Dave T

This one became more interesting the other night though, and is probably a perfect example of the frustrations that fans, players and coaches have. Tai fumbled a catch over his line versus Hull and then grounded it with the backs of his hands. The ref sent it up as a Try, and was overruled as the VR said it was intentionally grounded. Yet nobody grounds the ball intentionally with the backs of their hands. There were a lot of similarities with those two incidents, both saw a #### up and then the body on the ball. One saw a decision of no grounding, one saw a decision of grounded. Both had been sent as a try from the ref. Neither was an orthodox grounding, and both followed an error. We exacerbate the problem by ignoring some written rules, and then adding in interpretations of things that arent written. The Leeds disallowed try the other night just feels a weird decision instinctively. I dont have an issue with the refs, as long as I've watched RL, fans have asked who the clown is that day, this isn't new, and people used to hate Whitfield, and others will still talk about #### ups from Russel Smith in 1994 or Ganson at Cardiff and so on. But the governing body and the rulebook owners just dont help the refs imo when they have so much scrutiny. I'm a fan of simplifying things as much as possible (on the Wembley incident, I think you should have to use your hand/arms to ground it), I'd scrap this nonsense around regathering the ball with a full grip, why is that necessary? I dont think the authorities give the refs a chance tbh. And then we just see bad decisions like the Cas v Wigan one.

To an extent, all you can do is improve your numbers and hope the outcomes follow. Improving the numbers and getting skilled negotiators hopefully leads to that competition you refer to.

I must admit, I dont have too much of an issue with players speaking to the ref. Its up to the ref to manage that. Players absolutely used to talk throughout the match to the referees who are being held up as stricter from yesteryear.

To add further to this point, these comments are from Matt Dwyer (IMG) from his interview with Martyn Sadler 3 years ago: "What is particularly attractive here is that there is a real willingness to want to bring in a partner to help them drive the next stage of growth in the game. That was probably a large part of the attraction for us, as was the strong realignment. We feel that the with the expertise of IMG and Endeavor, we are in an excellent position to be able to help the game grow." "They have been down the path of private equity before and that is an incredibly topical conversation at the moment. But what they want from us is the skills and expertise that we bring in growing sports and growing revenue streams." “IMG Media, where I sit, this is the part where we will look at the competition structure. We have our digital agency called Seven League, who will be doing the digital transformation of the league. Then we have the brand and marketing agency 160over90, which will be doing a lot of the re-imagining of the sport. What is unique to a company like IMG and the broader Endeavor is that we can bring that wide range of expertise to the table." “In terms of the immediate needs, private equity funds is not what the game needs. They need the expertise to grow the game. Like any business, you want to sell your business when you can get the appropriate value for it. Super League flirted with the idea (of private equity) previously but they then realised that they don’t need funds to do what they need to do, but they do need expertise. Whether that will change going forward, I don’t know. We could have had an equity element like those examples, but that wasn’t what was needed. What the sport needs now is the biggest sports and entertainment company in the world providing its expertise."

I think this is spot on. There is no magic formula here that says, if we do x, we'll get y. And this is why you need to do all the right things, best practice to get on board with the broadcasters, sponsors, investors. I suppose the question then is do you have more faith in working with industry experts like IMG, or are you putting all your faith in an RFL that is under-resourced and under-funded?

They've created a boogeyman in IMG. Its not coincidence that grading is always referred to as IMG Grading, whereas the really positive streaming platform is never badged as IMG's streaming platform. The branding on Grading is RFL and RLCom, as it should be.

A problem here though is that the clubs have never advocated for anyone. They remain critical of Sky Sports. They've always been critical of the RFL. They abandoned their first SLE breakaway. They have been critical of IMG. They abandoned their 2nd SLE breakaway. And then we come onto tactical initiatives. They weren't happy with their decision to adopt licensing. They weren't happy with their decision to adopt S8's. And now here we are, unhappy with the decision to adopt grading by the looks of where we are heading. Have they ever gone into any partnership or new governance model and been happy with it? I can't think of one example where they have been happy with something that they have implemented.

Maybe the leap of faith point was too clumsy a description. There can absolutely be numbers associated with principles to show the size of the prize. Personally I just dont see these gaps that you call out. The reimagining RL document does outline the vision and what they are aiming for. They have outlined the plan. A key part of that plan was to drive up standards of clubs so that you can increase number of clubs from a position of strength. That's being undermined now. They have laid out what the plan is, with some exceptions, but this does come back to it being a 12 year deal and not a 12m piece.

The problem here though is that's an impossible ask. There isn't a formula here that says "invest £x in ad boards and a big screen and by the end of 2026 you'll have doubled your commercial income". We are dealing in principles somewhat here. The activities that have been recommended have an element of a leap of faith about them. Its about smartening ourselves up, putting on our best show so that when we sell ourselves we look better and more attractive. If there was a set formula to this stuff, you ultimately wouldn't need this partnership. But its about presenting as best in class and staying ahead of the latest developments to unlock the most value. This approach can be challenging for people. Ive made the point about there not being a silver bullet, its about doing the small things right consistently. A big part is controlling the narrative and presenting ourselves in a really positive way, yet we have a fanbase that is inherently negative, club owners who won't give anyone credit for anything and want everything on a silver platter, and then we have journos who will focus on things like gantry size to mock IMG. I do rather think we have to grow up a bit in RL. Its all similar to the years we've spent mocking the catering at Union events, or laughing that the off field is better than the on field. We spent so long focusing on shot clocks, and 40 twenties that we have been left behind and look like a tired outdated sport in some areas.

Why do you keep making up things? You really should try quoting people instead of lying.

Yes. I tend to agree. Its probably less about questioning him as such, he was an outstanding signing at first, but his body looks done. He seems to get badly hurt in many matches now, and its always surprising that he then comes back on or manages to play on.

I'm not too interested in the debate on lower leagues, but I find the disdain people have for paying players to be a bit weird.

Otherwise known as paying players to put on the SL comp that Sky pay millions for.

Plenty of acts not for me, but I absolutely love Glasto coverage each yeah, and other festivals too tbf. Quite a few beers last night up late watching random stuff. Neil Young ain't for me, but we loved watching Biffy, and Scissor Sisters was a lot of crazy camp fun, the atmosphere looked amazing there.

Yeah, that's where my head is, he is in credit right now, but I'm not sure whether he has the skills to deliver the strategies needed for the kind of.scenarios we are in. He does make a hell of a lot of changes when one may do.