Jump to content

Stabilization v Expansion


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Plans change. It’s normal for them to. 

Agree totally that plans change, but what we find is that they change to something less demanding, something more attainable and relevant to the effort expanded by the individual clubs to acheive than the first goals set, very rarely in RL do we realise the objectives initially presented and the "next step" published and new targets exposed.

If this was in the buisness world the MD would be demanding from his management that they keep on top of proceedings, submit periodical reports and ensure each and every stage is signed off.

But alas RL is not the buisness world and our MD - Mr Rimmer does not have the jurisdiction over the individual departmental managers - Messers Leneghan, McManus, Moran, Hetherington, Pearson etc to ensure any collective stratergies are enacted upon and met, which proved to be the case when they effectively mutinied and brought in Mr Elstone to look after their affairs.

Whoever is the top honcho of the RL is never going to get his propositions and projects given the effort and commitment required until all the clubs are willing to sign up to and in some way penalise those who underachieve, different targets should be set for each individual club so they are always improving their own status a "blanket" directive could be too easy for some yet unachievable for others, this applies to all clubs not just SL as long as season on season improvement is maintained that will be a positive for the game as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply
8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Agree totally that plans change, but what we find is that they change to something less demanding, something more attainable and relevant to the effort expanded by the individual clubs to acheive than the first goals set, very rarely in RL do we realise the objectives initially presented and the "next step" published and new targets exposed.

If this was in the buisness world the MD would be demanding from his management that they keep on top of proceedings, submit periodical reports and ensure each and every stage is signed off.

But alas RL is not the buisness world and our MD - Mr Rimmer does not have the jurisdiction over the individual departmental managers - Messers Leneghan, McManus, Moran, Hetherington, Pearson etc to ensure any collective stratergies are enacted upon and met, which proved to be the case when they effectively mutinied and brought in Mr Elstone to look after their affairs.

Whoever is the top honcho of the RL is never going to get his propositions and projects given the effort and commitment required until all the clubs are willing to sign up to and in some way penalise those who underachieve, different targets should be set for each individual club so they are always improving their own status a "blanket" directive could be too easy for some yet unachievable for others, this applies to all clubs not just SL as long as season on season improvement is maintained that will be a positive for the game as a whole.

Harry I'm asking for a prediction...I know, I know its not fair!...but I'm going to do it anyway.   Just answer the Yes/No question.

"Do you think Leigh will be in SL next year?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Kayakman said:

Incorrect, in fact Toronto has hit every benchmark it has set for itself so far....you know this.

No it hasn't and you know that, where is just one of Mr Perez's 1000's of ready made for Rugby League North American athletes, where is Mr Argyle's "wanting to put a rugby ball" into the hands of Toronto kids - forgive my ignorance but considering he own's a Rugby League club I assumed he meant a Rugby League ball and he would be doing something to promote the game for participants in the communities. 

"Expansion" into Canada was a wonderful concept set out to grow the sport, but allI the Hierarchy of the Wolfpack want to do us bring the circus to town, if there was something positve going on in the communities I would be the first to stand and applaud, but there is not even a flicker of assistance to kick-start a project of "Meaningful Expansion".

You have got to realize that without any infrastructure once the novelty begins to wear thin and the batteries run down the longevity of the sport will start to wane, wake up and smell the coffee K'man you are far too smart not to realise that is true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Picking at straws now. People in glass houses

Tommy after our previous "post swaps" regarding what we consider the nessacary action that should be taken to promote our sport to entice more participant's, seemingly albeit I may be wrong you consider Toronto to be exempt from participating in what I term as expanding the game. 

You champion the attendances Toronto returns and quite rightly so the evidence is there for all to see, but honestly I cannot as long as I consider the situation why The Wolfpack and Mr Argyle in particular is not moving on the back of this 'popularity' to put in place some community foundations, even clearing the site being ready for the construction workers to move in would be a statement of intent, but nothing comes out. 

