New Super League Board structure

[Dave T]

26 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Fully totally agree with that Dave the more watching is expanding the game and to a new audience, you highlight "You do not expand the game by having more spectators watching" that part of Mr Parksiders arguement very well........................... now he also says

"If North America drags our player base over there because they "get the crowds" you kill the player supply here" 

Whoever those clubs be who are going to be reliant for a very long time on imports it will totally impact on our game over here, FWIW, I believe that TWP will be successful in obtaining a place in SL whenever that may occur, but I also think that Mr Parksider makes a very reasonable argument in respect of the concensus of feeling that will be rising out of the SL management that charity begins at home first and foremost and they will be protective of their own before allowing mass integration with a number of new teams, in my opinion, TWP are here and they are doing well, but for me any further teams coming into the game from virgin territories need to show a massive commitment even deposits submitted that can be spent on infrastructures to grow the game.

 

 

 

 

 

I dont disagree that there are issues with competing for the same player pool, but if you can take those same players and put them in Toronto or NY in front of bigger crowds abd sponsors than some other clubs can then that is cool by me.

My issue though is with one or two loud people trying to narrowly define expansion.

TWP have expanded RLs footprint already even without using local players.

The discussion about player development and TWP would be interesting if Parky wabted to discuss it sensibly but he never does, it is just the latest obsession, a bit like the word rebels and 65m debt.

[shrek]

3 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Bob you need to stop believing that when you step in and refute an argument your wisdom is absolute and your answer is Over the last decade, player participation levels (in England)  have fallen from 131,900 to 44,000, The only thing shoring up the player supply is 12 SL clubs in England/France running Foundations and Academies that underpin the local game in Yorkshire Lancashire and south west France. To allow clubs from thousands of miles away to start raiding such a fragile playing pool, and replace English SL clubs who develop players just because they have money is ludicrous. A debate nobody wants to engage in, and avoids doing so with Crystal ball gazing.

I'd have thought the chance to spend a couple of seasons playing in North America would be great selling point that may well boost the "fragile playing pool".

One of my neighbours plys his trade in the Championship and loved the trip to Toulouse last year and the lads seemingly can't wait to get over to Toronto, hoping to make an impression by all accounts...........................

[Bob8]

44 minutes ago, shrek said:

I'd have thought the chance to spend a couple of seasons playing in North America would be great selling point that may well boost the "fragile playing pool".

One of my neighbours plys his trade in the Championship and loved the trip to Toulouse last year and the lads seemingly can't wait to get over to Toronto, hoping to make an impression by all accounts...........................

I hold it against you that you quoted him.

But, yes, the playing pool is too small, so we should not expand does seem nonsensical.  The game has to grow at all levels clearly.  I have estimated ten years to start developing pro players from North America.  Either way, I imagine the player pool from the North of England will decrease in that time, but we will not be reduced to playing 9-a-side.

My limited experience of trying to grow the game is that generating crowds is a great way of attracting players.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I dont disagree that there are issues with competing for the same player pool, but if you can take those same players and put them in Toronto or NY in front of bigger crowds abd sponsors than some other clubs can then that is cool by me.

May be cool by you David, but  the point of fact it being OK by some fans in the UK we should proceed with mass expansion at the risk of replacing clubs over here.

 Directors, sponsers, benefactors even Sugar Daddy's get into the sport for the love of it, if anybody really believes that they will just give up all the money, time and effort they have spent in promoting their teams to have them replaced for immediate crowd increases on a far off continent I think people are deluding themselves.

As I said previously charity begins at home, we will find out later as to the make-up of the SL commitee and how they will share their governance  but I think that every full member club will want  be represented with the abillity to have a vote to cast, like turkeys would not vote for Xmas, I can't see clubs voting for something that could be counterproductive for them individually.

[Blind side johnny]

How surprising that a thread about a new SL board structure ends up arguing about the pros and cons of Toronto. Who would have thought it?

[Dave T]

35 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

May be cool by you David, but  the point of fact it being OK by some fans in the UK we should proceed with mass expansion at the risk of replacing clubs over here.

