfield from relegation year after year and creates a 'closed shop' with no admittance for any ambitious clubs from the Championship.

We've had P&R that just created a generation of 'yo-yo' teams who went from boom to bust year after year because they had no chance of recruiting the players needed to stay up.

 

I've no problem with players, coaches and chairmen criticising the current system as long as they have something credible to offer as a replacement

[JoneslessBishop]

The implied commercial disaster seems to be a club being relegated. So is he only in favour of liscenicng? Standard P&R would result in a SL club being relegated every year, possibly 2 if there was a play-off between SLs 11th placed team and the Championships 2nd (via play-off) to retain competition throughout the championship, not just at the top.

Careful what you wish for Ken. The Super 8s gives the whole game so thing to aim for. If we want to keep that the alternative is potentially far more damaging

[Scubby]

The implied commercial disaster seems to be a club being relegated. So is he only in favour of liscenicng? Standard P&R would result in a SL club being relegated every year, possibly 2 if there was a play-off between SLs 11th placed team and the Championships 2nd (via play-off) to retain competition throughout the championship, not just at the top.

Careful what you wish for Ken. The Super 8s gives the whole game so thing to aim for. If we want to keep that the alternative is potentially far more damaging

 

No I think the commercial disaster also alludes to the reluctance of fans to buy season tickets because the fixtures are so uncertain, ability to sell hospitality packages and match sponsorships as you are in limbo from June/July waiting for fixtures etc.

[Dave T]

Rich backers in other sports dont complain like this. Other sports' fans dont complain like this. Other sports' journos dont complain like this.

It is clearly a RL issue. If you invest your money poorly in any sport in the UK you will lose it and probably get relegated and lose your investment. Not sure why we want so much protection from everything in RL.

These rich backers know what they are doing, what exactly is the point if his rant? What does he want?

Fans want to keep RL cheap, as do investors. It's holding us back.

Why am I meant to feel sorry for Mr Hudgell?

[paulwalker71]

So Ken Davy thinks its 'time for a dramatic rethink' - but has he given any clue to what he thinks that should lead to?

 

If it means pulling up the drawbridge and going back to a closed shop with the teams currently in SL, then I'll be done with RL. 

 

My team were unlucky enough to have their one year in the relegation places (unlike his team who were consistently at the bottom for years and were saved by franchising) in the one year that there actually was relegation. Removing the opportunity to get back to the top division would end my interest in supporting RL after more than 40 years

 

If that makes me sound like a bitter Bulls fan, then so be it...

[The Parksider]

The implied commercial disaster seems to be a club being relegated. So is he only in favour of liscenicng? Standard P&R would result in a SL club being relegated every year, possibly 2 if there was a play-off between SLs 11th placed team and the Championships 2nd (via play-off) to retain competition throughout the championship, not just at the top.

Careful what you wish for Ken. The Super 8s gives the whole game so thing to aim for. If we want to keep that the alternative is potentially far more damaging

 

He's in favour of P & R, he and five other chairman wanted this in January 2014 and still probably do.

He's in favour of a two year cycle to allow the promoted club chance to stay up up.

He's in favour of a semi pro championship in which a relegated club can then go straight back up. In his piece he says 

 

"I speak as someone who has previously been a supporter of relegation and indeed i have experienced it 15 years ago".

 

Davey accepted relegation, continued to invest in his club and they went straight back up unbeaten. He thinks that was fair then and would be fair now and even fairer if the promoted club got two years grace.

 

The implied "commercial disaster" was not specifically apportioned to Rovers relegation. As Steve Gill at Castleford has said Cas lost money on the Super 8's so I think you are barking up the wrong tree.

 

It appears (I may be wrong) that whilst the new system has been a breath of fresh air, and exciting, and controversial etc etc there is a bottom line of did it make money?? and I'd guess Davey is saying it didn't/hasn't.

[The Parksider]

No I think the commercial disaster also alludes to the reluctance of fans to buy season tickets because the fixtures are so uncertain, ability to sell hospitality packages and match sponsorships as you are in limbo from June/July waiting for fixtures etc.

 

I think Steve Gill said the above things so looks like your right. 

[The Parksider]

So Ken Davy thinks its 'time for a dramatic rethink' - but has he given any clue to what he thinks that should lead to?

 

If it means pulling up the drawbridge and going back to a closed shop with the teams currently in SL, then I'll be done with RL. 

 

My team were unlucky enough to have their one year in the relegation places (unlike his team who were consistently at the bottom for years and were saved by franchising) in the one year that there actually was relegation. Removing the opportunity to get back to the top division would end my interest in supporting RL after more than 40 years

 

If that makes me sound like a bitter Bulls fan, then so be it...

 

Mate, Ken Davey was one of six SL chairmen who proposed straight P & R.

 

This was heavily reported in January 2014 when his and his five "rebel" colleagues tried to get it in, instead of MPG etc.

