RFL's Strategic Plan

[Dave T]

So in answer to who disagreed with the tv deal he quotes irrelevant things to support his argument.

There really is no point trying to have any kind of discussion on here atm as every half decent tgread is derailed.

[The Parksider]

The RFL Strategic Plan is a current 'live' document. How is it 'old'?

 

It's not "old" fair enough.

 

 So I don't see how you can claim that the strategic plan is "old" when it was only published 15 months ago

 

 

OK it's not that old. But it is 15 months old.

 

So how do you both think the RFL have performed in terms of the last 15 months??

 

Or will this thread go on and on without anyone having a go at that simple question?

[Dave T]

And now he has the cheek to ask the question we have all been discussing all thread.

[The Parksider]

In 2014 Nigel Wood launched the RFL's strategic plan covering the 7 years 2015 - 2021.   The plan set targets covering various key areas of the sport, including playing numbers at amateur level, attendances for the professional game, TV viewing figures and commercial revenue etc etc. 

 

OK but.....

 

It's filed under forget.

 

I can't find it anywhere, it's not to be found on the RFL's own website.

 

Anyone find it? Or copied it when they were announcing it?

[Lowdesert]

Salford (Koukash who condemns the RFL's poor performance, did it again on the radio this last week), Hull (Pearson, who has stated we can dump the new structure in 18 months)  HKR (Hudgell warned the RFL publicly to ensure Solly's replacement must be right for them), Wigan (Lenegan led the rebels against the RFL) and Huddersfield and Warrington whose chairmen are less voiciferous.

 

Live document/dead document/PR guff about what the RFL are going to do, call it what you want.

 

The RFL's real objectives they actively pursued to a conclusion were to:- 

 

1. Get a new improved TV deal to primarily arrest the problem of clubs falling into debt stated to be £68.000,000.

 

It can be argued they did this, it can be argued Hudgells reduction to 12 clubs in SL may have done this, it can be argued there was far more money to be had dealing with BT, it can be argued SKY's ultimatum had the RFL over a barrel.

 

So if anyone wants to engage in that aspect of the RFL's FINANCIAL performance please do so, I'd be interested to hear what they think?

 

2. Rejuvinate the game itself post the expansion/licensing failure in which.......

 

SL crowds pre-licensing 9819 end of licensing 8041

CC crowds pre-licensing 2047 end of licensing 1095

 

This was hardly a good performance, but RFL & Solly gave it their best and introduced a new league structure to arrest the falling attendances.

 

It can be argued that the drain of players to NRL was a factor in the fall, but not sure of what else. It looks like the RFL's performance in turning round the decline in attendances is not too good but maybe someone can make a case for them?

 

My point is a simple one about how the RFL had to sort out the debt crisis and the attendances crisis and they actively did that to a conclusion, so we can now look at how they performed. 

 

How do you think they went?  Anyone else want to pass an opinion about how well the RFL did in what we must admit were difficult circumstances.

 

Six rebel clubs with six smart businessmen at the helm may have said they don't think the RFL did very well, but that goes onto raise the question could THEY have done any better??

So, in answer to the SKY deal - no reply.

In answer to whether the RFL objectives are real or not - no reply was again the answer.

In answer on whether the document was 'old' - "live document, dead document guff"

How can you expect people to engage with you about what you see as the 'real' objectives or the 'Rebels' when the Thread is completely different.

Still in the Sargasso Sea.

[Airlie Bird]

Managed to find a copy of the full plan - see link below.

 

Parksider : in answer to your question how do people feel the RFL has performed over the past 15 months, as far as I'm concerned the lack of transparency makes it difficult to judge.    You quote attendance figures for both SL & the Championship, but I'm not sure where you got these from as I always have difficulty finding any official data on attendances ; same applies to TV viewing figures and the value of various commercial sponsorship deals.  Which is why I'm so keen to see the RFL publish a progress report on the various objectives.