If Toronto Wolfpack was one of Mr Argyle's mining projects and initial 'digs' were as positive as the Wolfpack has proved to be with the public he would be making sure that site reached and acheived it's full potential, the money he has spent on the Wolfpack relative to his fortune is no more than you or I would spend on our chosen pastime i.e. surplus not essential funds, I do not think he is in this for the long haul or he cares or not if he leaves any lasting legacy for the sport in Toronto, the commitment under the superficial exterior doesn't seem to be there. 

My opinion of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Tommy after our previous "post swaps" regarding what we consider the nessacary action that should be taken to promote our sport to entice more participant's, seemingly albeit I may be wrong you consider Toronto to be exempt from participating in what I term as expanding the game. 

You champion the attendances Toronto returns and quite rightly so the evidence is there for all to see, but honestly I cannot as long as I consider the situation why The Wolfpack and Mr Argyle in particular is not moving on the back of this 'popularity' to put in place some community foundations, even clearing the site being ready for the construction workers to move in would be a statement of intent, but nothing comes out. 

If Toronto Wolfpack was one of Mr Argyle's mining projects and initial 'digs' were as positive as the Wolfpack has proved to be with the public he would be making sure that site reached and acheived it's full potential, the money he has spent on the Wolfpack relative to his fortune is no more than you or I would spend on our chosen pastime i.e. surplus not essential funds, I do not think he is in this for the long haul or he cares or not if he leaves any lasting legacy for the sport in Toronto, the commitment under the superficial exterior doesn't seem to be there. 

My opinion of course.

I'd think lets judge them after 10 years on that front, especially as by that time Ottawa and potentially another team will be set up. Establishing new amateur clubs is not easy and effective even for clubs that have been around for a century - in any sport.

For me the priority with the Wolfpack and indeed most expansion teams is first growing awareness of the game. We in the heartlands take for granted at times that people have a clue what rugby league even is, such is the way we've slipped from the national consciousness. The youth development aspect will come, but fundamentally it won't happen unless people know there is a game to be played. If in 25 years time we're looking at the Toronto and Ottawa and see that they're on the way to being as good as London (which after Yorkshire and Lancashire, is well up there with Cumbria and Cheshire in the elite player development stakes) then I'll be happy.

I'm intrinsically unkeen to nitpick some clubs over others as it leads to a people in glass houses scenario and no one wins. Change your angle and assume every club is helpful to the success of the game and it becomes a lot more positive way to approach the game as a whole

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I'd think lets judge them after 10 years on that front, especially as by that time Ottawa and potentially another team will be set up. Establishing new amateur clubs is not easy and effective even for clubs that have been around for a century - in any sport.

For me the priority with the Wolfpack and indeed most expansion teams is first growing awareness of the game. We in the heartlands take for granted at times that people have a clue what rugby league even is, such is the way we've slipped from the national consciousness. The youth development aspect will come, but fundamentally it won't happen unless people know there is a game to be played. If in 25 years time we're looking at the Toronto and Ottawa and see that they're on the way to being as good as London (which after Yorkshire and Lancashire, is well up there with Cumbria and Cheshire in the elite player development stakes) then I'll be happy.

Now that statement really worries me, we are across the great divide in that thinking, to even contemplate 3 teams in as little as 10 years with a min requirement of 30 player's each and I have no doubt - *if allowed - they will be in the elite division dipping into a very shallow pool for their roster's and without putting anything back in we are in big trouble.

In addition people want the two French club's also in the top division, in the 14 years of Catalans existance in SL and 90 years of of playing the sport in France they are not producing enough player's in the whole of the country to furnish one team never mind two.

Then you say you would be happy if NA could attain as many as London have produced in 25years, it is actually 40 years - 1980 was their first season as Fulham - you will be happy!

There seems to be a lot of little to no thought given by this expansion mindset what will happen to the clubs here if these new entities replace them in the top flight, do you consider for one minute it will just be "Carry on regardless" for the people who put their money into those clubs and the game or even the fans who turn up to watch, it will not only effect the club(s) itself it will have an adverse reaction in the communities and the community game locally.