 

Had they won that vote they lost 6-7 (they'd win it today given Bulls and London voted against but have no vote now) we would NOT have a closed shop, we would have straight P & R thanks to Mr. Davey.

 

He did not want a closed shop.

[Scubby]

So Ken Davy thinks its 'time for a dramatic rethink' - but has he given any clue to what he thinks that should lead to?

 

If it means pulling up the drawbridge and going back to a closed shop with the teams currently in SL, then I'll be done with RL. 

 

My team were unlucky enough to have their one year in the relegation places (unlike his team who were consistently at the bottom for years and were saved by franchising) in the one year that there actually was relegation. Removing the opportunity to get back to the top division would end my interest in supporting RL after more than 40 years

 

If that makes me sound like a bitter Bulls fan, then so be it...

 

IIRC Huddersfield were entirely against the 3x8 system from the start. I'm not 100% sure but I think Huddersfield went as far as to bring alternate proposals to the table?

[paulwalker71]

Fair enough, and if Ken Davy has alternative proposals, then I'd be interested to see them.

[Saint Toppy]

So Ken Davy thinks its 'time for a dramatic rethink' - but has he given any clue to what he thinks that should lead to?

 

If it means pulling up the drawbridge and going back to a closed shop with the teams currently in SL, then I'll be done with RL. 

 

My team were unlucky enough to have their one year in the relegation places (unlike his team who were consistently at the bottom for years and were saved by franchising) in the one year that there actually was relegation. Removing the opportunity to get back to the top division would end my interest in supporting RL after more than 40 years

 

If that makes me sound like a bitter Bulls fan, then so be it...

I actually think licencing was the best system we had its just that it was poorly implemented by the RFL. The criteria for getting in, staying in (or being pushed out) was completely fudged so that it suited their own means. Clubs rarely knew where they stood or exactly what it was they had to achieve.

 

If licencing was reintroduced it would have to have clear criteria based on both on-field results and off-field stability & systems. They should also reach an agreement with Sky that allows for extra TV money to be provided every time they expand the league and add an extra team so no existing teams lose out.

 

If a Championship club consistently is at the top of their league (over 2-3 years say) and can demonstrate they have a good quality ground, are financially stable, and have a youth development structure in place then they should be admitted to SL. Conversley if an existing club is consistently at the bottom of the league, has a poor record of junior development and is in financial trouble then they should lose their licence, drop down into the Championship and have to reapply in the future.

 

A system like this would mean clubs would consistently have to perform on and off the field in order to retain a licence

[The Parksider]

IIRC Huddersfield were entirely against the 3x8 system from the start. I'm not 100% sure but I think Huddersfield went as far as to bring alternate proposals to the table?

 

Be 100% sure I have the press cuttings and have laid this out a dozen times or more on here.

 

Huddersfield, Hull, HKR, Salford, Wigan and Warrington AKA the "rebels" joined forces to bring the alternative proposal of straight P & R and two year cycles if preferred to give promoted clubs a chance of "settling in"

 

They lost that vote 6-7 as skint clubs were bribed to vote against with advanced TV payments on offer with the 3x8

 

I'll send you copies of the press reports if you PM me your address which would be kept strictly confidential. 

[The Parksider]

Fair enough, and if Ken Davy has alternative proposals, then I'd be interested to see them.

 

What do you mean if?

 

In January 2014 he proposed straight promotion and relegation.

 

You can have copies of the press cuttings.

[Chronicler of Chiswick]

I take the point about automatic P&R, but what needs to be factored in here is how much of the current system is a result of having to keep the game's paymasters at Sky happy. They want a certain number of games for their dosh, perhaps this is the only way we can do it.

[deluded pom?]

I take the point about automatic P&R, but what needs to be factored in here is how much of the current system is a result of having to keep the game's paymasters at Sky happy. They want a certain number of games for their dosh, perhaps this is the only way we can do it.

When have Sky insisted on thirty games in a season?

[The Parksider]

I take the point about automatic P&R, but what needs to be factored in here is how much of the current system is a result of having to keep the game's paymasters at Sky happy. They want a certain number of games for their dosh, perhaps this is the only way we can do it.

 

The point is the auto P & R was actually voted on, if it was unacceptable to SKY it would not have gone to a vote.

 

SKY as usual said nothing, but PR guru Blake Solly claimed he sold the idea to SKY so it was hardly a case of SKY demanding it.

 

The new contract wasn't about keeping SKY happy it was about SKY keeping Superleague solvent, they were £68,000,000 in debt in January 2014

[paulwalker71]

What do you mean if?

 

In January 2014 he proposed straight promotion and relegation.

 

You can have copies of the press cuttings.

 

 

No need for press cuttings, I'm happy to take your word for it.

 

FWIW I could live with a one up, one down promotion every two years. My own team wouldn't be favourites to grab that one place in the immediate short term, but we have a good crop of young talent coming through and I'd be content with the notion of building towards promotion over a period of time.

