Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
scotchy1

League Restructure Discussion (Merged Threads)

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

The problem I have with this is how do you know that the team that won the GF to become champions would have played the same throughout the year if top of the league was the champions.

 

for example when Leeds won from 5th the played to the system as it was accepted at the start of the season. If at the beginning of the season it was known that  top of the league was to decide champions they would have played according to that.

It's my gut feeling, mate, simple as. As I said earlier, the system is decided by others and that's how we play, but I feel as I feel.


No team is an island.........................................

http://www.flickr.com/photos/31337109@N03/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Blackpool Hawk said:

 

Hunslet RLFC Chairman Neil Hampshire has released a statement following the events this week which saw a handful of Betfred Super League officials lined up alongside new chief executive Robert Elstone to unveil “radical changes” to the game.

Neil Hampshire commented “As League 1 has its most competitive season ever, producing a product the game can be proud to promote, it’s really disheartening to see the wider game starting to tear itself apart at the top.

“Robert Elstone, the new Super League CEO, certainly made sure his entrance into his new role wasn’t going to be missed by beginning his tenure with a dramatic statement that the Super 8s would be ditched in favour of a one up one down system whereby the million pound game would become a play off between the top 2 in the Championship.

“To top it off he finished by saying that Super League would also be running themselves without any future interference from the RFL, thank you very much.

“The fact that he then had to backtrack from all of this as being a done deal less than 48 hours later, when the RFL confirmed nothing at all has been agreed, didn’t matter one jot to him.

“Damage done, as he’d already planted the seed in the eyes of all Super League supporters, game wide sponsors and stakeholders which was his primary objective.

“In his first week we have already learned a lot about the type of political spin doctoring Mr Elstone will be bringing to his new post.

“Is all as straightforward as it seems though? Certainly Gary Hetherington made it absolutely clear that not everyone in Super League was supportive of this approach referring to “an absurd grab for power by a small group of men who think that they own the game”.

“I also thought it was quite telling that only three Super League Chairman could actually be bothered to turn up to anoint their appointed saviour.

“Then of course there is the small matter of the Championship and League 1 Clubs. the vast majority of whom are less than enamored with the proposals and have already entered into talks with Super League and the RFL to tell them exactly that.

“This whole situation stems of course from Wigan Chairman Ian Lenegan who famously wrote directly to the RFL to suggest that, among other things, the RFL should:

  • “Eliminate Championship / Championship 1 payments as soon as possible under Contracts by RFL negotiation. Replace then with whatever funding to Championship the new SL Board views as reasonable”
  • “Eliminate any SL funding to Championship 1 and encourage Clubs to become similar to leading community Clubs”

And allow Super League to:

  • “Take over commercial control of SL sponsorship”
  • “Take the lead role in discussions with Sky Sport over SL Broadcasting”

“The fact that he didn’t even realise we are called League 1 rather than Championship 1 hardly inspires.

“The latest to jump onto the bandwagon is of course Lenegans fellow SL puppet master Eamon McManus, esteemed Chair of St Helens. In his response to Gary Hetherington he said “….their Clubs do actually own Super League and in equal shareholding proportions”.

Erm, but that ownership changes dependent on who is actually in Super League doesn’t it Eamon? So if 4 Championship Clubs were to be promoted at the end of this season then things may not be quite the same around that top table? Oh of course, that’s why you want to stop that possibility………

“Some may view this stance as a little hypocritical as the League ditched the 8s system at the end of last season. There were actually 2 major contributing factors.

“Firstly, most clubs are tenants rather than owners of their own stadia in this league and it was becoming incredibly difficult to arrange fixtures at short notice.

“But secondly, and by far most importantly for the Clubs, we retained the 2 up 2 down promotion and relegation system. Different structure yes, but it still gives the same outcome.

“That’s not what’s being proposed in Super League and let’s face it, promotion and relegation is one of the two core principles at the heart of this whole conflict.

“Lest we forget, licensing almost destroyed the game creating far too much of a financial gap between SL and the rest and many of our current problems are still down to the fact that that divide has still to be bridged.