*If allowed, by that I think there will be some embargo put on the number of teams allowed in to our top divusion, we need to protect what little we have, if a numpty like me can envisage the downside I am sure those who need to protect their assets will also do, never let the phrase 'Charity begins at home' by pass you it is human nature to protect what have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Now that statement really worries me, we are across the great divide in that thinking, to even contemplate 3 teams in as little as 10 years with a min requirement of 30 player's each and I have no doubt - *if allowed - they will be in the elite division dipping into a very shallow pool for their roster's and without putting anything back in we are in big trouble.

In addition people want the two French club's also in the top division, in the 14 years of Catalans existance in SL and 90 years of of playing the sport in France they are not producing enough player's in the whole of the country to furnish one team never mind two.

Then you say you would be happy if NA could attain as many as London have produced in 25years, it is actually 40 years - 1980 was their first season as Fulham - you will be happy!

There seems to be a lot of little to no thought given by this expansion mindset what will happen to the clubs here if these new entities replace them in the top flight, do you consider for one minute it will just be "Carry on regardless" for the people who put their money into those clubs and the game or even the fans who turn up to watch, it will not only effect the club(s) itself it will have an adverse reaction in the communities and the community game locally.

*If allowed, by that I think there will be some embargo put on the number of teams allowed in to our top divusion, we need to protect what little we have, if a numpty like me can envisage the downside I am sure those who need to protect their assets will also do, never let the phrase 'Charity begins at home' by pass you it is human nature to protect what have.

Of course protecting what you have is essential, but when what you have is shrinking through forces outside your control, as you and I know, then you have to diversify.

Super League clubs are already orthodox in recruitment. Its M62 and the NRL. Anyone outside of that has to do especially well to be noticed even if they are in France, Wales or wherever with a strong rugby heritage - RU juniors is another neglected source of talent. New clubs with new thinking may be just what is needed to inspire changes in thought throughout the English game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/06/2020 at 10:20, Harry Stottle said:

Everything today is about money, and without it things don't happen, we the converted know we have a good product, but it is the advertising, selling and after sales back-up that has to be serviced that we cannot compete with,

I think this is the root of many issues. I've said before on previous threads, but constantly telling ourselves "we have a great product, we just don't tell people about it" leads us to think that RL's problems are ones that the sport can just advertise their way out of - and that because we can't afford lots of fancy advertising, we'll never succeed. There is a fundamental difference between advertising and marketing but they constantly get confused in this debate. 

The sport spends too much time thinking "the product is great" because middle-aged blokes from northern towns say that it's great. And that's fine if you think that middle-aged blokes from northern towns are going to sustain this sport for the next year, next decade, next generation and the generation after that. 

But as you allude to, the people commenting on here and buying League Express are the weirdos who get it. To most of the population, it's not that great a product and, when you look at it objectively, the existing customer base actually tollerates a hell of a lot that most audiences wouldn't - the poor facilities, tired match experience, the loss of leading talent, the poor governance and inaccessibility of media coverage. 

But it is those existing fans that are, in many respects, the barrier to addressing those issues with the product. The clubs are spending too much time asking Derek, the season ticket holder of 40+ years from Castleford, what he wants and catering to him, despite the fact he is already pretty well catered for. The sport isn't spending nearly enough, if any, time asking the new audiences that are needed to help the sport grow what they want, and creating something that they can easily buy.  

You're right - the sport can't compete in a financial arms race but it can fix this problem without actually getting into an arms race at all. This isn't a problem of advertising but of product, placement, pricing and perception. A shift in the culture of promoting this sport, a concerted effort to shift perception and a focus on catering to new audiences is far, far more powerful than any amount that is spent on media and advertising. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Of course protecting what you have is essential, but when what you have is shrinking through forces outside your control, as you and I know, then you have to diversify.

