Toby Chopra

Which is basically the plan we've been following over the last 3 years with the Reimagining Rugby League program overseen by IMG. And as SL viewing figures, social media reach and attendances show, things are - slowly - on the up. So we just need to keep going, not rip things up and start again. Indeed, despite all the stupid shenanigans with the RFL this year, it's notable that those now in charge aren't really changing the path we're on. The only major failure over the last 3 years was, ironically, on the pitch: the Ashes shambles. It was set up so well to reach parts of the public we don't normally touch, but sadly the team blew it. A real opportunity lost.

When does our current TV deal run up to again? End of 2026?

if the council agrees a rental deal, I don't see why not. And thus far the council have given a lot of supportive noises on this point, so we'll see if they follow through. Might only be for a year or two at discounted rates.

Far more baffling is why the fixture release went ahead when everyone knew today was coming, and this was a likely outcome. Unless the RFL have been briefed on concrete plans for a phoenix club.

I was thinking of ticket revenues, but good question, I'll try and find out.

Indeed. It might make more profit than 2021 (or not a loss, it's still not clear) but 2021 will knock it out of the park in terms of revenue generation. We've swung too far the other way.

Yep, the groups B and C are actually just a scheduling tool, not real groups. But I guess the problem is group A IS a real group. Since the Champions League changes I've become a convert to a Swiss system schedule, it works well. But we've one normal group, and one Swiss system group, and even UEFA wouldn't try to pull that one off! There's lots of things to quibble about - my personal is an England game being played on a Friday - but at least come next year, we know we're getting a month of internationals which should come to a fitting conclusion in the final. Now, can we get on with sacking Shaun Wane or it's all moot for England.

My understanding is that it's not that SL clubs have 2 votes, it's that SL clubs combined have equal voting weight to Championship/L1 combined. In the past that's meant each SL club "effectively" had roughly 2 votes compared to 1 for each lower tier club. But with SL expanding and Ch/L1 contracting that actually dilutes the power of the very biggest clubs: previously the "Big 6" controlled around 25% of the votes on the RFL council, now it's less. Where does that lead? I agree that if there's no breakthrough in the next TV deal, expect to see the biggest clubs exploring a breakaway again, perhaps with the NRL.

Easy to say but very hard to do. France and Wales are not going to be strong enough to play more than a single test vs England here and there for the foreseeable future, so England's schedule for the next decade is going to be bound up with the Pacific nations one way or another.

It's a tough one. If we're sticking with the view that international rugby is crucial for growing the game's profile, we have to decide whether a home series Vs Samoa or Tonga, or England joining a 4 Nations down under, will do more for the game in the UK. As an existing RL fan I'd love to see the latter, but I worry that the early kick off times mean even fewer of the general public than normal would know it was happening. So probably staying at home is best for the next couple of cycles.

UK rugby league of course has some serious image issues, but don't the Rhinos have a very lucrative corporate operation? Clearly lots of other businesses don't have a problem sponsoring Leeds and inviting people into their boxes so think it's a little bit more nuanced than no-one wanting to associate with RL. Would be good to know what those clients' specific issues were.

By that do you mean that the viewing figures were lower because there wasn't a string of games vs clubs before and in between the tests? I'd be inclined to think that wouldn't have done much to pique the interest of the wider public and the regular rugby league fanbase was already on board. Long tours are another casualty of modern sport, union and cricket also don't do them now, and not sure if they did it would add much to their TV figures either. Tour games are for the hard core, not the broader audience.

The more I think about it, the more I feel the Ashes tour is akin to bringing back GB in 2019. A great sporting brand in its time, but once you let it dwindle, the world moves on. And I say that as someone who's loved the series, despite the results, as have many rugby league fans. But is it going to have the wider promotional effect that we want? I suspect not.

They don't deliberately lose in the sense of dropping the ball on purpose or deciding not to tackle. But "tanking" absolutely does happen every year, where bad teams trade players, put in backups and project players, and try new formations with an eye on the future, even though it means losing even more games. Just this week the awful Jets traded away two of their best players for draft picks in future years. The NBA had to introduce a draft lottery because tanking got so bad, so now finishing with the worst record doesn't guarantee you the first pick. To an extent this happens in all sports, including Superleague at times, in situations where there isn't a risk of relegation. It isn't always a bad thing, especially when you're giving a chance to up and coming players. So it's perfectly reasonable to expect this to happen in the Championship too. The issue with the championship structure is that the incentive to (legally) tank dwarfs that in other sports. With over 80% of the schedule determined by where you finish the previous season - 4 times more than the NFL - and no risk of relegation, it's a given that championship teams will start making squad and matchday decisions with an eye on next season's schedule. (Realtedly, the transfer deadline for the American sports leagues is around the half way point of the season, much earlier than ours, specifically to limit the tanking effect, so the Championship may want to consider something similar).

I think that's a bit of a stretch Martyn. In the NFL only 3 of 17 games - 18% - are based on performance, the rest are annual geographic division games, or a set rotation that goes back decades. That means you can repeat the format each year without any problems. This championship system allocates 20 of 24 games on the basis of prior year performance. On one level I don't mind it for this year as the best team will eventually come out in the wash. The big problem though is that it only works for one year - because poor teams will be artificially higher in year two, and face a much tougher schedule. Basically we've just put off the wallopings for a year.