Even if some objectives aren't being met, it doesn't automatically mean that the RFL is performing badly - I think we'd all accept that the game faces a number of headwinds which make life difficult.    In particular, if we compare RL with RU : 

 

- whereas RU gets disproportionately high media coverages, RL's is disproportionately low - which I'm convinced has a knock-on effect on attendances, sponsorship, TV viewing figures etc etc

 

- RU's heartland sits in the triangle formed by London, Bristol & Leicester - a hugely more prosperous area than RL's heartland along the M62 corridor.   

 

http://media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugby%20League%20Strategic%20Plan%202014-2021%20A4%20LS%20LR%20(Digital).pdf

[The Parksider]

Managed to find a copy of the full plan - see link below.

 

Parksider : in answer to your question how do people feel the RFL has performed over the past 15 months, as far as I'm concerned the lack of transparency makes it difficult to judge.    You quote attendance figures for both SL & the Championship, but I'm not sure where you got these from as I always have difficulty finding any official data on attendances ; same applies to TV viewing figures and the value of various commercial sponsorship deals.

 

1.  Which is why I'm so keen to see the RFL publish a progress report on the various objectives.

 

2.Even if some objectives aren't being met, it doesn't automatically mean that the RFL is performing badly

 

- I think we'd all accept that the game faces a number of headwinds which make life difficult.    In particular, if we compare RL with RU : 

 

- whereas RU gets disproportionately high media coverages, RL's is disproportionately low - which I'm convinced has a knock-on effect on attendances, sponsorship, TV viewing figures etc etc

 

- RU's heartland sits in the triangle formed by London, Bristol & Leicester - a hugely more prosperous area than RL's heartland along the M62 corridor.   

 

http://media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugby%20League%20Strategic%20Plan%202014-2021%20A4%20LS%20LR%20(Digital).pdf

 

1. Brilliant work digging that out. It's headed "Where we want to be 2021" rather than "Where we will be 2021" and so straight away I don't see how you could pin anything on them for not achieving it. It reads like a wish list not a set of promises. 

 

2. Indeed I agree that if they publish a document full of hopes and wishes that set very optomistic targets indeed they can always claim that they didn't achieve them because of "difficult headwinds"

 

You actually give the RFL a way out yourself, and so you could not really hold them to account on the strategic plan. They're good at double speak, PR, self promotion etc call it what you will but I don't see any targets set on the basis of "If we don't achieve these we will resign".

 

But as I say if you were looking to make a forthright hard facts assessment of how the RFL have gone so far then six RL chairmen now the majority vote in SL have already done that and they have already condemned the RFL as not coming up to the mark.

 

They have demanded that Solly who resigned maybe before he was pushed according to Lockwood, be replaced by someone more to their liking who will follow their targets.

 

So all I'm saying is targets that the Supeleague clubs wanted the RFL to achieve on the TV deal, sponsorship and improved crowds, albeit not set out as hard and fast figures in any "plan", have not been achieved to those clubs satisfaction. 

 

The strategic plan has clearly been disregarded by the SL clubs, and buried by the RFL (albeit you admirably dug hard and found it) and they set their own criteria for success the RFL did not achieve.

[Oxford]

"So all I'm saying is targets that the Supeleague clubs wanted the RFL to achieve on the TV deal, sponsorship and improved crowds, albeit not set out as hard and fast figures in any "plan", have not been achieved to those clubs satisfaction. 

 

The strategic plan has clearly been disregarded by the SL clubs, and buried by the RFL (albeit you admirably dug hard and found it) and they set their own criteria for success the RFL did not achieve."

 

I'm not sure how you know any of this. I have heard and read lots of hints but nothing of any substance to say this is the case, Parky. For instance I think the chairmen took one look at the amount on offer for the TV deal and snatched their hands off, no matter what was said later and with hindsight. Do you have any quotes from clubs, the three dissatisfied chairmen apart where they have specified rather expressed their general unhappiness?