Super League clubs are already orthodox in recruitment. Its M62 and the NRL. Anyone outside of that has to do especially well to be noticed even if they are in France, Wales or wherever with a strong rugby heritage - RU juniors is another neglected source of talent. New clubs with new thinking may be just what is needed to inspire changes in thought throughout the English game.

New thinking is better than no apparent thinking at at all, it is just to easy to sit back and be reliant on others to be the providers, please Tommy tell me what France are doing to improve the situation, and there is not an inkling to even any plans forthcoming across the pond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

New thinking is better than no apparent thinking at at all, it is just to easy to sit back and be reliant on others to be the providers, please Tommy tell me what France are doing to improve the situation, and there is not an inkling to even any plans forthcoming across the pond.

They've got two clubs in the english comp with reserve sides to advertise their best talents, compete annually in regional and global tournaments and have proposals to move to a regionalised domestic league system so that strategically important places such as Lyon, Marseilles and of course Paris can be represented in a growing structure. Not bad for an essentially part time operation that is at best equivalent to the Championship over here regarding resources.

We could do more to help France, as we could with Wales and almost every other nation on our doorstep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I think this is the root of many issues. I've said before on previous threads, but constantly telling ourselves "we have a great product, we just don't tell people about it" leads us to think that RL's problems are ones that the sport can just advertise their way out of - and that because we can't afford lots of fancy advertising, we'll never succeed. There is a fundamental difference between advertising and marketing but they constantly get confused in this debate. 

The sport spends too much time thinking "the product is great" because middle-aged blokes from northern towns say that it's great. And that's fine if you think that middle-aged blokes from northern towns are going to sustain this sport for the next year, next decade, next generation and the generation after that. 

But as you allude to, the people commenting on here and buying League Express are the weirdos who get it. To most of the population, it's not that great a product and, when you look at it objectively, the existing customer base actually tollerates a hell of a lot that most audiences wouldn't - the poor facilities, tired match experience, the loss of leading talent, the poor governance and inaccessibility of media coverage. 

But it is those existing fans that are, in many respects, the barrier to addressing those issues with the product. The clubs are spending too much time asking Derek, the season ticket holder of 40+ years from Castleford, what he wants and catering to him, despite the fact he is already pretty well catered for. The sport isn't spending nearly enough, if any, time asking the new audiences that are needed to help the sport grow what they want, and creating something that they can easily buy.  

You're right - the sport can't compete in a financial arms race but it can fix this problem without actually getting into an arms race at all. This isn't a problem of advertising but of product, placement, pricing and perception. A shift in the culture of promoting this sport, a concerted effort to shift perception and a focus on catering to new audiences is far, far more powerful than any amount that is spent on media and advertising. 

Thanks for the reply Micheal, of course you are correct in your assessment and the remedial action you describe.

I am your descriptive of Derek from Cas you emphasise the clubs are catering for me and my type, even to the extreme of seeking out our thoughts of what we require I should think (hope) that was a metaphorical or even a fanciful example to further your theory.

The likes of me who have been attending for more years than I care to remember would not forsake the game for want of being objectional to catering for the requirements of any new audience, I for instance would still follow my own 'game day' expierience of about 4.1/2 - 5 hours for a home game plus travelling time for an away fixture either of which no more than 2 of those hours are actually spent on the ground, but if attendances were increased so it meant I had to get to the ground earlier I would welcome that.

So what do you suggest the course of action the clubs do to promote the sport and entice a new audience along, how will they guarantee their outlay speculation will result in a monetary accumaltion for spare cash is not a luxury in our sport, what can be done to entice the club's to venture on this much needed path the 'younger' generation champions as the saviour of our sport, as you say we need more Cory's and Rihanna's  attending along with the Derek's and Ethels's that will still be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

They've got two clubs in the english comp with reserve sides to advertise their best talents, compete annually in regional and global tournaments and have proposals to move to a regionalised domestic league system so that strategically important places such as Lyon, Marseilles and of course Paris can be represented in a growing structure. Not bad for an essentially part time operation that is at best equivalent to the Championship over here regarding resources.