“It was a system that also openly rewarded failure by allowing teams the opportunity to finish bottom 3 years on the trot and yet still retain their place via an approved application process.

“Only one Club, Widnes, ever made the step up during the licensing years and even then they only finished mid table in the year their application was accepted.

“No doubt they were holding funds back for the following year but who could blame them? It was the flaw which helped expose the folly of the system for what it was.

“Whichever way you look at it though, the Super 8s still offers every single Club within the Super League the chance to keep their status but this time through their performances on the pitch.

“The fact that it also offers 4 Championship Clubs a shot at glory at the same time is surely a bonus that should be embraced as a way of driving up standards at the elite end of the sport.

“It’s also a great way to attract investment. Look at Toronto. They have bought into this whole process in the knowledge that they would have a decent chance to go from League 1 to Super League in just 3 years. If that’s achieved it will be a hugely positive story we can all use to entice new stakeholders and sponsors.

“For those relegated they will also still have a really good chance of an immediate return as Hull KR proved last year. Moving to a one up one down system to me would inevitably lead to the return of “boom and bust” as Clubs go all out to try and procure that single exclusive spot.

“Sorry, but we’ve been there, done that, got the t-shirt and it’s not a place I think our sport should be rushing back to anytime soon.

“The second core principle in this argument is of course Super League’s desire to own and control its own destiny.

“That leads me to consider our own Club History. Here at Hunslet of course we were denied entry to the promised land back in 1999 when we won the Northern Ford Premiership Grand Final in only the second year of the Super League era.

“The argument was based solely around our ground not meeting the right standards. It was pretty galling at the time as a number of existing Super League grounds didn’t meet the criteria either. Other Clubs both before and after us, notably Keighley and Dewsbury, were similarly ostracised.

“I mention this because my worry would be that allowing Super League control of their own competition would inevitably lead to the return of such unfair practices that would allow them the final say on who gets to sit at the top table.

“The only way to avoid that type of unjust control is to keep the sport under the independent control of the RFL. Promotion and relegation is without doubt the lifeblood of British sport.

“Given the position we find ourselves in I’m also supportive of a “root and branch” review of the whole sport. Wouldn’t it be fantastic for example if we had a whole game pyramid system? Surely that would increase interest in the sport at all levels and provide the most effective player pathway platform?

“For now though I think it’s time to call an end to the open hostility and bickering in the media and get everybody back round the table to discuss things openly and honestly otherwise we’ll never move forward.

“We definitely don’t want to see a split similar to that of 1895 and believe me I don’t think that’s completely out of the question if things start to go pear shaped here.

“We need to be a lot smarter as a sport and make sure that the column inches we get in the press promote, rather than denigrate, our game.

“One can only imagine how this looks to our major paymasters at Sky who must be rubbing their hands with glee at the possibility of getting a new TV deal at cut price whilst the sport implodes in a never ending round of internal bickering.

“All anyone asks is a fair deal for all Clubs that will help us all to promote and grow the greatest game.

“We are after all called Rugby League not Super League and we would all do well to remember that.

I also enjoy cliches. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

I also enjoy cliches. 

Neil Hampshire wants to read Hunslet's history.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

 

But the non-SL clubs will have to quickly decide how to deal with the new reality, since they hold only limited cards, and stand to lose the most from it. As the statements so far make all too clear.

This is ultimately the most important thing for Championship clubs now.

It was made extremely clear in the press conference that the money being discussed was money from the Super League contract that was being routed elsewhere. Whether people like it or not, that does (and should) mean that SLE decides where that is invested. My preference is that we take a whole-of-game approach, but declaring war isn't going to help the case.