[The Parksider]

"So all I'm saying is targets that the Supeleague clubs wanted the RFL to achieve on the TV deal, sponsorship and improved crowds, albeit not set out as hard and fast figures in any "plan", have not been achieved to those clubs satisfaction. 

 

I'm not sure how you know any of this. I have heard and read lots of hints but nothing of any substance to say this is the case, Parky. For instance I think the chairmen took one look at the amount on offer for the TV deal and snatched their hands off

 

You may have heard and you may have read lots, but you clearly never read, or you clearly disregarded umpteen times the reports on the situation when the TV deal was offered to the club chairmen, and where they stood on it. I have all the cuttings.

 

What happened was set out in the RL press and I've quoted it all again and again, and explained it again and again yet it doesn't sink in with you. You still conclude all the chairmen just accepted it because it was money to be grabbed at.

 

Maybe you too readily fell for the liar liar it's all made up stuff. 

[Oxford]

You may have heard and you may have read lots, but you clearly never read, or you clearly disregarded umpteen times the reports on the situation when the TV deal was offered to the club chairmen, and where they stood on it. I have all the cuttings.

 

What happened was set out in the RL press and I've quoted it all again and again, and explained it again and again yet it doesn't sink in with you. You still conclude all the chairmen just accepted it because it was money to be grabbed at.

 

Maybe you too readily fell for the liar liar it's all made up stuff. 

No Parky I think you've misunderstood. The reports I read were quite clear in that one thing had a 6-7 vote but not the TV deal.So it's your linking of this to other things where I just see no connection whatsoever! And I can find no substantive proof to general dissatifaction and or a majority ready and willing to take on the RFL. When MK said he was about to insist on a vote of no confidence, other chairmen started to speak I thought you might be right, but nothing came of any of it. This is pretty good evidence that either the support wasn't there, the RFL had the bulk of support or there was very little to the suggestions that this was the case at all.

 

If I thought you were just a deluded liar I wouldn't reply to any of your posts just the same as if I thought you'd gone OTT or were a bit of a keyboard bully. There's a few of those and I don't tend to respond to any of them.

[dhw]

You may have heard and you may have read lots, but you clearly never read, or you clearly disregarded umpteen times the reports on the situation when the TV deal was offered to the club chairmen, and where they stood on it. I have all the cuttings.

 

What happened was set out in the RL press and I've quoted it all again and again, and explained it again and again yet it doesn't sink in with you. You still conclude all the chairmen just accepted it because it was money to be grabbed at.

 

Maybe you too readily fell for the liar liar it's all made up st

You have made bold authoritative statements and invariably when challenged to back it up you have not done so. It is a recurring theme.As for what happened being set out in the RL press that is a fantasy because there would have been discussions and actions that have not been publicised.

[Dave T]

You have made bold authoritative statements and invariably when challenged to back it up you have not done so. It is a recurring theme.As for what happened being set out in the RL press that is a fantasy because there would have been discussions and actions that have not been publicised.

Indeed. I am on ignore, but I am still very interested in this statement of truth from Parky:

 

They represent the clubs and the clubs objectives included a bigger TV contract from BT and a return to P & R?

 

I would love to see evidence that the clubs had an objective to get a bigger TV contract from BT. I would be absolutely stunned, and happy to put my house on the fact that that is blatantly not true, however that is now getting repeated and will be passed off as fact in future threads.

[Oxford]

- whereas RU gets disproportionately high media coverages, RL's is disproportionately low - which I'm convinced has a knock-on effect on attendances, sponsorship, TV viewing figures etc etc

 

- RU's heartland sits in the triangle formed by London, Bristol & Leicester - a hugely more prosperous area than RL's heartland along the M62 corridor.   

 

http://media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugby%20League%20Strategic%20Plan%202014-2021%20A4%20LS%20LR%20(Digital).pdf

The thing is if the strategic plan doesn't specifically reference how it's going to address these issues which are at the heart of all that is needed we can't say how well the plan is going or not. But if they show no understanding that this is the very essence of what needs tackling then we must question their intentions and abilities.