We could do more to help France, as we could with Wales and almost every other nation on our doorstep.

Tommy if we have that kind of money to use, it should be spent on promoting the game over here and getting more playing the sport, it is not as though we are not in need of a good dose of care and attention, we need to be in a very stable situation before spending what we have on others.

Have you ever noticed when on a plane and they are going through the safety procedures how they advise those with children in the case of the oxygen facemasks 'dropping' and having to be utilsed, the instruction is to put your own on first before attending to the child, there is a very good reason for that which I will leave you work out why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Thanks for the reply Micheal, of course you are correct in your assessment and the remedial action you describe.

I am your descriptive of Derek from Cas you emphasise the clubs are catering for me and my type, even to the extreme of seeking out our thoughts of what we require I should think (hope) that was a metaphorical or even a fanciful example to further your theory.

The likes of me who have been attending for more years than I care to remember would not forsake the game for want of being objectional to catering for the requirements of any new audience, I for instance would still follow my own 'game day' expierience of about 4.1/2 - 5 hours for a home game plus travelling time for an away fixture either of which no more than 2 of those hours are actually spent on the ground, but if attendances were increased so it meant I had to get to the ground earlier I would welcome that.

So what do you suggest the course of action the clubs do to promote the sport and entice a new audience along, how will they guarantee their outlay speculation will result in a monetary accumaltion for spare cash is not a luxury in our sport, what can be done to entice the club's to venture on this much needed path the 'younger' generation champions as the saviour of our sport, as you say we need more Cory's and Rihanna's  attending along with the Derek's and Ethels's that will still be there.

I use "Derek from Castleford" as an example persona of the typical RL fan. I too fall into such a bracket (although I'm not quite old enough to have held a ticket for 40 years and I live (for most of the time) in Leeds). But the question is whether there are enough of people like us? The evidence suggests that there may not be and you can either shrug your shoulders and accept that, or acknowledge that something has to change. 

I think my point about over-catering to Des from Cas is a fair one. The game is very good at making sure that it caters to the one person that buys 20 match tickets a year, but very bad at catering to the 20 people who might each buy one match ticket a year. 

Take yourself out of that persona and try to look at RL as an 'outsider' - a first time fan. Does a typical English RL game look like the sort of you'd willingly spend money on? Does it look like a vibrant, popular, exciting product that you'd want to spend your money on? Or does it look like something that not that many people are bothered about, delivered on the cheap and nothing special compared to the many, many other ways you can spend your money in the modern leisure market? This isn't about 'Corey and Rihanna' as you glibly put it, but about broadening the game's appeal generally.

Magic Weekend is a classic missed opportunity - it's essentially the same thing we always sell, sold to the people we always sell to - only with the added hassle of getting to Newcastle thrown in. It could be delivered in a way that doesn't upset Des from Cas too much, but is different enough to appeal to more than just him and his ilk. 

Loop fixtures are another example of how the wrong attitude keeps us in our usual bubble. The clubs know they aren't popular, but they persist with them anyway because they perpetuate the myth that they are necessary. Loop fixtures are only 'necessary' if you look at things purely from a perspective of utility maximisation - sweating the assets if you will - rather than from the perspective of how we add value to the product. The band of accountants and lawyers that run our clubs all have that 'utility maximisation' mindset (as you'd expect an accountant to have), so they would much rather extract as much out of the players as possible, rather than investing in the product and the players to add value and create something that more people would be willing to pay more for. 

As for what we can or should do, I think the sport firstly needs to get rid of this hubris that "we're a great product", look at what we can learn from other sports and even other businesses and actually get the basic 'four Ps' of marketing right. 