Sometimes businesses/people do things which they are entitled to but seem unfair. I'd prefer to embrace the challenge and work to the best solution for all. It's a bit like the discussions around the NRL last week, I don't think we should be going to war with them because they make decisions we don't like, we should try and influence them and get the best we can from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Bob

You say we cannot maintain a national12 SL clubs, I assume you are omitting Catalan from that statement, how many do you envisage from these shores? considering you have already used the term "viable commercial clubs" as I eluded to a couple of posts ago according to Dr. KOUKASH we only posses 3 of those and two are less than 10 miles apart, but supposedly you mean we should drop the complete basket cases in SL, we can leave the ones in there who are only in the catagory of "bloody desperate" 

If we did prune some clubs from the heartlands do you think that the game would still

(1) maintain or grow it's popularity, or do you think

(2)less people would attend, watch it on TV, or even discuss it

I would go for the latter, 

Are we going to find all these new clubs you say we so desperately need overseas for I see that is the only option, it is not appreciated or desired enough by the required numbers anywhere in the UK, it always has been and will continue to be a regional sport in this country, nobody can prove otherwise.

So those characteristics for entry will have to come from off these shores in my opinion, but tgere are a whole host of problems attached to that, some we know, and I suspect quite a few more that would be uncovered.

Kind of gone off topic here Bob, but I see your point, and may I say concern, I am 100% in agreement with you re the community game, I see them as the small capilliaries that supply blood to keep the body functioning correctly, when they get damaged or severed and that blood supply stops the resulting consequences are catastrophic, many times fatal, it does not happen instantaneously but takes affect overtime. 

I think we both think we are the most pessimistic!  

I am very negative.  Leigh in particular is one where I a hugely conflicted, it is an incredible heartland of the game.  Losing such clubs is like cutting off a leg and an arm.  You do not do it lightly, indeed, it might be like cutting out the heart.  

I am not a huge fan of NA expansion, the reason is distance.  TWP has people excited, but I recall a hypothetical discussion with someone who wanted NA clubs, but when I suggested Oslo, his only argument for why New York would be great and Oslo would be bad is that suggesting Oslo was stupid.  

I see us as in a deperate hole.  I could be wrong.  

If you will excuse me Harry, what would Leigh, Halifax or London have to do to make SL very keen to have them in?  (or even Oslo :D )

Edited by Bob8

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think there is a fair point about parachute payments etc. but these things are not problems we cannot overcome with a bit of thought. Aren't Leigh operating with a parachute payment this year?

If, for example, 2 SL clubs are relegated this year - will there be 2 parachute payments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I also enjoy cliches. 

That may well be the case but for me the statement made reasonable points from another perspective... which is good surely even if one has counter points.

I particular have support for the comment with regard to the previous licencing and seeing that as a marker for how SL clubs may change or circumvent "goal-posts" to protect certain SL clubs due to be relegated.  e.g. if say Catalan were to be that bottom team one would suspect SL not wanting them to be relegated.. I guess that may well apply to other clubs that may have a bad year....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dave T said:

This is ultimately the most important thing for Championship clubs now.

It was made extremely clear in the press conference that the money being discussed was money from the Super League contract that was being routed elsewhere. Whether people like it or not, that does (and should) mean that SLE decides where that is invested. My preference is that we take a whole-of-game approach, but declaring war isn't going to help the case.

Sometimes businesses/people do things which they are entitled to but seem unfair. I'd prefer to embrace the challenge and work to the best solution for all. It's a bit like the discussions around the NRL last week, I don't think we should be going to war with them because they make decisions we don't like, we should try and influence them and get the best we can from them.

To to double check as I don't know and maybe pedantic as it ultimately means the same...

Isn't the monies from the TV contract with the RFL to broadcast SL games... as distinct from SL contract....

as I say means the same anyway.... but just interested in knowing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

Indeed. Although I guess the lower league clubs always assumed, probably correctly and understandably, that the RFL was the representative and negotiating body for the whole game, so they had no need to? Although others might term that an abdication of responsibility, I guess?

Now it has become clear the RFL is largely powerless, and the SL clubs have effectively declared UDI, they need to try and strike some unity of purpose and put their own structure in place urgently. Since if they do not hang together, they will sure as hell hang separately. 