 Directors, sponsers, benefactors even Sugar Daddy's get into the sport for the love of it, if anybody really believes that they will just give up all the money, time and effort they have spent in promoting their teams to have them replaced for immediate crowd increases on a far off continent I think people are deluding themselves.

As I said previously charity begins at home, we will find out later as to the make-up of the SL commitee and how they will share their governance  but I think that every full member club will want  be represented with the abillity to have a vote to cast, like turkeys would not vote for Xmas, I can't see clubs voting for something that could be counterproductive for them individually.

If you know anything about my view it is that expansion is not simply replacement. I have proposed ring-fencing of a set number of UK clubs.

I've made the point before, you do not add value to your home by adding a conservatory on the back but let your garage rot away on the side.

[Harry Stottle]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If you know anything about my view it is that expansion is not simply replacement. I have proposed ring-fencing of a set number of UK clubs.

I've made the point before, you do not add value to your home by adding a conservatory on the back but let your garage rot away on the side.

Please forgive me Dave, but remind me how many UK clubs would you ring fence in a SL of what number in total?

 

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Please forgive me Dave, but remind me how many UK clubs would you ring fence in a SL of what number in total?

 

I think you have to make that decision based on the circumstances at the time ie. what you can afford and what standard you think you can maintain.

At the moment I would ensure we never drop below 10 UK clubs.

In an ideal situation, I think 10-14 UK clubs, and 4 to 6 overseas clubs to create a 14-20 team league, potentially with conferences once you get to the high end.

But ultimately it depends what you can afford. 

I am not in favour of a 12 team league that contains Catalans, Toulouse, Toronto, NY etc. I think the UK can, and should be made up of more than 8 teams.

At a time when I am genuinely excited about England's chances in the 2021 WC, we should be ensuring we do not harm our chances through unintended consequences.

[Harry Stottle]

20 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think you have to make that decision based on the circumstances at the time ie. what you can afford and what standard you think you can maintain.

At the moment I would ensure we never drop below 10 UK clubs.

In an ideal situation, I think 10-14 UK clubs, and 4 to 6 overseas clubs to create a 14-20 team league, potentially with conferences once you get to the high end.

But ultimately it depends what you can afford. 

I am not in favour of a 12 team league that contains Catalans, Toulouse, Toronto, NY etc. I think the UK can, and should be made up of more than 8 teams.

At a time when I am genuinely excited about England's chances in the 2021 WC, we should be ensuring we do not harm our chances through unintended consequences.

So having said X number of UK clubs would be ring fenced would that be in a closed shop scenario for both the UK and overseas clubs? 

 You give the clause at the beginning of your statement "based on the circumstances at the time" I will counter that with what has been gleaned and learned, as I said I believe that TWP will be admitted, by how that is acheived by either earned on the field of play or by the licencing method will come to pass, but if sense is to prevail they should be viewed as a work in progress not just for what they themselves acheive or otherwise, but what it does to the game here, will it be advantageous for the clubs and the game in the UK. 

There is to much speculation from those both for and against the expansion programme, there is no structured pathway, everything is ad-hoc, what better way to go forward than to evaluate a working example.

[shrek]

9 hours ago, Bob8 said:

I hold it against you that you quoted him.

 

Sorry!  I shall try to only offend in AoB in future!

[The Parksider]

14 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Fully totally agree with that Dave the more watching is expanding the game and to a new audience, you highlight "You do not expand the game by having more spectators watching" that part of Mr Parksiders argument very well...........................

Harry,

 Don’t get dragged in by one line soundbites. The 8,000 Toronto fans buy tickets and beer and that just subsidises the massive loss Argyle makes. The premise of this argument is that if Toronto can get thousands interested in watching RL live/on a TV channel then…

 …Maybe, just maybe the new people who watch might fancy giving it a go at some stage.

That’s the expansion of playing the game part of the argument that you actually miss whilst you herald the Toronto crowd. That qualifying statement above needs to be given some attention and thought, which you don’t do. You just blindly think more fans = growth. We can get that growth putting Bradford in SL and taking Salford out. Easy.

