Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

audois

Rob Elstone

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, clogdance said:

He's a football fan from Barnsley. Has good business/accounting pedigree, but like Dick Lewis, knows very little about RL.. 

What doesn't he know about RL that you think he should know about?

Because it seemed to me he's the most qualified person we've ever had at the top of the game to run a multi million pound sports business and we've only got him because he took a massive pay cut to do it purely because he loves the game.  

Share this post


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

The others seem sensible enough (though im not sure the middle-east is necessarily the best place, Tenerife maybe? Florida?)

I assume he meant one of the Gulf states with wealthy benefactors. You might get a few thousand willing to travel to, say, Dubai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, clogdance said:

He's a football fan from Barnsley. Has good business/accounting pedigree, but like Dick Lewis, knows very little about RL.. 

Wrong, he’s a Cas supporter from Barnsley, and knows a lot about the game 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert Elstone made a fantastic point about the true worth of some of the Championship and League One clubs in that interview.

A lot of these teams produce no players at all, they don’t have Academy or reserve grades and they’re being given cash for this, while amateur clubs in the National Conference (your Wigan St Pats, Siddal’s, Dudley Hill’s etc) are the ones who are spending years producing players for the professional game and they’re not included in getting a share of any money. How is that fair exactly? 

On the whole, a very good interview and he raised a number of good points about the game without giving too much away. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had another listen and on the Super League structure question he sees "12 or maybe even smaller" as the ideal to ensure a quality product for broadcasters. Suspicious of expansion because it would dilute that.

Share this post


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

I understand that argument but the link to expansion is nonsense. 

The salary cap has such an affect on quality pretty much everything else becomes irrelevant.

Which clubs are in is probably not even top 5

I didn't take his comments to mean that he was suspicious of expansion per se, just that he is totally focussed on transforming the performance of Superleague as a sports business, and any club that wants to be part of that has to prove that it can add value to that longer term.

Apart from Toronto, all the other expansion names such as NYC are just wishful thinking at the moment therefore there's nothing to discuss. That would apply to British clubs too - prove you have the resources and investor backing to survive the journey to the new era. 

However the flip side of that, however, is I thought he indicated clearly that IF there are indeed clubs that can offer more than the existing 12 in SL, and some of those existing SL clubs are not keeping up, then he'd be quite happy for them to lose their place.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Loiner said:

At least he's not trying to take money from the smaller clubs by keeping all the TV money. Are Wigan so skint they have to take £75,000 off league 1 clubs ?

75,000 X 14 = 1,050,000 is the total club grant to Championship 1 clubs but then there are other cost covered by the game involving match officials & Admin costs. So the basic running costs for the division currently covered by the RFL  = Grant to clubs, Refs, & Admin would have to be about 1.2 million pounds / per year.

Championship One needs TV rights/live streaming site, Sponsorship & a combined merchandise distribution deal. In total all revenue streams need to cover running costs of the division = 1.2 million pound per year or as close to that as they can get to fund the competition and make it as self sufficient as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we put his commitment to the lower division funding as a sticky at the top of the forum to avoid mistruths being repeated over and over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That commitment beyond the end of this Sky deal is a huge backtrack from the original Lenagan position which should hopefully prove the basis of a consensus point going forward.

The structure thing may take longer to resolve; it turns out Leeds are very firm believers in the 8s (even though it's at some peril to themselves) so it will take a coalition of some lower league clubs with the other SL ones to change it using the existing voting structures.

Share this post


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

That commitment beyond the end of this Sky deal is a huge backtrack from the original Lenagan position which should hopefully prove the basis of a consensus point going forward.

The structure thing may take longer to resolve; it turns out Leeds are very firm believers in the 8s (even though it's at some peril to themselves) so it will take a coalition of some lower league clubs with the other SL ones to change it using the existing voting structures.

