RP London

That is all fair comment as well.

last sentence is very true.. and is a big issue IMHO. I have criticised often the leadership for being very hidden and quiet. Wood was rarely that and, again, he is out in front of the cameras talking. I wish they weren't quite so much the "politician" in that they don't answer questions properly but that seems to be the way of things now in front of journalists. I hope he can stay independent of the cabal and that he can give the strong leadership we need and that has arguably been lacking for some time. As with many others on here, its not him that I have an issue with its the way the organisation/select few have done this, how they have gone against their own governance rules and against the strategic documents they have put out. I don't mind changing strategies (although let them bed in first and see if they are working) but to go against the "values" and "governance" that is laid out within the document, and especially to go against your articles of association, is IMHO disgraceful.

arguably before this coup we had one who could have lead a recruitment for the next if they really needed it.

absolutely talk the game up 100% talk it up, but use real facts and figures, use real statistics, use proper strategy. SMART targets are by their very nature attainable.. this idea 40+k will part with £40 per month is not attainable, it also (as has been mentioned) does not take into account the cost of setting things up etc. SKY and DAZN know this so the figures are pointless and actually it will underline negatives which is the exact opposite to what you are wanting them to do.

They wont take negotiations seriously if the maths that has been mentioned is used. It has so many holes in it. There are plenty of times I have sat in meetings with buyers who have tried things on like "I can get it from xyz for £abc" which I know to be false as we know the cost of the raw materials etc and I simply say, if you can get it for that you should absolutely take that offer no negotiation just take their offer. The conversation quickly spins back round because they are lying but all it does is make my position stronger and I normally come out with a better deal than I thought I would. As soon as you come up with something that is patently rubbish you weaken your position significantly.

This is exactly the same for me.. I can justify the expenditure because of the other sports that I watch a lot of.. that expenditure just for RL is an absolute no, especially becuase I also enjoy watching the other sports so would keep sky too. If asked in a survey I would say RL is my reason for having it to prove the importance of it to SKY

This was the thing with IMG, take your time and build the right foundations... Or we could just build super league on sand AGAIN and assume this time will be different... (Like the bible or not it was written thousands of years ago and it's never been proven wrong on this one!!!)

Or the multitude of Thursday games we have, like every week... Game Thursday couple Friday couple Saturday rest Sunday...

Not everything should be tub thumping... You need some just "general content" stuff too.. keep things ticking over without ramming it in your face... Agree the music could be better

first paragraph: Sport England have warned they would not hesitate to take action if the Rugby Football League fails to reach the standards set by its Code for Sports Governance following Nigel Wood’s return to the governing body. in the strategy document it specifically talks about holding to these standards, it would appear the RFL is incapable of keeping to their own promises... the fact they are keeping such a close eye on them means they are either already over but capable of bringing it back or they are very very close to it.. c'mon RFL just keep to what you say you will do, you could have still done half of this stuff but just in a way that keeps to your own and Sport England's rules!

very very well put.

Perhaps, you know with the intricate knowledge of the club the owner has, he didnt have the same reading of the situation that you have come up with without said knowledge. Perhaps also his understanding of the risk was superior in that he understood that that "Had they" was not a sufficient enough of a guarantee as to risk the outlay. His money, his choice, his club and as the Butterfly Effect would be in force as soon as he did any slight deviation from what happened, NONE of us can say whether him doing this would have resulted in promotion and staying up (and therefore these rewards), no promotion (the death of the club arguably) or promotion but not staying up and the myriad of consequences that that holds. What is for 100% sure is that P&R raises the risk profile of these decisions...

I assume the AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement standard is just something that has passed all these people by in their day to day working lives... not like getting someone in from the outside would be useful in these types of matters where companies are moving forwards leaps and bounds because these things are now expected of them!

problem is a lot of that work would be on the back of the clubs getting themselves into a position to maximise deals and exposure, to have fit for purpose stadiums, to have good advertising options... basically to be of a quality to be able to sell... if the other parts of the grading criteria disappear then you are basically tying one hand behind IMGs back.

its bizarre... yet I've just been on the RFL website and looked at careers and they have a vacancy for a Technology assistant at £22-£24.5k a year... as a business we outsource all our IT stuff and phone so that we can move quickly if software /hardware changes, can use the expertise etc etc we pay about £4.5k for this. The entire job description is what this company offers us. Now granted they will have more computers than we do etc but they would get a better service that doesn't take holidays, that has a proper expert on everything rather than one person who cannot be that, and they would get it cheaper...