 

I decided to add to this, that the RFL document is thorough and far reaching, it is also as meticulous as documents like this can be. It doesn't address the issues above accept in the most general and loose terms. But none the less it is a good document and worthy of a bit of praise for all sorts of reasons. I have a few quibbles apart from the above but that's all they are.

[dhw]

Key KPIs in the plan were:

- Increasing annual revenue from 118m to 146m per year.

- Increasing spectator numbers from 2.3m to 3.0m per year.

- Increasing TV viewership from 17m to 22m per year.

- Increasing participation from 46K to 66K

Now in terms of working out where we are fairing being honest I can't work out how RL got their base figures. For participation they claim to have 40K Community players, 3.5K Touch and 3K Students to make up the 46K odd base.

When I look at Sports England numbers for RL in 14/15 the figures are around 24.5K for community.

TV audiences I can't see increasing significantly unless there is an increase in content whilst I don't see any evidence either that attendances are growing at a decent level.

All in all, for the second year in of a 5 year plan, things aren't starting well.

The criteria from the RFL and SportEngland from counting participation different. SportEngland figures are based on the Active Participation Surveys, the results from that are extrapolated. RFL figures are based on registered players. Hence the difference int he figures.

[Lowdesert]

The thing is if the strategic plan doesn't specifically reference how it's going to address these issues which are at the heart of all that is needed we can't say how well the plan is going or not. But if they show no understanding that this is the very essence of what needs tackling then we must question their intentions and abilities.

 

I decided to add to this, that the RFL document is thorough and far reaching, it is also as meticulous as documents like this can be. It doesn't address the issues above accept in the most general and loose terms. But none the less it is a good document and worthy of a bit of praise for all sorts of reasons. I have a few quibbles apart from the above but that's all they are.

Yes, agreed to an extent, but this is only the Plan document. Roles, responsibilities, arrangements, check/ hold points, review timetables, audit schedules ( both internal and external), target to date info etc are missing.

Notwithstanding this, an executive summary should, I hope, come with the annual report.

[The Parksider]

You have made bold authoritative statements and invariably when challenged to back it up you have not done so. It is a recurring theme.As for what happened being set out in the RL press that is a fantasy because there would have been discussions and actions that have not been publicised.

 

The bold authoritative statements come from Martyn Sadler, you know the editor of the main RL press who according to many "bold authoritative statements" by several on here knows nothing more than me you and the gatepost.

 

Sadler is a journalist who has contacts, knows insiders and who has information leaked to him yet people who read nothing up, and spout off the top of their heads want to tell me he's just as ignorant of the facts and realities as you and me.

 

If I had to choose again who to believe it will remain Mr. Sadler, Mr. Lockwood and those who seek out the truth and detail of what is happening behind the scenes.

 

But it's not just behind the scenes,much of what I pass on to this site is actual press statements by RFL officials and clubs chairmen yet it is dismissed if it doesn't fit what comes of the top of the usual suspects heads.

 

Let those who disagree with Mr. Sadler "back it up".

 

Let's hear the alleged there "would have been"  discussions and actions then??

 

Back your bold claim up ?? what were they?? who said what to who???

[Lowdesert]

Lol

[Oxford]

The bold authoritative statements come from Martyn Sadler, you know the editor of the main RL press who according to many "bold authoritative statements" by several on here knows nothing more than me you and the gatepost.

 

Sadler is a journalist who has contacts, knows insiders and who has information leaked to him yet people who read nothing up, and spout off the top of their heads want to tell me he's just as ignorant of the facts and realities as you and me.

 

If I had to choose again who to believe it will remain Mr. Sadler, Mr. Lockwood and those who seek out the truth and detail of what is happening behind the scenes.