MJM do you happen to have the voting rights for the various changes within the game? I think this used to be highlighted in the Watkins Review, however this is no longer on the rfl site?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dave T said:

Can we put his commitment to the lower division funding as a sticky at the top of the forum to avoid mistruths being repeated over and over?

is his commitment worth anything though ? ATEOTD he is employed by the SL clubs and will be duty bound to do what they want. It isn't really a commitment until the SL clubs have voted on it and approved it. Its a good thing that he is in favour of continuation of the funding but until the clubs rubber stamp it then its not really a commitment that he can make.


I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Derwent said:

is his commitment worth anything though ? ATEOTD he is employed by the SL clubs and will be duty bound to do what they want. It isn't really a commitment until the SL clubs have voted on it and approved it. Its a good thing that he is in favour of continuation of the funding but until the clubs rubber stamp it then its not really a commitment that he can make.

Maybe not, but people are making all sorts of claims about Lenegan's intentions despite this being part of a proposal/discussion at a meeting. 

I think we have to give a bit of credibility to a claim made by the CEO of the organisation. Even if that just now leads to trying to get that commitment voted on and in writing.

Share this post


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

I think we have to give a bit of credibility to a claim made by the CEO of the organisation. 

Unfortunately he undermined his own credibility on day one in the job by announcing changes to the league structure that (a) haven't been agreed by all parties and (b ) are not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the organisation he heads to make in the first place.

I'm sure he regrets it now, but it can't be unsaid and it will mean that his statements on other matters will not automatically be taken at face value from now on by many people.

Most of us are still unclear as to what his actual role and remit is, and so long as we have a sport that is being pulled in two different directions by two separate organisations, that's only likely to get even more confusing.


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, John Drake said:

Unfortunately he undermined his own credibility on day one in the job by announcing changes to the league structure that (a) haven't been agreed by all parties and (b ) are not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the organisation he heads to make in the first place.

I'm sure he regrets it now, but it can't be unsaid and it will mean that his statements on other matters will not automatically be taken at face value from now on by many people.

Most of us are still unclear as to what his actual role and remit is, and so long as we have a sport that is being pulled in two different directions by two separate organisations, that's only likely to get even more confusing.

Maybe, however I think it is pretty clear that the Super 8's won't be here next year, so his statement won't be wrong. It may not be the most transparent way of getting things done, but it will get things done.

I'm certainly not saying it was the best way to go about it, i'll reserve judgement until he starts delivering stuff.

Share this post


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

Maybe, however I think it is pretty clear that the Super 8's won't be here next year, so his statement won't be wrong. It may not be the most transparent way of getting things done, but it will get things done.

I'm certainly not saying it was the best way to go about it, i'll reserve judgement until he starts delivering stuff.

It was the worst possible way to get something done! 

Split the game and set club against club, fan against fan, and have everyone talking about damn league structures again, right at the point when the 'powers that be' should be united in selling the virtues of the competitions as they currently exist, not effectively telling the public how rubbish they are. And with no guarantee that what you've said will actually come to pass anyway.

If that's a template for how he plans to do his job in future, gawd help the sport.


.

Share this post


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

It was the worst possible way to get something done! 

Split the game and set club against club, fan against fan, and have everyone talking about damn league structures again, right at the point when the 'powers that be' should be united in selling the virtues of the competitions as they currently exist, not effectively telling the public how rubbish they are. And with no guarantee that what you've said will actually come to pass anyway.

If that's a template for how he plans to do his job in future, gawd help the sport.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the overall principle, but if it is clear that this was ambling on, and maybe even being purposely delayed so that a system had to stay by default, then this tactic could be a masterstroke. It may upset plenty, but I think that is where these financial commitments are now coming into play. 

And I think there is a guarantee that what they have said will come to pass. They won't be forced to play under the Super 8's system, I think we can be pretty sure of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave T said:

MJM do you happen to have the voting rights for the various changes within the game? I think this used to be highlighted in the Watkins Review, however this is no longer on the rfl site?