But what chances of that? Especially since aspiring SL clubs - and certainly ones with any realistic potential - may have a very different agenda to the rest? Something the cabal will be quite aware of, I am sure, if/when they seek to divide the opposition.

The independent SL genie is now out of the bottle, and I can see no way of it ever now going back. The RFL looks to have permanently lost control. And, given how poorly the RFL - or, more to the point, the second-raters charged with running it in recent years - has performed in developing and promoting the game, something needed to happen. Time I guess will tell whether this coup saves the game, or wrecks it. It has potential to do both. Probably the former, if it leads to opening up and widening out SL to include new entrants with money and potential and ideas; probably the latter, if it becomes just a cover for protecting the existing SL clubs from relegation or challenge. IMO.  

But the non-SL clubs will have to quickly decide how to deal with the new reality, since they hold only limited cards, and stand to lose the most from it. As the statements so far make all too clear.

A fair summary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TrueBull said:

If, for example, 2 SL clubs are relegated this year - will there be 2 parachute payments?

Do you think the SL club being relegated on the 1 up 1 down P&R  won't get a bean? Its a dictatorship.

The statement from McManus shows dictatorship at its best. You either do that or we will do this.

Let them do it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, redjonn said:

That may well be the case but for me the statement made reasonable points from another perspective... which is good surely even if one has counter points.

I particular have support for the comment with regard to the previous licencing and seeing that as a marker for how SL clubs may change or circumvent "goal-posts" to protect certain SL clubs due to be relegated.  e.g. if say Catalan were to be that bottom team one would suspect SL not wanting them to be relegated.. I guess that may well apply to other clubs that may have a bad year....

This doesn't make any sense when you remember it' the top 3 in the league driving this through. 

This idea it is self interest protecting them relegation looks like nonsense when you realise one of them had never been relegated and the other two are two of the biggest most successful clubs we have. 

Clearly this is something that the big clubs and smaller clubs agree causes huge problems 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Blackpool Hawk said:

 

Hunslet RLFC Chairman Neil Hampshire has released a statement following the events this week which saw a handful of Betfred Super League officials lined up alongside new chief executive Robert Elstone to unveil “radical changes” to the game.

Neil Hampshire commented “As League 1 has its most competitive season ever, producing a product the game can be proud to promote, it’s really disheartening to see the wider game starting to tear itself apart at the top.

“Robert Elstone, the new Super League CEO, certainly made sure his entrance into his new role wasn’t going to be missed by beginning his tenure with a dramatic statement that the Super 8s would be ditched in favour of a one up one down system whereby the million pound game would become a play off between the top 2 in the Championship.

“To top it off he finished by saying that Super League would also be running themselves without any future interference from the RFL, thank you very much.

“The fact that he then had to backtrack from all of this as being a done deal less than 48 hours later, when the RFL confirmed nothing at all has been agreed, didn’t matter one jot to him.

“Damage done, as he’d already planted the seed in the eyes of all Super League supporters, game wide sponsors and stakeholders which was his primary objective.

“In his first week we have already learned a lot about the type of political spin doctoring Mr Elstone will be bringing to his new post.

“Is all as straightforward as it seems though? Certainly Gary Hetherington made it absolutely clear that not everyone in Super League was supportive of this approach referring to “an absurd grab for power by a small group of men who think that they own the game”.

“I also thought it was quite telling that only three Super League Chairman could actually be bothered to turn up to anoint their appointed saviour.

“Then of course there is the small matter of the Championship and League 1 Clubs. the vast majority of whom are less than enamored with the proposals and have already entered into talks with Super League and the RFL to tell them exactly that.

“This whole situation stems of course from Wigan Chairman Ian Lenegan who famously wrote directly to the RFL to suggest that, among other things, the RFL should:

  • “Eliminate Championship / Championship 1 payments as soon as possible under Contracts by RFL negotiation. Replace then with whatever funding to Championship the new SL Board views as reasonable”
  • “Eliminate any SL funding to Championship 1 and encourage Clubs to become similar to leading community Clubs”

And allow Super League to:

  • “Take over commercial control of SL sponsorship”
  • “Take the lead role in discussions with Sky Sport over SL Broadcasting”

“The fact that he didn’t even realise we are called League 1 rather than Championship 1 hardly inspires.

