RFL.

[Dave T]

We are always going to be restricted by our lack of competition in the northern hemisphere until that improves. However, with SOO having a standalone weekend from 2018, meaning a break from NRL fixtures, no reason we can't have a mid-season test against NZ. It's already been confirmed that the Pacific Nations will play each other to fill gaps in the TV schedule outside of the Origin test. June is a great time as outside the football and RU seasons so could get us on the back pages. If we are playing in the Southern Hemisphere that autumn gives us a chance to have a home game that year, when we should go for a big Olympic stadium style fixture. Given the number of English players in NRL, would be easy to put a strong team out down there the following year without expecting too much domestic disruption i.e. Just send Wigan and Leeds players, who could play each other following week so fair jetlag impact.

We are never going to be football or RU, but a regular calendar and a strongly performing England team can go a long way toward increasing exposure and sponsorship. Baby steps maybe but things do seem to be falling into place, especially with Australia also talking about a mid-season interntional window

RLIF strategy paper suggested a Confed Cup competition every 4 years in between World Cup, with a strong intimation towards test series in other 2 years, so I would assume a test series in UK in 2018 followed by a new competition 2019. Potentially attractive to a sponsor

The reality is though that we are in control of our own destiny. If we were serious about this, we could tour mid-season. We could easily take a 24 man squad out of SL and go to Oz/NZ in June. We could play in PNG and/or the Pacific, before the Aussies or Kiwis. 

 

It takes the Aussies and/or Kiwis to get on board, but we really need to be learning from other sports that have strong international seasons - they all take top players out of their regular seasons for the benefit of the game.

 

As a Wire fan, if I went to games each week I would have no issue whatsoever with watching Wire without Hill, Clark and Ratchford for a couple of weeks - it would give some of the younger lads a run - and I would get the bonus of watching the England Test team on tv that morning too!

 

What we sometimes forget in RL is that we control our own destiny on things like this.

[Northern Eel]

1. Almost helped kill off London Broncos by forcing them to have the same number of Federation quota players as other clubs while at the same time cutting the number of development officers.

There are some who would argue that the problem was less about the number of DOs in London and the South, rather the number who were doing a good job. Sport England funding began to disappear partly when the KPIs were not being met, I think. (And am happy to stand corrected).

[JoneslessBishop]

I admire your ambition Dave, but two barriers. Firstly the RFL don't decide the interntional calendar. The RLIF do (albeit with Wood on the board). RL fans have long bemoaned lack of structure and that Interntionals seems ad hoc, hence the drive for the RLIF to provide direction. If they can provide that window, then great, but it's not the RFLs gift to so so. Secondly, we need someone to play during a test series. Australia are always suggesting too many games, so shoe horning more games won't be popular and given NRL teams already release players for Origin, for Interntionals as well?

Whilst your comment is by no means scathing criticism of the RFL, given they are the point of this thread, I think it's a little indicative of people's views that they are often to blame for everything, when at times they have had to do too much with too few resources. At least with ambition the RLIF are showing, expansion, interntional scheduling, player development outside England etc us under theirr remit, and the RFL can ocus its resources on a developing players and the English competitions and thus the England team.

I'd love there to be mid-season tests, and it's great a window has been discussed down under and Mal Meninga has gone public on it, but 1 NRL test during the SOO NRL break would be a great start. I think we have every right to be frustrated by history as RL fans, but I really think the governing bodies are now starting to take us in the right direction

[Dave T]

I admire your ambition Dave, but two barriers. Firstly the RFL don't decide the interntional calendar. The RLIF do (albeit with Wood on the board). RL fans have long bemoaned lack of structure and that Interntionals seems ad hoc, hence the drive for the RLIF to provide direction. If they can provide that window, then great, but it's not the RFLs gift to so so. Secondly, we need someone to play during a test series. Australia are always suggesting too many games, so shoe horning more games won't be popular and given NRL teams already release players for Origin, for Interntionals as well?

Whilst your comment is by no means scathing criticism of the RFL, given they are the point of this thread, I think it's a little indicative of people's views that they are often to blame for everything, when at times they have had to do too much with too few resources. At least with ambition the RLIF are showing, expansion, interntional scheduling, player development outside England etc us under theirr remit, and the RFL can ocus its resources on a developing players and the English competitions and thus the England team.