 

It was in one of the papers. From memory it explained that things were weighted so that even if the SL clubs voted as a block there would need to be some support from the lower leagues. if even one top flight club voted differently it would need quite a number from below voting with the SL clubs. Can't find what I read anywhere from a quick Google though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, M j M said:

It was in one of the papers. From memory it explained that things were weighted so that even if the SL clubs voted as a block there would need to be some support from the lower leagues. if even one top flight club voted differently it would need quite a number from below voting with the SL clubs. Can't find what I read anywhere from a quick Google though.

AIUI, it is 2 votes for SL clubs =24.

1 each for the others =26.

Which would fit with your recollection.

Not sure how Dracs, TWP and TOXIII fit in as "guests", however.

Share this post


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

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the overall principle, but if it is clear that this was ambling on, and maybe even being purposely delayed so that a system had to stay by default, then this tactic could be a masterstroke. It may upset plenty, but I think that is where these financial commitments are now coming into play. 

And I think there is a guarantee that what they have said will come to pass. They won't be forced to play under the Super 8's system, I think we can be pretty sure of that.

It's a dangerous precedent to set that if a deal is made (ie, the TV deal which runs to 2021), and you sign up to that deal, but decide later you don't like it, you just choose to rip it up in public in an attempt to bully all the other signatories to the deal into acquiescence.

That's what's happened here.

If you support that way of doing business now, just because you agree with the particular outcome, what recourse have you if it is done again in the future and the outcome is less palatable to you or the club you support?


.

Share this post


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

Maybe, however I think it is pretty clear that the Super 8's won't be here next year, so his statement won't be wrong. It may not be the most transparent way of getting things done, but it will get things done.

I'm certainly not saying it was the best way to go about it, i'll reserve judgement until he starts delivering stuff.

Clear to whom? Depends if Lenegan is your messiah or Hetherington

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, John Drake said:

Unfortunately he undermined his own credibility on day one in the job by announcing changes to the league structure that (a) haven't been agreed by all parties and (b ) are not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the organisation he heads to make in the first place.

I'm sure he regrets it now, but it can't be unsaid and it will mean that his statements on other matters will not automatically be taken at face value from now on by many people.

Most of us are still unclear as to what his actual role and remit is, and so long as we have a sport that is being pulled in two different directions by two separate organisations, that's only likely to get even more confusing.

Nail and head spring to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, dixiedean said:

AIUI, it is 2 votes for SL clubs =24.

1 each for the others =26.

Which would fit with your recollection.

Not sure how Dracs, TWP and TOXIII fit in as "guests", however.

I thought SL votes match the lower league vote. So each SL vote is the equivalent of 2.33 votes. Which would then leave the RFL as the deciding vote. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, John Drake said:

It's a dangerous precedent to set that if a deal is made (ie, the TV deal which runs to 2021), and you sign up to that deal, but decide later you don't like it, you just choose to rip it up in public in an attempt to bully all the other signatories to the deal into acquiescence.

 That's what's happened here.

If you support that way of doing business now, just because you agree with the particular outcome, what recourse have you if it is done again in the future and the outcome is less palatable to you or the club you support?

And I suppose this is one of the bits we don't know - unless it has been published somewhere - that the SLE clubs claim they have spoken to Sky and they are paying for number of games rather than the specific format - although Hetherington claimed otherwise.

As far as the official line is going, they will adhere to the tv deal, but I have only seen Hetherington ever claim that change can't be made until the end of the deal. 

So as things stand, my understanding is that, Sky will get the 90 games or so that they pay for, all clubs will continue to get the funding that they agreed, so I'm not sure that any official deal has been ripped up.

I suppose it depends how much the TV deal was linked to the structure. If you ask IL, not at all, if you ask Hetherington, 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Private Baldrick said:

Clear to whom? Depends if Lenegan is your messiah or Hetherington

Do you think the Super 8's will be here next year?

Neither of those people are my messiah. But I don't see the majority of Super League clubs being forced into playing in a comp that they don't want. Something will give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

I thought SL votes match the lower league vote. So each SL vote is the equivalent of 2.33 votes. Which would then leave the RFL as the deciding vote. 

That was my understanding. I also thought there were certain rights that were exclusive to SLE clubs, things like structure of the SL comp?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...