“The latest to jump onto the bandwagon is of course Lenegans fellow SL puppet master Eamon McManus, esteemed Chair of St Helens. In his response to Gary Hetherington he said “….their Clubs do actually own Super League and in equal shareholding proportions”.

Erm, but that ownership changes dependent on who is actually in Super League doesn’t it Eamon? So if 4 Championship Clubs were to be promoted at the end of this season then things may not be quite the same around that top table? Oh of course, that’s why you want to stop that possibility………

“Some may view this stance as a little hypocritical as the League ditched the 8s system at the end of last season. There were actually 2 major contributing factors.

“Firstly, most clubs are tenants rather than owners of their own stadia in this league and it was becoming incredibly difficult to arrange fixtures at short notice.

“But secondly, and by far most importantly for the Clubs, we retained the 2 up 2 down promotion and relegation system. Different structure yes, but it still gives the same outcome.

“That’s not what’s being proposed in Super League and let’s face it, promotion and relegation is one of the two core principles at the heart of this whole conflict.

“Lest we forget, licensing almost destroyed the game creating far too much of a financial gap between SL and the rest and many of our current problems are still down to the fact that that divide has still to be bridged.

“It was a system that also openly rewarded failure by allowing teams the opportunity to finish bottom 3 years on the trot and yet still retain their place via an approved application process.

“Only one Club, Widnes, ever made the step up during the licensing years and even then they only finished mid table in the year their application was accepted.

“No doubt they were holding funds back for the following year but who could blame them? It was the flaw which helped expose the folly of the system for what it was.

“Whichever way you look at it though, the Super 8s still offers every single Club within the Super League the chance to keep their status but this time through their performances on the pitch.

“The fact that it also offers 4 Championship Clubs a shot at glory at the same time is surely a bonus that should be embraced as a way of driving up standards at the elite end of the sport.

“It’s also a great way to attract investment. Look at Toronto. They have bought into this whole process in the knowledge that they would have a decent chance to go from League 1 to Super League in just 3 years. If that’s achieved it will be a hugely positive story we can all use to entice new stakeholders and sponsors.

“For those relegated they will also still have a really good chance of an immediate return as Hull KR proved last year. Moving to a one up one down system to me would inevitably lead to the return of “boom and bust” as Clubs go all out to try and procure that single exclusive spot.

“Sorry, but we’ve been there, done that, got the t-shirt and it’s not a place I think our sport should be rushing back to anytime soon.

“The second core principle in this argument is of course Super League’s desire to own and control its own destiny.

“That leads me to consider our own Club History. Here at Hunslet of course we were denied entry to the promised land back in 1999 when we won the Northern Ford Premiership Grand Final in only the second year of the Super League era.

“The argument was based solely around our ground not meeting the right standards. It was pretty galling at the time as a number of existing Super League grounds didn’t meet the criteria either. Other Clubs both before and after us, notably Keighley and Dewsbury, were similarly ostracised.

“I mention this because my worry would be that allowing Super League control of their own competition would inevitably lead to the return of such unfair practices that would allow them the final say on who gets to sit at the top table.

“The only way to avoid that type of unjust control is to keep the sport under the independent control of the RFL. Promotion and relegation is without doubt the lifeblood of British sport.

“Given the position we find ourselves in I’m also supportive of a “root and branch” review of the whole sport. Wouldn’t it be fantastic for example if we had a whole game pyramid system? Surely that would increase interest in the sport at all levels and provide the most effective player pathway platform?

“For now though I think it’s time to call an end to the open hostility and bickering in the media and get everybody back round the table to discuss things openly and honestly otherwise we’ll never move forward.

“We definitely don’t want to see a split similar to that of 1895 and believe me I don’t think that’s completely out of the question if things start to go pear shaped here.