Personally, if I was at the RFL, I'd massively rebrand and overhaul things like the Challenge Cup - it just looks tired and dated. Why would a casual fan go to that when other sporting events offer so much more for their entry fee? That burk from Rugby AM shouting at people through a megaphone does not a fan park make. Let's actually work out what we want the Challenge Cup to be because at the moment, it isn't appealing to anyone and it seems like the only reason we're persisting with it is because "that's what we've always done". 

I'd look at pricing. The game simply has to get off this treadmill of discounting that it has been stuck on for far too long. Existing fans have got used to the discounting and when it comes to new fans, we're arguably at a point where our cheap prices, in comparison to other sports, are doing us a disservice. If we look too cheap, people won't believe us when we say that we're better than the competition. If you want an example (and perhaps an analogy for RL comes across) it's a lot easier to sell Ed Sheeran for $100 than it is for $2

I'd put greater onus on the clubs to promote themselves more effectively. I'd make aspects of central funding contingent on clubs delivering commercial growth and I would modify the salary cap to an FFP model, preventing under-performing clubs from holding back those that can grow. 

We have to make this sport easier to buy. In a world where I can order something from the other side of the world and it'll be at my door in a few days, it's frankly stupid that we insist that, in order to be a "proper" RL fan, you have to live within a narrow band of land in the north of England. For the months of the year that I'm not living in Leeds it is very difficult for me, even as an RL fan, to "buy" RL. That's just dumb. 

And yes, I'll shake this hornets nest again, I'd introduce alternative forms of the sport such as 7s or 9s. We have to acknowledge that whilst Des from Cas might love the intricacies of a forward battle, many people don't. Instead, they want to see the flair players doing their stuff, creating viral moments and delivering the unexpected. Done right, it could go a long way to challenging the perception of RL being a sport where northern blokes watch fatter northern blokes fight over an egg in the same way that T20 changed the perception that cricket was just something for pensioners to fall asleep to. 

Yes, Des from Cas might not like the idea of a 9s weekend in London or Manchester surrounded by people who use Twittergram and Facetube, but he'll still be able to watch the derby with Wakefield the following week and nobody would begrudge him that pleasure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Tommy if we have that kind of money to use, it should be spent on promoting the game over here and getting more playing the sport, it is not as though we are not in need of a good dose of care and attention, we need to be in a very stable situation before spending what we have on others.

Have you ever noticed when on a plane and they are going through the safety procedures how they advise those with children in the case of the oxygen facemasks 'dropping' and having to be utilsed, the instruction is to put your own on first before attending to the child, there is a very good reason for that which I will leave you work out why.

The player pool is limited by the number of professional contracts available. Right now that stands at a pitifully low figure in the northern hemisphere. Hundreds of players every year are dumped out of the academy game to not return to amateur level because mainly there isn't the opportunity and the majority choose not to play part time. Expanding the number of professional opportunities is an essential part of our game growing as much as expanding youth.

This isn't charity starts at home, this is drawing investment in from outside. You can only cut your cloth so much before you run out of cloth. 

It's why I said earlier in this thread that fans of perennially second division sides such as yours should be praying for expansion over stabilization in the OP's suggested dichotomy. As if the Super League clubs want to "stabilise" or to use your term "charity begins at home", they're not going to look after the second and third division clubs are they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

The player pool is limited by the number of professional contracts available. Right now that stands at a pitifully low figure in the northern hemisphere. Hundreds of players every year are dumped out of the academy game to not return to amateur level because mainly there isn't the opportunity and the majority choose not to play part time. Expanding the number of professional opportunities is an essential part of our game growing as much as expanding youth.

This isn't charity starts at home, this is drawing investment in from outside. You can only cut your cloth so much before you run out of cloth. 

It's why I said earlier in this thread that fans of perennially second division sides such as yours should be praying for expansion over stabilization in the OP's suggested dichotomy. As if the Super League clubs want to "stabilise" or to use your term "charity begins at home", they're not going to look after the second and third division clubs are they?