 

But it's not just behind the scenes,much of what I pass on to this site is actual press statements by RFL officials and clubs chairmen yet it is dismissed if it doesn't fit what comes of the top of the usual suspects heads.

 

Let those who disagree with Mr. Sadler "back it up".

 

Let's hear the alleged there "would have been"  discussions and actions then??

 

Back your bold claim up ?? what were they?? who said what to who???

Mr Sadler and Mr Lockwood having inside people and information does not make them correct or even well informed. We all need to read things with a critical gaze otherwise we might end up believing what we read on the sides of buses and where would that lead us?

 

The truth is people who leak stuff often do so for ill motivated reasons and that means they are not always entirely truthful or to be relied upon. And both the journos you mention, just like the rest of us, have enough agendas and axes to grind to light Blackpool illuminations.

 

And lastly you made the statement that you had the cuttings to show this and if so refer to them, It's easy date, journal, title and writer.

 

Those who simply disagree don't have to back anything up, they're just disagreeing.

 

All the best O.

 

PS have you read the plan?

[Lowdesert]

The bold authoritative statements come from Martyn Sadler, you know the editor of the main RL press who according to many "bold authoritative statements" by several on here knows nothing more than me you and the gatepost.

 

Sadler is a journalist who has contacts, knows insiders and who has information leaked to him yet people who read nothing up, and spout off the top of their heads want to tell me he's just as ignorant of the facts and realities as you and me.

??

Mr.Sadler will not know any more than people, collectively posting on RL forums. No one is saying he is ignorant, he will just keep his 'ear to the ground' for gossip and keep an eye on online media.

How many 'scoops' are outed, before gossip finds its way onto message boards? Very few. Imo, without these message boards RL journalists would struggle for a story.

[Oxford]

Mr.Sadler will not know any more than people, collectively posting on RL forums. No one is saying he is ignorant, he will just keep his 'ear to the ground' for gossip and keep an eye on online media.

How many 'scoops' are outed, before gossip finds its way onto message boards? Very few. Imo, without these message boards RL journalists would struggle for a story.

Absolutely right Lowdesert.

 

I don't blame journos for turning to forums though at least it's a form of research and would show you where you client base interests lie. And when I can't find something in particular I visit forums of clubs to see what the fans are saying. The truth is keeping a cynical eye on everything reputed or otherwise, is the sensible way to approach what people say. Even if it's me!

[The Parksider]

Mr.Sadler will not know any more than people, collectively posting on RL forums. No one is saying he is ignorant, he will just keep his 'ear to the ground' for gossip and keep an eye on online media.

 

 

Well that's a (highlighted) "bold statement" you don't back up  He "will" will he? .............Your source for that bold statement please?????

 

That asisde this is Mr. Sadler's own forum, and he reads it and he can answer your charge that he's as ignorant in RL matters as anyone on here, which if you will excuse me, nothing personal, is as ignorant a statement as anything I've seen posted on here.

 

I note Mr. Sadler always gets a hard time and scuttles off quickly if he dares to pass an opinion or make a comment on his own website, often from people who won't buy his publications, or won't even accept free copies of the articles backing the news stories that I offer them in good faith.

 

here's the OP:-

 

"It would be great if some RL journalist could chivvy and embarrass the RFL in to providing annual progress reports on the strategic plan, including an explanation of what action is to be taken in any areas where actual performance is below target".

 

Whilst the OP doesn't get it that half the superleague clubs are indeed embarrassing the RFL into explaining their performance or lack of (note Mr. Hudgell's public call for their own man to replace Solly to correct this which appeared on the "online media" you quote) Mr. A. Bird at least accepts that it's the RL editors and journalists that have the knowledge and the inside track on the corridors of power, and not us rank and file Forum fans.

 

If you don't accept that Messrs Lockwood and Sadler etc. get very close to the movers and shakers in the game, and can get access to the RFL barons (but more importantly their staff "insiders") or that they can get access to club chairmen and loose tongued directors, or that they get to go to events where the coaches, directors, officials etc of the game go, and whose tongues are loosened with the "hospitality" or sadler and Lockwood are even considered knowledgeable enough to be invited onto Television programmes discussing the game then your assertion that they merely repeat "gossip" and copy from other "media" and know no more than us is a little hard to believe.