“We need to be a lot smarter as a sport and make sure that the column inches we get in the press promote, rather than denigrate, our game.

“One can only imagine how this looks to our major paymasters at Sky who must be rubbing their hands with glee at the possibility of getting a new TV deal at cut price whilst the sport implodes in a never ending round of internal bickering.

“All anyone asks is a fair deal for all Clubs that will help us all to promote and grow the greatest game.

“We are after all called Rugby League not Super League and we would all do well to remember that.

What a muppet! 

He calls for an end to open hostility and bickering in the media, yet he's just chosen to release a statement to the media openly criticising some in SL 

Presumably he meant he wanted an end once he'd had his say in public! 

  • Sad 1

This is captain Juncker speaking. The EU gravy train is about to enter Brussels, so will all Brits please exit at the next stop

To all remaining passengers, thank you for your continued custom and contributions to my pension fund

Kind Regards - YOUR PRESIDENT !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Dave T said:

This is ultimately the most important thing for Championship clubs now.

It was made extremely clear in the press conference that the money being discussed was money from the Super League contract that was being routed elsewhere. Whether people like it or not, that does (and should) mean that SLE decides where that is invested. My preference is that we take a whole-of-game approach, but declaring war isn't going to help the case.

Sometimes businesses/people do things which they are entitled to but seem unfair. I'd prefer to embrace the challenge and work to the best solution for all. It's a bit like the discussions around the NRL last week, I don't think we should be going to war with them because they make decisions we don't like, we should try and influence them and get the best we can from them.

If the Sky contract included the TV rights for non-SL games, and if Sky paid more than they would otherwise have to secure those rights (or, perhaps, to secure them from anyone else getting them) then that part of the Sky contract monies is not something the SL clubs have any right to.

Those who argue the SL clubs ARE entitled to appropriate that money must presumably believe that Sky did not pay a penny more for the TV rights than they would have done anyway had only the rights to SL games been up for grabs.

So...does anyone have any proof which of these it was? Anyone?

If they do not, then no-one on here can be qualified to say whether the SL clubs are entitled to any more of the pot, or whether lower-League clubs are being “subsidised”. And everyone - you, me, the lot of us - are basing an argument on assumptions?

Edited by Adeybull
  • Like 1

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, redjonn said:

Isn't the monies from the TV contract with the RFL to broadcast SL games... as distinct from SL contract....

No SL agreed to allow the RFL to negotiate on their behalf, which is totally different in effect the RFL were the broker not the customer.

  • Thanks 1

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

What free money? This present deal breaks down as follows (cuertosy of Spud):-

The five-year deal breaks down as follows:

The amount being paid for club and international matches will be £182,200,000 in total.

Of that total, £146,760,000, or 80 per cent, will go to Super League clubs.

£14,576,000 or 8 per cent, will go to the twelve Championship clubs in the second tier.

£1,822,000, or one per cent, will go to the Championship One clubs.

£20,042,000, or 11 per cent, will be paid for Challenge Cup and internationals coverage.

Some perspective re the possibilities available to the game from establishing pro teams in the North part of America:

The SL portion of  146,760,000 £ for five years equates to 29,352,000 £  or 38,979,603 US$ per season.  That's just a little more than 1/3 of the 90,000,000 US$ which Major League Soccer earns per season from their three TV contracts.

Edited by Big Picture

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blackpool Hawk said:

I think it’s time to call an end to the open hostility and bickering in the media and get everybody back round the table to discuss things openly and honestly otherwise we’ll never move forward.

This is all that needed saying, by anyone.

All the protagonists need to pull their necks in, stop spouting off in public and communicate with each other like adults.

I'd lock 'em all in a room without food and drink and not let 'em out until they'd reached an agreement about the future of the sport they can all put their names to.

  • Like 1

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, John Drake said:

This is all that needed saying, by anyone.

All the protagonists need to pull their necks in, stop spouting off in public and communicate with each other like adults.

I'd lock 'em all in a room without food and drink and not let 'em out until they'd reached an agreement about the future of the sport they can all put their names to.