 But let’s consider the idea once Canadians see RL on TV or at the ground they will “fancy giving it a go”. Canadians have had since the 1920’s to “give it a go”. Twice the game died out. RL is not new to Canada. Canadians all know Rugby exists because as like here, tens of thousands of them play union – they prefer to give that a go just as we see over here. Have you heard if the local Ontario clubs have had a mass influx of players by any chance?. Have any kids teams sprung up?? I’ve heard nothing.

 This is the old “greatest game” fallacy. RL is so wonderful everyone will play it when they see it. When we went professional in 1996 and the crowds rose by thousands and we were on pay TV every week, but still on the BBC for the cup and internationals “maybe but maybe” did all the people who came on board to watch start playing RL here?? NO! 20 years later the numbers playing have more than halved Harry. This will get worse if we sack off English clubs with foundations, academies and experienced staff in them.

As a footnote if Bob8 believes “generating crowds is a great way of attracting players” then fine, let’s get Bradford Bulls back in Superleague so they can get back to generating crowds, interesting local kids and producing Great Britain Internationals…..

[Guest]

I could sell a Red balloon full of air. Could I sell the same balloon in a deflated pack?

I could sell a Red balloon full of Helium for 10 times the amount of the one filled with air,but again could I sell the deflated version?

Our product (our game) has been most woefully marketed with deflated actions because we have waited for others to fill the Red balloon instead of filling it ourselves.

My concern with expansion in this scenario is who will be holding the inflated Red helium balloon?

 

 

[Harry Stottle]

7 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Harry,

 Don’t get dragged in by one line soundbites. The 8,000 Toronto fans buy tickets and beer and that just subsidises the massive loss Argyle makes. The premise of this argument is that if Toronto can get thousands interested in watching RL live/on a TV channel then…

 …Maybe, just maybe the new people who watch might fancy giving it a go at some stage.

That’s the expansion of playing the game part of the argument that you actually miss whilst you herald the Toronto crowd. That qualifying statement above needs to be given some attention and thought, which you don’t do. You just blindly think more fans = growth. We can get that growth putting Bradford in SL and taking Salford out. Easy.

 But let’s consider the idea once Canadians see RL on TV or at the ground they will “fancy giving it a go”. Canadians have had since the 1920’s to “give it a go”. Twice the game died out. RL is not new to Canada. Canadians all know Rugby exists because as like here, tens of thousands of them play union – they prefer to give that a go just as we see over here. Have you heard if the local Ontario clubs have had a mass influx of players by any chance?. Have any kids teams sprung up?? I’ve heard nothing.

 This is the old “greatest game” fallacy. RL is so wonderful everyone will play it when they see it. When we went professional in 1996 and the crowds rose by thousands and we were on pay TV every week, but still on the BBC for the cup and internationals “maybe but maybe” did all the people who came on board to watch start playing RL here?? NO! 20 years later the numbers playing have more than halved Harry. This will get worse if we sack off English clubs with foundations, academies and experienced staff in them.

As a footnote if Bob8 believes “generating crowds is a great way of attracting players” then fine, let’s get Bradford Bulls back in Superleague so they can get back to generating crowds, interesting local kids and producing Great Britain Internationals…..

You give me a lot of discredit Mr. P, perhaps you were incensed that in the first sentance I agreed with another posters comment that in the terminoligy used in the point in question he was in my opionion correct, whilst you defaulted, in that you probably read no further before your brain put your fingers into gear on the keyboard.

In the rest of the post I was agreeing with your other statements.

I have been and still am very concerned that placing new 'entities' in foriegn virgin territories without a plan or commitment for growth from within will be detremental to our game in the UK.

Take time, look back, and read what I have said in previous posts, like yourself I have taken a lot of stick on these pages because I have had the temerity to air my views and concerns which do not fall in line with the popular propaganda, I am not against expansion the more the merrier, but I am concerned that it could be happening at a pace of knee jerk into the unknown, instead of looking and learning.