 

But I don't want to accuse you of "making it up" or it may get nasty and we'll be calling each other liars, and you'll be chasing me all over the board.

 

And so we agree to disagree, on the fundamental and simple principle that if I have to believe anyone I will choose Mr. Sadler and Mr. Lockwood over your good self or any keyboard warrior who want's a virtual fight rather than a lively debate.

 

Mr. Sadler remains charged by you that his lazy sources for journalistic copy are "gossip" and "online media" and that he doesn't know anything more than the rest of us, and doesn't have any original sources or any access to people in the game who do know what's going on and will let him know things off record. 

 

Over to you Mr. Sadler,

[Lowdesert]

Well that's a (highlighted) "bold statement" you don't back up  He "will" will he? .............Your source for that bold statement please?????

 

That asisde this is Mr. Sadler's own forum, and he reads it and he can answer your charge that he's as ignorant in RL matters as anyone on here, which if you will excuse me, nothing personal, is as ignorant a statement as anything I've seen posted on here.

 

I note Mr. Sadler always gets a hard time and scuttles off quickly if he dares to pass an opinion or make a comment on his own website, often from people who won't buy his publications, or won't even accept free copies of the articles backing the news stories that I offer them in good faith.

 

here's the OP:-

 

"It would be great if some RL journalist could chivvy and embarrass the RFL in to providing annual progress reports on the strategic plan, including an explanation of what action is to be taken in any areas where actual performance is below target".

 

Whilst the OP doesn't get it that half the superleague clubs are indeed embarrassing the RFL into explaining their performance or lack of (note Mr. Hudgell's public call for their own man to replace Solly to correct this which appeared on the "online media" you quote) Mr. A. Bird at least accepts that it's the RL editors and journalists that have the knowledge and the inside track on the corridors of power, and not us rank and file Forum fans.

 

If you don't accept that Messrs Lockwood and Sadler etc. get very close to the movers and shakers in the game, and can get access to the RFL barons (but more importantly their staff "insiders") or that they can get access to club chairmen and loose tongued directors, or that they get to go to events where the coaches, directors, officials etc of the game go, and whose tongues are loosened with the "hospitality" or sadler and Lockwood are even considered knowledgeable enough to be invited onto Television programmes discussing the game then your assertion that they merely repeat "gossip" and copy from other "media" and know no more than us is a little hard to believe.

 

But I don't want to accuse you of "making it up" or it may get nasty and we'll be calling each other liars, and you'll be chasing me all over the board.

 

And so we agree to disagree, on the fundamental and simple principle that if I have to believe anyone I will choose Mr. Sadler and Mr. Lockwood over your good self or any keyboard warrior who want's a virtual fight rather than a lively debate.

 

Mr. Sadler remains charged by you that his lazy sources for journalistic copy are "gossip" and "online media" and that he doesn't know anything more than the rest of us, and doesn't have any original sources or any access to people in the game who do know what's going on and will let him know things off record. 

 

Over to you Mr. Sadler,

Do you think that some people who write on here, or any other RL message board, do not have access, through colleagues, friends and former associates who can give 'inside' (your word' information? Sometimes, they might hear it in a pub.

RL is not some form of tongue loosening, secret society where people in high RL positions wander, unapproachable and protected through to the small hours. The vast majority, at all levels, are approachable, ordinary people, decent people.

What I hope he will read, is what I have written. That he is not 'ignorant' (your word).

Meanwhile, I will keep an eye out for these tongue loosening events. Missed them. Maybe it was poor marketing?

[The Parksider]

"Absolutely right" Lowdesert.