There will be a lot of coffins coming out of that room.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, TrueBull said:

If, for example, 2 SL clubs are relegated this year - will there be 2 parachute payments?

Who knows, sounds like Leigh's was a bit of an informal arrangement!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

What a muppet! 

He calls for an end to open hostility and bickering in the media, yet he's just chosen to release a statement to the media openly criticising some in SL 

Presumably he meant he wanted an end once he'd had his say in public! 

Hardly. He is exercising a right to reply to the original statement. They made a public statement; he has responded. Same way the other club chairmen and CEOs so far have. 

Whether the content or tone is professional is a separate argument. My own view is that Lenagan started the hostile tone with his ridiculously-provocative statement that about the SL clubs being terrified of relegation. This was clearly interpreted by many as indicating this coup was all about preserving the SL existence of the weaker SL sides - and it probably detracted from anything more positive in the press conference. 

Now he HAS exercised his right to respond - and I saw little to take issue with in it apart from going ad hominem which was wrong - you would expect him to follow his own argument, and refrain from saying anything else likely to be seen as provocative and confrontational. Otherwise he would be seen as being a hypocrite, as you say.

But he is not a hypocrite merely for making a first response.

Edited by Adeybull
  • Like 1

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, redjonn said:

To to double check as I don't know and maybe pedantic as it ultimately means the same...

Isn't the monies from the TV contract with the RFL to broadcast SL games... as distinct from SL contract....

 as I say means the same anyway.... but just interested in knowing

That is a good question, I'm not sure how it is set up as to whether it is a contract with SLE or the RFL and then SLE have an agreement with the RFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Padge said:

There will be a lot of coffins coming out of that room.

More to the point, we could also solve any energy crisis, by capturing and using all the hot air that would be pouring out...


The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.

Bury your memories; bury your friends. Leave it alone for a year or two.  Till the stories grow hazy, and the legends come true.  Then do it again - some things never end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

If the Sky contract included the TV rights for non-SL games, and if Sky paid more than they would otherwise have to secure those rights (or, perhaps, to secure them from anyone else getting them) then that part of the Sky contract monies is not something the SL clubs have any right to.

Those who argue the SL clubs ARE entitled to appropriate that money must presumably believe that Sky did not pay a penny more for the TV rights than they would have done anyway had only the rights to SL games been up for grabs.

So...does anyone have any proof which of these it was? Anyone?

If they do not, then no-one on here can be qualified to say whether the SL clubs are entitled to any more of the pot, or whether lower-League clubs are being “subsidised”. And everyone - you, me, the lot of us - are basing an argument on assumptions?

Actually it is slightly more than an assumption. It is based on what Ian Lenegan said - now whether he is bending the truth is a completely different question. Surely he wouldn't do that would he? ;)

 

What we do know though is that there is no Sky L1 contract, yet they get some funding, so that is at least a known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Padge said:

There will be a lot of coffins coming out of that room.

It would concentrate a few minds.


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

This doesn't make any sense when you remember it' the top 3 in the league driving this through. 

This idea it is self interest protecting them relegation looks like nonsense when you realise one of them had never been relegated and the other two are two of the biggest most successful clubs we have. 

Clearly this is something that the big clubs and smaller clubs agree causes huge problems 

I'm not relating it to the top 3...or the historically top 3 but to the full make up of the SL.  The top 3 may well support the existing SL clubs for supporting their wishes.   

As I said and to repeat my point was the changing of the goal posts if one of the team they like/are buddies with/support every thought they have, etc etc... in order to prevent that clubs relegation... The point being it has to be a set of criteria that is applied to all and independent from the SL executive.  They accept P&R and their has to be no way of circumventing that,   

Past experience of licencing shows how it can be fudged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Padge said:

No SL agreed to allow the RFL to negotiate on their behalf, which is totally different in effect the RFL were the broker not the customer.

That was my understanding, a bit like when IMG used to negotiate it. But I wasn't sure whether the model changed and the contract was with the RFL as an over-arching one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...