Adelaide Tiger

So what do you think the options would be?

Yes, IMG is ‘going in a different direction’ and I welcomed and have supported IMG’s involvement and I hope that they fulfil their 12 year agreement irrespective of whether the NRL is involved or not. If you feel that my wording of ‘different direction’ is not appropriate, then I will say ‘or look at alternative options’. Is that better?

Where did I say a choice must be made now? Obviously a choice can only be made when all information is available. Then, in my view, you are at a stage when it is a simple choice between retaining the status quo or having the NRL involved in some form.

Dave T. The figures you quote are obviously based on existing figures. Over the last 10/20 years those averages of SL clubs and Toulouse have remained relatively static. Is that acceptable, or even sustainable, for the next 10/20 years? Current finances for the game, and clubs, are close to rock bottom. The clubs know this, that’s why they support a Strategic Review. How will such a Review lead to a substantial increase of attendances, sponsorship or TV income if all that the Review offers is retaining the status quo? So, would an NRL intervention lead to the selected teams increasing their attendances, sponsorship and TV income? Quite simply we do not know. But, there would be no doubt that the NRL would put financial and physical resources into promoting and marketing the sport at a level way, way beyond what the RFL/SL can do currently. And, do so in non-traditional RL areas such, as you say, Cardiff or Newcastle. So IMHO it’s a simple choice. Stay as we and accept RL as a minority sport that struggles for growth and income or go in a different direction.

Yep, just like back in the UK. When I worked in Local Govt I could not name or provide a quote attributed to a Local Councillor or MP when issuing a Project update to the local press in the run up to Local or National Elections.

Nurse, Nurse, he is out of bed again!

So, just so I understand your comment, you are actually stating that someone born in England cannot play for England?

Re: a personal memory from the first test of the 2003 series at Wigan. A young lad straight out of university joined our small team at Wakefield Council. He did not follow any sport and did not know anything about Rugby League. But we persuaded him to go with 3 of us to the first test. Due to an horrendous accident on the M62 we got into the Wigan ground moments before kick off, only to see Morley sent off. The 3 of us screamed blue murder at Morley whilst the young lad just sat there. Australia scored first, and we booed, then the ground erupted when Carney scored in the corner. A few minutes later the young lad said politely ‘Excuse me, can I ask you a question?’. Thinking it was going to be about something technical about the game, I said ‘Sure, what is it’. He replied ‘Which team is Great Britain?’. This lad is now an high ranking Council Official with Leeds City Council so hopefully knowledge of RL might have ever so slightly improved.

Perhaps IMG could have helped him prepare a more mature statement ……

I am now reading Fermi’s Paradox ‘Cosmology and Life’ by Michael Bodin. The first three Chapters proved a little bit difficult to comprehend but as a lad that went to Airedale High School in Cas and left with 4 ‘O’ Levels, I am pretty chuffed that I have spotted around half a dozen spelling mistakes so far!

Has it? By whom? If it has been officially debunked on this site I have missed the post.

Apologies OldRedEyes for just highlighting this sentence from your post relating to the reported NRL proposal for a 10 team league. But your comment is also extremely relevant to the current Strategic Review that might jettison Catalans and Toulouse which some one here clearly support.

MJM, according to an article on the NRL website dated 7 April, 2025 the Western Australian Premier Roger Cook was reportedly preparing to invest $300 million into a WA NRL franchise. Apparently, the offer was well below the NRL’s expectations!!!!!!! So, it appears that further negotiations are needed.

Firstly, I have not read all 81 pages, so I cannot comment on your question that others believe that Beaumont has purposefully ‘sabotaged the sport and in doing so damage his club’. IMHO, there are two potential outcomes to your comment: 1. In my initial response on Page 76 to a prior post from you, I had already addressed the point that as Beaumont is one of the vocal advocates for the Strategic Review he obviously believes that it guarantees Leigh a place in SL for the foreseeable future. So he believes that he is acting in a protectionist manner to safeguard the future of his club. 2. However, if the proposals from the Strategic Review are implemented and do not provide a satisfactory return, or heaven forbid, lead to a further reduction in the TV income then the Review could in fact do damage to all clubs, including Leigh. So he would indeed be doing damage to his club. Only time will tell.

Harry. I do not believe that I have ever criticised Beaumont for what he has achieved with the club - however, I have criticised some of his rants when he has acted like a spoiled baby - and I cannot question his passion and commitment to the club. And, some of his ‘left field’ ideas have been a success at club level. To me, Beaumont is a ‘disruptor’ and in some cases a disruptor can be a breath of fresh air and change the dynamics of the way an organisation operates in a positive way. But, Beaumont, like most other owners of RL clubs, are people who been successful in business and have been able to change the strategic direction of their business whenever they want. However, that approach is anathema to sport where a vision needs to be agreed, implemented and given time to gauge its success. History in RL shows that whatever this Strategic Review proposes there will be another Review in 3 or 4 years time if there is no immediate success. That is not the way to run a sporting organisation.