I'd love there to be mid-season tests, and it's great a window has been discussed down under and Mal Meninga has gone public on it, but 1 NRL test during the SOO NRL break would be a great start. I think we have every right to be frustrated by history as RL fans, but I really think the governing bodies are now starting to take us in the right direction

i get that it is difficult, but PNG are there, so are France, both without NRL influence. The other thing is we need to be lobbying for the rlif to enforce international windows, space can be found where people genuinely want it to.

We (major nations) are playing less internationals than ever outside of World Cups.

[jpmc]

There are some who would argue that the problem was less about the number of DOs in London and the South, rather the number who were doing a good job. Sport England funding began to disappear partly when the KPIs were not being met, I think. (And am happy to stand corrected).

So basically for every new participant in RL in the south we lost two in the North so Sport England cut the funding?

[Northern Eel]

So basically for every new participant in RL in the south we lost two in the North so Sport England cut the funding?

No, I don't think so. The targets applied to the staff in their specific regions and roles as I understand it. Do you know different? I'm perfectly happy to be corrected.

[JohnM]

http://www.stlyrics.com/songs/l/lizaminnelli20267/moneymoney538511.html

[jpmc]

No, I don't think so. The targets applied to the staff in their specific regions and roles as I understand it. Do you know different? I'm perfectly happy to be corrected.

I dont no noffink,except the rfl seem to have remembered in the last 3yrs the areas of the country were its strongest,and i seem to remember reading recently that numbers of participants in the sport is on the rise

[Barnaby Reddin]

http://www.stlyrics.com/songs/l/lizaminnelli20267/moneymoney538511.html

Indeed it does. We have 58,000 fans who attend games every week over 2 divisions for 30 weeks of the year, a TV audience of 300k a week and yet we can't attract sponsors......whose fault is that? The RFL bigwigs are paid handsomely yet deliver very little growth in any area of the game fiscal or otherwise. Put 50% of their salary on a commission/KPI system and then you'd see their worth.

[The Parksider]

We have 58,000 fans who attend games every week

 

a TV audience of 300k a week

 

yet we can't attract sponsors......whose fault is that? 

 

Clearly the small size of the game.

 

You've said it yourself.

 

One top soccer club can attract 58,000.

 

One small city/big town is 300K.

 

We attract the size of sponsors in line with the limited audience we offer.

 

This is just RFL bashing...........

[The Parksider]

No, I don't think so. The targets applied to the staff in their specific regions and roles as I understand it. Do you know different? I'm perfectly happy to be corrected.

 

That aside RL participation is significantly up on Touch and Tag rugby League.

 

That's the headline with the "Grass roots" 13 a side game showing some increase.

 

But please let's deal with reality, contact RL isn't doing well nor is RU hence the RFL have tried to get people playing with non contact versions. The 13 a side game includes that with "Masters".

 

If full contact RL is up at all then how much is it "up" and how does it compare with the early 2,000's.

Still well down on what used to be.

 

Before the accusations of "negative" & "downer", any business has to work on the realities.....

[The Parksider]

There's Woods's version and the there is reality.

 

OK

 

Guilty M'Lud.....

[JoneslessBishop]

I agree more games would be better Dave but they need to be meaningful to attract interest and sponsors, and if games are blow outs it harms the credibility of interntional RL. Most of the PNG Players play in the Queensland Cup for PNG Hunters, so wouldn't be available to travel, whilst France have typically been awful mid-season due to Catalan pull outs, which we even saw end of season last year.

World Cups/ Confed Cups will give tier 2 nations big games every 2 years, whilst If England have a regular mid-season NZ test and either a test series or bigger tournaments (than the successful 4 Nations format) at the end of the season, then we have a very much improved calendar.

[Dave T]

I agree more games would be better Dave but they need to be meaningful to attract interest and sponsors, and if games are blow outs it harms the credibility of interntional RL. Most of the PNG Players play in the Queensland Cup for PNG Hunters, so wouldn't be available to travel, whilst France have typically been awful mid-season due to Catalan pull outs, which we even saw end of season last year.