[Lewis]

I may be wrong here but didn't Catalan Dragons not attend the meeting where a vote was taken (on 3 x 8 & MPG system)?

 

The RFL cast their vote instead, which was obviously in favour of the system, making it 7 - 6?

 

Such a close vote and Rugby League being Rugby League, the system was always going to come under close scrutiny after a season or two. 

 

Personally, I don't like the system. I think it will be tinkered with again after next season. I also think with NIgel Wood at the helm there will always be a gimmicky element to the format. 

[Derwent]

No I think the commercial disaster also alludes to the reluctance of fans to buy season tickets because the fixtures are so uncertain, ability to sell hospitality packages and match sponsorships as you are in limbo from June/July waiting for fixtures etc.

It's not just that. Hull KR will lose £1m central funding. On top of that their crowds will probably drop to 3k in the Championship, from about 8k average now. Losing 5k a game will equate to about £75k per game. So 13 home games x £75k drop in income equals £965k of lost revenue. Then there all of the other commercial issues you allude to.

But that's the nature of sport, and there is no space for sympathy. My own club have been relegated, our drop in income will impact as much as KR's in comparative terms, but you just have to get on with it.

[Lowdesert]

It is a fair system in that everyone knows the rules before the season starts. Whether it changes or not remains to be seen, but these owners are rich men who are a bit too bright to gamble all their fortune on RL. They make their own business decisions.

What is strange is that Hudgell is not banging on, now, that the system is no good, needs to change or needs a 'dramatic re-think'. You would think, if anyone deserved to shout, it was him. Maybe he feels let down by the lack of support from the people who are complaining now?

[bobbruce]

I may be wrong here but didn't Catalan Dragons not attend the meeting where a vote was taken (on 3 x 8 & MPG system)?

The RFL cast their vote instead, which was obviously in favour of the system, making it 7 - 6?

Such a close vote and Rugby League being Rugby League, the system was always going to come under close scrutiny after a season or two.

Personally, I don't like the system. I think it will be tinkered with again after next season. I also think with NIgel Wood at the helm there will always be a gimmicky element to the format.

I thought the RFL get a vote anyway and Catalans abstained from the vote.

[The Parksider]

I may be wrong here but didn't Catalan Dragons not attend the meeting where a vote was taken (on 3 x 8 & MPG system)?

 

The RFL cast their vote instead, which was obviously in favour of the system, making it 7 - 6?

 

Such a close vote and Rugby League being Rugby League, the system was always going to come under close scrutiny after a season or two. 

 

Personally, I don't like the system. I think it will be tinkered with again after next season. I also think with NIgel Wood at the helm there will always be a gimmicky element to the format. 

 

Catalans Dragons abstained as they are in SL by invitation only and the other 13 clubs voted 7-6 for.

 

The RFL did not need any casting vote, but as was said at the time such major changes to the game need to be agreed rather than carried with half the clubs unhappy.

[paulwalker71]

It's not just that. Hull KR will lose £1m central funding. On top of that their crowds will probably drop to 3k in the Championship, from about 8k average now. Losing 5k a game will equate to about £75k per game. So 13 home games x £75k drop in income equals £965k of lost revenue. Then there all of the other commercial issues you allude to.

 

 

 

Drop in attendances are, IMO, an inevitability. I was convinced that when we went down, crowds wouldn't suffer much, if at all as:

 

a) It seemed that we'd already reduced down to the 'core' (i.e around 6-7K). It turned out that about  40% of those people stopped coming

 

I expected people would enjoy watching us win most of the time, after a couple of seasons of being battered every week. That didn't seem to happen either

 

You've also got to factor in the pitifully small away followings. With the exception of Leigh and Halifax, we seldom get more than a few dozen away fans. With the distances involved, I suspect HKR will have even fewer away fans.

[The Parksider]

It is a fair system in that everyone knows the rules before the season starts. Whether it changes or not remains to be seen, but these owners are rich men who are a bit too bright to gamble all their fortune on RL. They make their own business decisions.

What is strange is that Hudgell is not banging on, now, that the system is no good, needs to change or needs a 'dramatic re-think'. You would think, if anyone deserved to shout, it was him. Maybe he feels let down by the lack of support from the people who are complaining now?

 

It's politics Mr. D.

 

If Hudgell complains now it's "sour grapes", so I read it as Mr. Davey taking his turn to denounce the system, and as you can see in the article he has denounced the system on behalf of not just himself, but Hudgell and Koukash. 

 

Hudgell had a go at the RFL over the new marketing appointment, and Pearson has had a go, as has Lenegan in an open letter. Koukash has had umpteen goes at the RFL only Moran has yet to speak.

 

These six "rebel" clubs banded together against the RFL over this system and there is no real logic that each time one of them speaks they speak just for themselves. The message is always the same anyway - we don't want this system and we want our own general manager.