[Dave T]

I see Parky is claiming he is ignoring me, but replying to my posts through conversation with another poster.

Very grown up.

Bradford returning to SL with 10k fans may be growth, but it is not expansion.

Whichever way you spin it, if the best we get in the next 5 years is TWP, NY and Toulouse in SL delivering new sponsors and 30k new regular fans - that is expansion. Trying to find criteria to discredit that is nonsense.

[Bob8]

34 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I see Parky is claiming he is ignoring me, but replying to my posts through conversation with another poster.

Very grown up.

Bradford returning to SL with 10k fans may be growth, but it is not expansion.

Whichever way you spin it, if the best we get in the next 5 years is TWP, NY and Toulouse in SL delivering new sponsors and 30k new regular fans - that is expansion. Trying to find criteria to discredit that is nonsense.

I actually end up replying to Parky when he is quoted.

I actually agree with him that organic growth is BS,  He was the first to persuade me of that point!

[Dave T]

35 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

I actually end up replying to Parky when he is quoted.

I actually agree with him that organic growth is BS,  He was the first to persuade me of that point!

Parky makes plenty of points I agrer with. Unfortunately he often ends uo flip flopping or finding a new soundbite and you end up in a contrary position again without even knowing how it happened

[Bob8]

14 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Parky makes plenty of points I agrer with. Unfortunately he often ends uo flip flopping or finding a new soundbite and you end up in a contrary position again without even knowing how it happened

Indeed, it is fair to say that throwing out five clubs in the 2019 season of Super League and bringing in five North American clubs would be daft.  I am just not sure who is actually suggesting that should happen!

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

Indeed, it is fair to say that throwing out five clubs in the 2019 season of Super League and bringing in five North American clubs would be daft.  I am just not sure who is actually suggesting that should happen!

I think where there is a defensiveness around that is when people automatically link replacement to these clubs. There are many people who state that they would love to see NY in for example and would happily sacrifice existing clubs (usually naming Leigh, Wakefield etc) to deliver that. I don't see it as an either/or - although I accept that levels of funding will largely dictate that.

We have also seen that when we have brought new expansion clubs in, they have often been at the expense of other clubs, so there is a natural cynicism as many people see  that as inherently unfair. 

I keep repeating this point, but I don't see replacement as expansion. It's why I would welcome a stated approach ie. we are looking to expand SL to a 16 (for example) team SL and the additional places will be awarded to new areas. I believe you would get far more support if we demonstrated a commitment to the UK game as well as expanding. Dismissing people being concerned about the UK game or existing teams as flatcappers isn't helpful. 

I absolutely believe we should be strengthening our existing base as well as focusing on new fans, players, viewers, sponsors etc. 

It really doesn't need to be a conflicting position.

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I think where there is a defensiveness around that is when people automatically link replacement to these clubs. There are many people who state that they would love to see NY in for example and would happily sacrifice existing clubs (usually naming Leigh, Wakefield etc) to deliver that. I don't see it as an either/or - although I accept that levels of funding will largely dictate that.

We have also seen that when we have brought new expansion clubs in, they have often been at the expense of other clubs, so there is a natural cynicism as many people see  that as inherently unfair. 

I keep repeating this point, but I don't see replacement as expansion. It's why I would welcome a stated approach ie. we are looking to expand SL to a 16 (for example) team SL and the additional places will be awarded to new areas. I believe you would get far more support if we demonstrated a commitment to the UK game as well as expanding. Dismissing people being concerned about the UK game or existing teams as flatcappers isn't helpful. 

I absolutely believe we should be strengthening our existing base as well as focusing on new fans, players, viewers, sponsors etc. 

It really doesn't need to be a conflicting position.

Yep, I go along with that.

Yesterday I posed a question to your goodself David were I stated that before we set out headlong in accepting multiple expansion teams we look and learn from TWP to evaluate and moniter the impact they will make as we go forward. What they return could be wonderful then again it may not produce the desired effect. Of these proposed new teams from exotic named places who are eager to join do you think their interest would wane if their application was not accepted immediately, or would it nake them more hungry to do so especialy  if the TWP excersize is a resounding success both for expansion and the game here? 