 

I don't blame journos for turning to forums though at least it's a form of research 

 

Wow that's a bold statement that you don't back up, look at this:-

 

Absolutely-adverb

 

1. 1.

   with no qualification, restriction, or limitation; totally.

    

   You couldn't be bolder could you

 

And so what evidence do you have that Low Desert is totally right that the Rugby League press obtain their copy from these forums, using them as a form of research?

 

Perhaps in your minds Messrs Sadler, Bower,Jones etc read your rubbish with a view to firming a major article in their RL papers. But.......

 

Where was the League Express "Marketing is the key to sell out crowds" article?

Or the "All 12 clubs now happy with the new format" article? Or "Green worried about RFL compliance team being a little slow" article.

 

Boy Mr. Sadler missed a hat trick of cracking scoops to put in his rag?

 

This weeks League Express has a great article by Chris Jones about forthcoming government spending that will back the game, especially the next world cup here. 

 

Perhaps he read it in one your, or your mates posts    

 

If not then PM me and I will post you the whole paper, you may learn something.

[Padge]

Managed to find a copy of the full plan - see link below.

 

Parksider : in answer to your question how do people feel the RFL has performed over the past 15 months, as far as I'm concerned the lack of transparency makes it difficult to judge.    You quote attendance figures for both SL & the Championship, but I'm not sure where you got these from as I always have difficulty finding any official data on attendances ; same applies to TV viewing figures and the value of various commercial sponsorship deals.  Which is why I'm so keen to see the RFL publish a progress report on the various objectives.

Even if some objectives aren't being met, it doesn't automatically mean that the RFL is performing badly - I think we'd all accept that the game faces a number of headwinds which make life difficult.    In particular, if we compare RL with RU : 

 

- whereas RU gets disproportionately high media coverages, RL's is disproportionately low - which I'm convinced has a knock-on effect on attendances, sponsorship, TV viewing figures etc etc

 

- RU's heartland sits in the triangle formed by London, Bristol & Leicester - a hugely more prosperous area than RL's heartland along the M62 corridor.   

 

http://media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugby%20League%20Strategic%20Plan%202014-2021%20A4%20LS%20LR%20(Digital).pdf

 

Attendance and TV figures are easily available. Sponsorship these days is given as an "about" figure as companies see the information as commercially sensitive, why I have no idea but they do.

[Oxford]

Wow that's a bold statement that you don't back up, look at this:-

 

Absolutely-adverb

 

1. 1.

   with no qualification, restriction, or limitation; totally.

    

   You couldn't be bolder could you

 

And so what evidence do you have that Low Desert is totally right that the Rugby League press obtain their copy from these forums, using them as a form of research?

 

Perhaps in your minds Messrs Sadler, Bower,Jones etc read your rubbish with a view to firming a major article in their RL papers. But.......

 

Where was the League Express "Marketing is the key to sell out crowds" article?

Or the "All 12 clubs now happy with the new format" article? Or "Green worried about RFL compliance team being a little slow" article.

 

Boy Mr. Sadler missed a hat trick of cracking scoops to put in his rag?

 

This weeks League Express has a great article by Chris Jones about forthcoming government spending that will back the game, especially the next world cup here. 

 

Perhaps he read it in one your, or your mates posts    

 

If not then PM me and I will post you the whole paper, you may learn something.

To be honest Parky I don't know if you do this deliberately or you just don't read what people write. There are times when stories appear on forums well in advance of even internet journalism pieces. This would suggest there's a certain amount of "knowledge" around amongst the general public. No on suggested that Journos are thickos who don't know anything. Many things have been said about them none of which you've talked about. What was said in reality is that being critical about what anyone writes is the job of the reader, nothing should just be accepted on face value, not even your posts Parky!

 

I was really glad to hear that the government was investing in the RLWC and I think that shows dome very good work by the RFL and the APRLG and certainly fits in with the RFL's strategic plan ( that's what the thread is about by the way ) but even then some remark made me question this investment slightly, but that would be another thread.

 

All the best O.