World Cups/ Confed Cups will give tier 2 nations big games every 2 years, whilst If England have a regular mid-season NZ test and either a test series or bigger tournaments (than the successful 4 Nations format) at the end of the season, then we have a very much improved calendar.

Are there any details of the Confed cup yet? I'll be interested to see what is planned, but as usual there is nothing confirmed.

 

A quick google search shows a comment that they are still wondering whether this second event should be a 9's tournament ffs.

 

It is a scandal that in 2014 England played only three games, all on the other side of the world.

In 2015 New Zealand - the world number 1's played no games in New Zealand. I'm not sure if they will in 2016 either.

In 2015 Australia played 1 Test match all year.

PNG haven't played a proper Test since 2013. This is a country where RL is the national sport!

 

I'm sorry, but the RLWC is masking some quite serious issues here, and the RFL is as much a part of that as anyone.

[GeordieSaint]

Are there any details of the Confed cup yet? I'll be interested to see what is planned, but as usual there is nothing confirmed.

 

A quick google search shows a comment that they are still wondering whether this second event should be a 9's tournament ffs.

 

It is a scandal that in 2014 England played only three games, all on the other side of the world.

In 2015 New Zealand - the world number 1's played no games in New Zealand. I'm not sure if they will in 2016 either.

In 2015 Australia played 1 Test match all year.

PNG haven't played a proper Test since 2013. This is a country where RL is the national sport!

 

I'm sorry, but the RLWC is masking some quite serious issues here, and the RFL is as much a part of that as anyone.

 

According to 'spud, it'll be an 8-team Confed Cup playing 13-a-side; the 9s will be pre-season in the years not covered by the RLWC or Confed Cup e.g. 2018 (tours at the end) and 2020 (tours) etc. Good in theory but as you allude to, it is only theory at present.

[JoneslessBishop]

The RLIF have been pretty bold in their strategy paper and I think they should be applauded for that. We are 4 years away from the first Confed Cup so to expect everything to be confirmed yet is unfair. PNG played Tonga last year if my memory serves me correctly. Pacific Nations teams will play each other every year during the NRL SOO break.

National federations will be free to organize tours outside of World Cup/ Confed Cup years. Whether Oz chose to rest one year is immaterial to England's commercial proposition, as a cash strapped NZ will always fill the void, as we saw with great success last year.

So over a four year cycle England have a World Cup, a NZ series, a Confed Cup, and an Oz series, plus potential for a mid-season test with NZ, that is as compelling a case for broadcast and sponsorship deals as we have had for decades.

The RFL are strong backers of the RLIF, with Wood appointing their first ever CEO, and the NRL CEO (once appointed) and Shane Richardson is on the board. Every NRL club wanted to play in the World Club Series. The game is moving in an interntional direction.

Plenty of reasons to be positive, unless you don't want to be.

[GeordieSaint]

Do the RLIF charge a levy each year to the NRL and RFL?

[Dave T]

The RLIF have been pretty bold in their strategy paper and I think they should be applauded for that. We are 4 years away from the first Confed Cup so to expect everything to be confirmed yet is unfair. PNG played Tonga last year if my memory serves me correctly. Pacific Nations teams will play each other every year during the NRL SOO break.

National federations will be free to organize tours outside of World Cup/ Confed Cup years. Whether Oz chose to rest one year is immaterial to England's commercial proposition, as a cash strapped NZ will always fill the void, as we saw with great success last year.

 

So over a four year cycle England have a World Cup, a NZ series, a Confed Cup, and an Oz series, plus potential for a mid-season test with NZ, that is as compelling a case for broadcast and sponsorship deals as we have had for decades.

The RFL are strong backers of the RLIF, with Wood appointing their first ever CEO, and the NRL CEO (once appointed) and Shane Richardson is on the board. Every NRL club wanted to play in the World Club Series. The game is moving in an interntional direction.

Plenty of reasons to be positive, unless you don't want to be.

As somebody who has supported international Rugby League extensively, from Ashes games in the '80's, to watching attending World Cup games in '92, '95, 2000, 2008 and 2013 - and seriously considering 2017, I absolutely want to be positive, but a nice presentation doesn't do it for me just yet - although the signs are that things are more professional.