just cropped to this bit.... are they doing it for free??? NEDs normally get paid and I hope they are becuase that would be the professional way to work, these people have expertise and we need it and we need to pay for it so that we encourage the next people and the next and also so that we demand x amount of their time as we are paying for it. It is a better looking board but the way we have got there concerns me in that this board could go the same way tomorrow, the RFL have hardly shown that they are stable in all of this.

it does also go on to say it is Player Centric and Fan Focussed so I probably should have known that there was a hidden line disclaimer that it was real somewhere!

but the RFL values as stated on documentation are: United, Professional, Excellent, Respect surely this will all be handled in a professionally excellent manner with respect as the game is united....

exactly this... how can you plan if you have no idea what the future is going to hold and even when they make that decision how long with that last for before someone decides its not for them and has another coup.. even the rules of the organisation are not kept to!

100% the RFL should be doing that, it is the sensible way to go, clubs that are interested but "not quite there" could be got "there" with some advice and help therefore giving you 2 nice new clubs to look at and start to expand the game. However, they are too busy ignoring their own governance laws and strategic plan to actually do this.. The way the clubs were treated around the announcements etc I would not be surprised if they have no interest in applying at all..

Just to add on the risk side.. This season IMHO has shown good honest businessmen exactly why RL is not a place to invest their money at the moment. A good sensible long term strategic plan has just been ripped up and thrown in the bin at the whim of one or two owners.. Whether you like the plan or not the fact it is there means people started to invest in it etc. If that is ripped up and you go straight back to purely on the field basis then your clubs strategic plan has just been thrown out of the window, investments made need to be re though out, plans changed, squad structures changed etc etc etc.. why oh why would you want to put money into a sport that will do that, I cannot think of any other sport that would be saying "we are not stable, we do not give you thought out strategies to plan to". The strategic document on the website https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/RFL Strategic Report 2021 Final.pdf says some great stuff but with the actions of the few it has been shown to be utterly pointless (even the values "United, Professional, Excellent, Respect" are not kept to ffs) From its bit on governance "Regulate across all tiers with independence, transparency and integrity, and in line with sector best practice (including in relation to medical standards." anyone want to say they are keeping to that?? putting money into this great sport at the moment is madness, not sense not something to respect but madness.

The key risk within P&R... spend on one or two more players that can "take you over the edge"... within 1 week one or both is injured for 2-3 key matches or for the season... money wasted.. club gone.. The Risk profile is totally different to normal business decisions (its why I felt that IMG and the way it was structured would encourage investment into the clubs). Some owners see that if they dont go hard then the club is basically done anyway and its a one off go at it (success or bust) some owners see that the club can still be "happy" and "Sustainable" at the level but they would prefer to be a level higher.. all of these things affect the risk profile and risk appetite. Its very easy to spend someone else's money.. and we see that in all walks of life. He chose the long term future of the club over the short term risk. They could have gone up, made some bad signings due to bad luck rather than anything else and they would have been straight back down and not "reaping the benefits" at all.. it isnt a simple calculation as it has many many variables, no matter how simple people want to make it.

But Chris it does mean we cannot discuss it and have a view, didnt you notice that once the vote on IMG's involvement happened it was universally accepted... oh hang on.. something about "you can change your mind" was mentioned wasnt it, and that would be the adult way of acting as everyone is entitled to change their mind and reflect.. and that who in their life had not made a decision they would go on to regret and therefore look to change this..

sadly its on the side that is always face down on the floor!

Wales is one we should be looking at in the next year or so with the issues and potential dropping of 1 or 2 regions from their professional RU circuit.. when i say looking at i do simply mean that, from the outside simply a smaller salary cap and smaller squad sizes can mean running at a lower budget, obviously the counter is a smaller profile will mean potentially smaller sponsorship etc, but there may be other things that stop this being viable. However, we have a year or so before this happens in Union so a year or so to investigate and build up if we decided to go with it but we should be aware that this could, and I massivly emphasis COULD, be a gift horse and one of those turning points like the 1995 world cup in wales or the 2009 iteration for Bristol where we could look back on it and think "what if" down the line. edit: and I am not talking simply about dropping a SL team into the region (although that might be a way to go) it could just be youth set ups, it could be an academy with on the road games being played in the regions dropped etc etc.. all sorts on the table.