I suggest that it's also limited by the game's small footprint, low profile, small time parochial ways and lack of money which I suspect are a definite turnoff for many boys and young men nowadays, including a good number of the sons and grandsons of the RL players and fans of yesteryear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Big Picture said:

I suggest that it's also limited by the game's small footprint, low profile, small time parochial ways and lack of money which I suspect are a definite turnoff for many boys and young men nowadays, including a good number of the sons and grandsons of the RL players and fans of yesteryear.

I think there's certainly an element to that. I suggested on here before that without schools essentially forcing kids to play the game we face an increasingly declining interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I'd introduce alternative forms of the sport such as 7s or 9s.

I agree. I think this strategy makes the most sense when trying to introduce people from new areas. It gives you much more flexibility in terms of the number of teams, the amount of time you play for, the structure of events, etc. You need that flexibility in order to try new things. You can't do it with 13-a-side 80 minutes matches. They might come in time, but you need something else to gain a foothold.

I don't know how it can be done, but I do believe that you need new teams (7's or 9's) that will represent the areas that you're hoping to attract interest from. It simply won't work if your plan is to take Widnes to Birmingham and say "hey, we're Widnes, rugby league is a great sport, please come and watch and support us."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Well they have already expanded and contributed to the player pool. Far more than any club in the lower leagues bar possibly Bradford.

But the environment created has limited the abilities of any club to do the things we want them to do

FFS Scotchy, not to go over the well beaten track once more, it is not just the pro and semi pro clubs of the area's that contribute to the player pool it is the area's themselves, look af the academies of the SL clubs and take note of the origins of the player's who populate them they are scattered from all over the lower leagues, I would wager the influx of new academy players for the 2020 season from those area's will be more than the whole of Canada will produce in the next 10 years.

So tell me what this environment that has been created that limits the abilities of any club and specifically how that effects Canada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it boils down to it we have one huge problem in UK RL, we do it on the cheap, we are seen as being on the cheap, we have fans who demand it on the cheap, we have fans who do their best to drive out new money coming in, we cater for the cheap clubs, we employ cheap leaders with little or no ability to grow a business, sponsors see us as cheap, media see us as cheap - and we like a damn good moan about it all.

Unless we raise the bar and have a joined up approach to expansion ie they bring wealth to the table not take from it, then we will be this cheap sport supported by cheap fans on cheap wages. FFS even Greggs reinvented themselves away from being cheap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

When it boils down to it we have one huge problem in UK RL, we do it on the cheap, we are seen as being on the cheap, we have fans who demand it on the cheap, we have fans who do their best to drive out new money coming in, we cater for the cheap clubs, we employ cheap leaders with little or no ability to grow a business, sponsors see us as cheap, media see us as cheap - and we like a damn good moan about it all.

Unless we raise the bar and have a joined up approach to expansion ie they bring wealth to the table not take from it, then we will be this cheap sport supported by cheap fans on cheap wages. FFS even Greggs reinvented themselves away from being cheap

This is certainly one of the biggest issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I use "Derek from Castleford" as an..........

Thank you for that, I am not disagreeing with anything that you say, I would agree to most things that would make our game more popular and entice people in, irrespective of Ethel and myself preferring to stay in the pub until kick off time, but as you state we are not the target audience, simply put we are the converted with a limited shelf life. 

You quite obviously - well you do to me being a novice in such matters - seem very well versed in these intracsies you so eloquently describe. So who is it up to set in motion this apparently life saving system of enticing a whole new audience, should it be a directive from the governing body to invest 'X' amount from the subsistence fund the clubs recieve, or considering it is the individual clubs who will gain from whatever the investment is should they bite the bullet and go for it .................. do you see it ever happening?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

You are wrong and your self-serving definition of youth development is silly. 

However even by your silly criteria you are wrong. 

The post i responded to was talking about France. Not Canada. 

If you had followed all the conversation you would have seen the main theme was Canada.

And why I am I wrong in stating that area's other than the cities and towns of SL clubs provide players for academies, simply check the rosters, but you already know that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.