 

The problem that we have is that it will take a rather large change of heart from the main nations to support these plans, if that comes off I will be the first to celebrate, but in reality, the main nations have really gone backwards on this front, despite some outstanding success when they have made any kind of effort.

 

Having just done a search, PNG did play in 2015, they played Fiji on the Gold Coast. That'll do plenty for the development of the game in those countries.

 

We are currently just playing at it. I genuinely hope Collier and Wood are the men to deliver this massive change.

[Barnaby Reddin]

Clearly the small size of the game.

 

You've said it yourself.

 

One top soccer club can attract 58,000.

 

One small city/big town is 300K.

 

We attract the size of sponsors in line with the limited audience we offer.

 

This is just RFL bashing...........

No it isn't.

The game used to attract name sponsors. Engage was worth 750k a year......do you believe First Utility is anything other than loaded towards a Cost Per Acquisition model with a small retainer?

We may have a small audience, but it's a "brand loyal" audience....and 58,000 over 30 weeks or so is a significant opportunity to marketers if pitched correctly.

The NRL deliver an audience in attendance of 119k a week yet attract far bigger names than Foxy Bingo. 

If we aim low, what are we to expect?

 

I regularly "bash" the RFL, but also am pragmatic when it comes to their limitations. The issue of sponsorship and residual income is an area they deserve bashing......Stobart is proof of that!

[MaverickX111]

No it isn't.

The game used to attract name sponsors. Engage was worth 750k a year......do you believe First Utility is anything other than loaded towards a Cost Per Acquisition model with a small retainer?

We may have a small audience, but it's a "brand loyal" audience....and 58,000 over 30 weeks or so is a significant opportunity to marketers if pitched correctly.

The NRL deliver an audience in attendance of 119k a week yet attract far bigger names than Foxy Bingo.

If we aim low, what are we to expect?

I regularly "bash" the RFL, but also am pragmatic when it comes to their limitations. The issue of sponsorship and residual income is an area they deserve bashing......Stobart is proof of that!

You talk utter rubbish

Continually trying to downgrade our sport

[Futtocks]

The NRL deliver an audience in attendance of 119k a week yet attract far bigger names than Foxy Bingo. 

If we aim low, what are we to expect?

In Australia, the NRL is a regular back page (and sometimes front page) sport. The code's profile is so much higher Down Under that comparisons like this are not helpful.

 

In the UK, RL delivers high TV ratings for a pittance, but the sport can't hold Sky to ransom, because the alternatives aren't there yet.

 

Sky know they have SL over a barrel right now, but they will be willing to pay much much more if another major broadcaster starts sniffing around. 

[Dave T]

In Australia, the NRL is a regular back page (and sometimes front page) sport. The code's profile is so much higher Down Under that comparisons like this are not helpful.

In the UK, RL delivers high TV ratings for a pittance, but the sport can't hold Sky to ransom, because the alternatives aren't there yet.

Sky know they have SL over a barrel right now, but they will be willing to pay much much more if another major broadcaster starts sniffing around.

im not sure sky take advantage of sl. My understanding is that the funds are not dissimilar to club ru, maybe even higher, but ru gets more through european and international comps. I dont think our domestic club comp does bad through sky.

[Barnaby Reddin]

You talk utter rubbish

Continually trying to downgrade our sport

Re-read my post......I'm not down on then sport, just many aspects of its governance.

[The Parksider]

 

If we aim low, what are we to expect?

 

I regularly "bash" the RFL, but also am pragmatic when it comes to their limitations. The issue of sponsorship and residual income is an area they deserve bashing......Stobart is proof of that!

 

Mate, you have no idea of the sponsors the RFL's commercial people chase year on year, and you have no idea what their reply is to offers to sponsor Rugby league.

 

That the RFL ended up with a no money Stobart deal doesn't mean for one nano second they didn't ask Britains biggest 1,000 companies to sponsor them.

 

It's as simple as this.

 

Either the big sponsors you crave do not want to know, or the commercial team and their director at the RFL spend all their time in the local pub.

[Barnaby Reddin]

or the commercial team and their director at the RFL spend all their time in the local pub.

Chicken dinner.......we have a winner!