Sadly, you chose not to answer so I do not know if you agree or disagree.

[Dave T]

9 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yep, I go along with that.

Yesterday I posed a question to your goodself David were I stated that before we set out headlong in accepting multiple expansion teams we look and learn from TWP to evaluate and moniter the impact they will make as we go forward. What they return could be wonderful then again it may not produce the desired effect. Of these proposed new teams from exotic named places who are eager to join do you think their interest would wane if their application was not accepted immediately, or would it nake them more hungry to do so especialy  if the TWP excersize is a resounding success both for expansion and the game here? 

Sadly, you chose not to answer so I do not know if you agree or disagree.

Sorry Harry I did mean to reply, however I trotted off to my Christmas Party and didn't want to appear here after copious amounts of wine and ale!

I will get round to replying when I get a sec to give it a proper answer! Cheers

[John Rhino]

On 12/12/2017 at 5:49 PM, Lowdesert said:

RFL has Barwick as Exec Chairman and Wood as CEO ( Wood is aligned under Barwick which indicates, to me, he reports to Barwick).

 

Barwick is non-exec chairman. If he has no executive role then it's possible Wood doesnt report to him.

All very Byzantine

[Blind side johnny]

2 hours ago, John Rhino said:

Barwick is non-exec chairman. If he has no executive role then it's possible Wood doesnt report to him.

All very Byzantine

He will report to the board, of which Barwick is chairman. All perfectly normal in any organisation; a non-executive chairman (the norm) doesn't have any day to day involvement with the organisation and has the primary role of protecting the interests of the shareholders.

[The Parksider]

16 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

You give me a lot of discredit Mr. P,  I have been and still am very concerned that placing new 'entities' in foreign virgin territories without a plan or commitment for growth from within will be detrimental to our game in the UK.

Take time, look back, and read what I have said in previous posts......

I’ve done that and no discredit. I feel your previous posts are very good, but the latest ones concern me. You say we should “Learn from TWP to evaluate and monitor the impact they will make as we go forward”. Have you not already learned Rugby Union have won the day in Canada, causing RL to die out twice. They have 100K registered players mainly juniors and youth and 300 clubs. How do we reverse that monster when Canadian Union is attempting to go pro themselves with the latest plans including the Toronto based Ontario Arrows.

A major elephant in the room question remains (for over a year now) to be answered about Toronto Wolfpack’s ability to do what every other SL club has to do (except Salford who may well lose their SL place on this) which is contribute to the professional player pool by developing players. If they can’t do this why should they get a place??

They can’t do it now, you yourself suggested they can’t do it for 10-20 years (assuming it will come eventually). I suggest you consider how in England we manage to do it because in the north we have a development infrastructure backed by foundations at SL clubs with a network of amateur clubs in clubhouses, multi-pitches and a wealth of people with years in the game putting their time and sponsorship in to nurture the kids, who aim for the academy system. That doesn’t exist at all in Canada – only Union has any development infrastructure there. It’s also exactly the reason we can’t find many quality players outside the north of England- there’s no RL infrastructure

The debate currently involves the deflection of talking about how we would of course not replace English SL clubs with North American clubs as Bob8 now says. The very idea!!

This has then gone onto the idea that we should “welcome a stated approach ie. we are looking to expand SL to a 16 (for example) team SL and the additional places will be awarded to new areas”.

You latch onto this ludicrous idea Harry, but for goodness sake, the extra four clubs will create a need for another 100 quality players. When SL wanted to go to 13 to ensure HKR got back in, they gave up, because as Koukash said “where would we find 25 more quality players?”

Where would we find the extra 100 quality players please gentlemen??

[Kayakman]

27 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

I’ve done that and no discredit. I feel your previous posts are very good, but the latest ones concern me. You say we should “Learn from TWP to evaluate and monitor the impact they will make as we go forward”. Have you not already learned Rugby Union have won the day in Canada, causing RL to die out twice. They have 100K registered players mainly juniors and youth and 300 clubs. How do we reverse that monster when Canadian Union is attempting to go pro themselves with the latest plans including the Toronto based Ontario Arrows.

