RP London

The last bit is a given really by the articles of association https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/201202_RevisedArticlesofAssociation_final.pdf (article 45 onwards) the chair is elected as per any other Non Exec Director. These are appointed by the RL Council... therefore why are the clubs involved in this? this breaks the articles of association (I am not shocked by this BTW).. If any other business acted like this they would be in trouble.

why is it only super league get to vote on the chairman of the RFL?

I would assume if its about a grievance process it would be the HR agency they employ, as cannot imagine they have any staff left to actually have an HR department, then again they probably haven't paid the bill for the agency so yep could be interesting! Maybe the meeting with the RFL is actually going to happen first so they can actually understand what a grievance process is... then again the RFL don't seem to understand their own governance rules so, again, this could be interesting!

So just SL owners should have a say in the way the RFL is run... right got it.. and your done with the thread... excellent got it.

I can see it now... sorry couldnt resist

Just as an example one of the lads I've been coaching for a while at the local union club, and who played league when we set up a summer league team for a few years (see Harry still doing my bit so surely allowed an opinion).. has, this year, signed with Wakefield Academy, born and bred in Sheffield but playing there now, 3-4 other players from the club were asked to go but they were doing a-levels and planning to go to uni so turned it down. However, if there had been more emphasis on this with a better set up in the area, more opportunity, rather than just a couple of ex league players who were coaching at the club (and a DoR who was ex league) who thought it was a good way to get the kids involved and try the game (and keep takings over the bar in the summer etc) then these players could have got into the system earlier. Plus how many just in our club are going through who would fit the mould perfectly. Thats 1 club, 1 club ffs! If the RFL want to get this right they need to do more in expansion areas, there are loads of kids who will end up playing RU who are better suited to RL but really really do not have the chance to even give the game a try because there is nothing in the area..

oh the utter irony of the bit in bold.. I am sure you know this about everyone on this board!

He's trying to say "you don't get involved therefore you're not allowed an opinion" without knowing personal circumstances, general experience or knowledge via other sources. It's par for the course TBF

If you feel insulted by it then why do people think it's ok to denigrate the exact same people doing a much harder job, with much less, in expansion areas... People like me who have spent a lot of time in community clubs in expansion areas often get a "what do you know" attitude on this forum.. or a "how many games do you go to" "how many people so you speak to about this on a regular basis".. and it's all from "heartland fans"... Wonder why people stop bothering??? I don't.

It's because they assume just because you aren't actively involved at a high level with a club you cannot possibly know better, even if you may be an expert in your field (one they could desperately do with getting experts involved from).. and that can be seen with their view of IMG too... Almost a "what can you possibly know".. we'll we've done pretty much the same with xyz.. ah yes but that wasn't rugby league.. Same in many places... Business need outside influence and outside looking people to bring the best from the outside as well as develop what you can now see (by looking outwards) is your strength and unique propositions.

interestingly in the post telling us all how someone else should have spent their money without knowing their full circumstances there were 2 really important words.. Calculated Risk. The person whose money it was calculated the risk not to be enough to take and that really should tell us everything we need to know. What I would find interesting was if he had all his money back, and was about to go in and invest again with the idea that off the field investment is perhaps more important in terms of Super League places etc would that risk calculation change. ie he would spend the same but on the off field and therefore have a better club, a place in super league (or if not a more sustainable club), and now be reaping the reward. IMHO after dealing in risk for many years the risk profile is less as it is at the moment than it was with P&R due to the number of variables that can occur "on the pitch".

DP

Dont think its that far off what is happening at Salford to be honest... none payment of wages, people supposedly about to buy the club etc... but still very cloak and dagger and thats with journalists that understand how to do their job.

Just look at the utter debacle at Sheffield Wednesday at the moment...

No, they wouldn't bring him, their own governance rules say.... oh hang on... oops

This is exactly why I would task each team with an expansion area that is theirs and theirs alone. BUT they have to put in x amount of money to develop it, play at least one home game in that area too. build an academy which then feeds into their normal "local" academy. Really task them with it. From that you see a tie into people supporting that super league team from that area (having their own one is not necessarily relevant as we can see in people supporting teams from all over the place in other sports). But developing, eventually, a league one/champ club is the long term goal, but each area will develop that over different timescales and that is fine. The ONLY way these clubs will buy in is if you force them too, the only way we can spread the money there is if we get the clubs to buy in. The RFL dont have a pot to urinate in at the moment, but this can benefit the clubs as they are forced to start finding and bringing through talent from new areas and a nice virtuous circle can then start.. and it will. But without forcing them to do it the clubs are unlikely to "risk" cash that could be spent on a nice pie and pea supper.

probably my biggest bug bear when expansion is spoken about is "we've done it before and it hasn't worked there." When have we ever "done it" anywhere properly?!? just dropping a team into the league and hoping to god it will work is not "doing it"... The only time I have seen anywhere near "doing it" was when there were DOs around London and it was working... losing those lost a lot of momentum in the junior/community game.. and even then I wouldnt say that was "doing it" really.

funny you should mention this.. ChatGPT recons Bristol Brigands

Their bill is due as soon as the funds are available.. ie they need to pay now... but the next meeting to wind them up ie final due date, is September.. They're not wasting their time waiting simply a month to then go through the same rigmarole again they give it a little bit of time before they want another serious chat, but they still want their money soonest.

Its like walking into Currys and getting annoyed you cant get root vegetables. Then moaning to everyone that Currys is a rubbish shop.

To be fair Rhinos might be accurate as most have got the horn... its a bit hot for a coat but I'll grab mine anyway

For me, if I became Lord of the RFL, I'd carve the country (big population centres) up into 12 or 14 (whatever big Nige decides) pieces and hand them to each club. It would be their responsibility to develop the area. Get kids playing with camps and they would come under the clubs banner. The "new areas" can play each other as development regions. Best kids would automatically start to be picked up by the clubs that run the areas and can end up in their academies early on with the hope they may actually end up running 2 academies one in the heartland and one in the development area. Therefore bringing juniors through in those areas. Maybe even looking at the possibility of a "league one" club springing up there int he future that can be used as a "development team" for the super league club. The clubs will fall into line if they can see that they can actually benefit massivly from it, have a salary cap exemption for players coming through that pathway etc. They can invest in it and they have sole usage of those players up until a certain age, 21 when they are free to move to another club like any other player (or the club decide to release them younger and they can sign for another academy). some clubs are already doing some of this with scouting in these regions and helping development IIRC and some players are coming through but they could do more and all clubs should be doing this.

Yep thats something I cannot get my head around either. As you say someone may have stood too it themselves or (and this is highly unlikely and I am sure would make not a jot of difference to the loan company) there is a memorandum of understanding that is very watertight on purchase of something like the land and they have some recourse to that.. but I cannot see that being very likely.. its all very odd.

The only way I can make it "make sense" in my head is that HMRC will wind them up before the end of the season. The loan company will not. That buys them extra time to find more funding if they are massivly short, sell assets to fund it (other parts of their "group") or sell land if they have managed to buy any off the council, or buy the land off the council at which point they can then mortgage that at a better rate and pay off the bridging loan. None of those options really make much sense, they are flawed and illogical and some may not actually work anyway but I am really struggling to get any further than those.

Wakefield Trinity Wildcats Hull Sharks There's been some doozies.. Could go with London Lickspittles.. would show to the established clubs they are prepared to bow and scrape to their superiors which will go down well with those "in power".