A major elephant in the room question remains (for over a year now) to be answered about Toronto Wolfpack’s ability to do what every other SL club has to do (except Salford who may well lose their SL place on this) which is contribute to the professional player pool by developing players. If they can’t do this why should they get a place??

They can’t do it now, you yourself suggested they can’t do it for 10-20 years (assuming it will come eventually). I suggest you consider how in England we manage to do it because in the north we have a development infrastructure backed by foundations at SL clubs with a network of amateur clubs in clubhouses, multi-pitches and a wealth of people with years in the game putting their time and sponsorship in to nurture the kids, who aim for the academy system. That doesn’t exist at all in Canada – only Union has any development infrastructure there. It’s also exactly the reason we can’t find many quality players outside the north of England- there’s no RL infrastructure

The debate currently involves the deflection of talking about how we would of course not replace English SL clubs with North American clubs as Bob8 now says. The very idea!!

This has then gone onto the idea that we should “welcome a stated approach ie. we are looking to expand SL to a 16 (for example) team SL and the additional places will be awarded to new areas”.

You latch onto this ludicrous idea Harry, but for goodness sake, the extra four clubs will create a need for another 100 quality players. When SL wanted to go to 13 to ensure HKR got back in, they gave up, because as Koukash said “where would we find 25 more quality players?”

Where would we find the extra 100 quality players please gentlemen??

Well excuse me...I watched all of the games from the World Cup on You Tube....are you deaf, dumb AND blind?

[Harry Stottle]

8 hours ago, The Parksider said:

I’ve done that and no discredit. I feel your previous posts are very good, but the latest ones concern me. You say we should “Learn from TWP to evaluate and monitor the impact they will make as we go forward”. Have you not already learned Rugby Union have won the day in Canada, causing RL to die out twice. They have 100K registered players mainly juniors and youth and 300 clubs. How do we reverse that monster when Canadian Union is attempting to go pro themselves with the latest plans including the Toronto based Ontario Arrows.

A major elephant in the room question remains (for over a year now) to be answered about Toronto Wolfpack’s ability to do what every other SL club has to do (except Salford who may well lose their SL place on this) which is contribute to the professional player pool by developing players. If they can’t do this why should they get a place??

They can’t do it now, you yourself suggested they can’t do it for 10-20 years (assuming it will come eventually). I suggest you consider how in England we manage to do it because in the north we have a development infrastructure backed by foundations at SL clubs with a network of amateur clubs in clubhouses, multi-pitches and a wealth of people with years in the game putting their time and sponsorship in to nurture the kids, who aim for the academy system. That doesn’t exist at all in Canada – only Union has any development infrastructure there. It’s also exactly the reason we can’t find many quality players outside the north of England- there’s no RL infrastructure

The debate currently involves the deflection of talking about how we would of course not replace English SL clubs with North American clubs as Bob8 now says. The very idea!!

This has then gone onto the idea that we should “welcome a stated approach ie. we are looking to expand SL to a 16 (for example) team SL and the additional places will be awarded to new areas”.

You latch onto this ludicrous idea Harry, but for goodness sake, the extra four clubs will create a need for another 100 quality players. When SL wanted to go to 13 to ensure HKR got back in, they gave up, because as Koukash said “where would we find 25 more quality players?”

Where would we find the extra 100 quality players please gentlemen??

Mr P. "Learn and evaluate"  I will re-phrase, judge, gauge, rate or assess.

You did not look back far enough, all along I have said TWP should be looked at as a work in progress, to see how it impacts both in Canada and what it does for or to the game over here before jumping into a mass expansion programme.

Player supply has and will always be the difficult part to satisfy in my opinion without placing a massive impact on the game in the UK, again in the past I directed a question directly to your self which you did not care to answer concerning player production in the smaller towns of long established clubs should Licensing return and interest waning in those places to such a degree that kids stop playing and community clubs slip further into decline, not all are stars are from SL towns originally!