WE'RE REALLY BACK

[Rupert Prince]

12 hours ago, DoubleD said:

Glad you have such a positive view on it

I'm positive that it would be daft to play on an empty Wembley.

And I'm positive it would have been best to have agreed this seasons schedule and next a lot sooner and laid out a proper build to the world cup.  We play too many games as it is, and we need a proper preseason next year.

[John Drake]

16 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

I'm positive that it would be daft to play on an empty Wembley.

And I'm positive it would have been best to have agreed this seasons schedule and next a lot sooner and laid out a proper build to the world cup.  We play too many games as it is, and we need a proper preseason next year.

These are not normal times.

It can only have been a logistical nightmare for those making these decisions, in terms of keeping the participating clubs happy, honouring existing contractual obligations with sponsors, venues, broadcasters and ensuring the health and safety of the players, all under the ever-changing rules and regulations relating to the pandemic.

I think we have to cut those in charge of getting Rugby League's show back on the road a little bit of slack right now.

Not everything that unfolds over the weeks and months ahead is going to be ideal, but considering what the entire world has been through so far in 2020, if the Rugby League season is completed at all - and it is still a massive 'if' considering the virus is still out there and we don't have a vaccine - I think those who made it possible will deserve immense credit, rather than nitpicking criticism.

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, John Drake said:

These are not normal times.

It can only have been a logistical nightmare for those making these decisions, in terms of keeping the participating clubs happy, honouring existing contractual obligations with sponsors, venues, broadcasters and ensuring the health and safety of the players, all under the ever-changing rules and regulations relating to the pandemic.

I think we have to cut those in charge of getting Rugby League's show back on the road a little bit of slack right now.

Not everything that unfolds over the weeks and months ahead is going to be ideal, but considering what the entire world has been through so far in 2020, if the Rugby League season is completed at all - and it is still a massive 'if' considering the virus is still out there and we don't have a vaccine - I think those who made it possible will deserve immense credit, rather than nitpicking criticism.

Spot on John. 

Personally, even if behind closed doors, and as long as the costs are not prohibitive I'd be playing the final at Wembley. 

[wiganermike]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Spot on John. 

Personally, even if behind closed doors, and as long as the costs are not prohibitive I'd be playing the final at Wembley. 

I would imagine Wembley would only be used in the event of a very large crowd being allowed which is looking unlikely to be the case. Considering that the RFL are already looking at a £3 million hole due to losing The Ashes spending money to rent an empty or mostly empty Wembley would be a ridiculously wasteful symbolic gesture. Look at what happened when the crowd was lower than hoped for due to Catalans reaching the final. Unless we can sell 80% of the seats we won't use Wembley IMHO. I think we will get a cup final somewhere in the north this year.

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, wiganermike said:

I would imagine Wembley would only be used in the event of a very large crowd being allowed which is looking unlikely to be the case. Considering that the RFL are already looking at a £3 million hole due to losing The Ashes spending money to rent an empty or mostly empty Wembley would be a ridiculously wasteful symbolic gesture. Look at what happened when the crowd was lower than hoped for due to Catalans reaching the final. Unless we can sell 80% of the seats we won't use Wembley IMHO. I think we will get a cup final somewhere in the north this year.

But that's my point about costs. If crowds are not allowed I see little reason why Wembley would be charging a bomb. 

[wiganermike]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

But that's my point about costs. If crowds are not allowed I see little reason why Wembley would be charging a bomb. 

They will have hosted 3 soccer internationals in the fortnight previous to the Challenge Cup final, at least one of which will be behind closed doors and they will have held the 3 EFL playoff finals, 2 FA Cup semi finals and the FA Cup final without paying crowds. They have a lot of expected and budgeted for lost revenue to make up for so I don't see why we should expect a significant reduction in rental costs. Certainly not significant enough to make up for the losses that would result from a smaller than average attendance.

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, wiganermike said:

They will have hosted 3 soccer internationals in the fortnight previous to the Challenge Cup final, at least one of which will be behind closed doors and they will have held the 3 EFL playoff finals, 2 FA Cup semi finals and the FA Cup final without paying crowds. They have a lot of expected and budgeted for lost revenue to make up for so I don't see why we should expect a significant reduction in rental costs. Certainly not significant enough to make up for the losses that would result from a smaller than average attendance.

No ground will be free. 

The final should still deliver some prestige, and of course we shouldn't forget that we already have a contract with Wembley. If their insurance has covered their losses from the Cup final, who knows what deal could be struck for what is basically a white elephant. 

But it's all guesswork, none of us know the costs, but our starting point should be we play the final at Wembley until that isn't possible, either through costs or other logistical issues. 

[wiganermike]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

No ground will be free. 

The final should still deliver some prestige, and of course we shouldn't forget that we already have a contract with Wembley. If their insurance has covered their losses from the Cup final, who knows what deal could be struck for what is basically a white elephant. 

But it's all guesswork, none of us know the costs, but our starting point should be we play the final at Wembley until that isn't possible, either through costs or other logistical issues. 

I think that working from the starting position of having a Wembley final but preparing for any contingency is what the RFL are doing. Hence the mention in some press releases of it being provisionally booked but also stating in all press releases that the cup final venue is unconfirmed. I just don't think for practical reasons such as cost, permitted attendance and the time-frame to sell tickets once the venue is able to be confirmed that a Wembley final is where we will end up.

[arcticchris]

A disgraceful aspect of the restart that seems to have had little comment is that only a small number of grounds have been made available for the next set of games including triple headers yet Leeds have got 2 of their first 3 matches at Headingley.

Yet Toronto and likely Catalans will have to play all games over in England.

 

If Leeds win it this year it will be a bit tainted for mine.

[M j M]

5 minutes ago, arcticchris said:

A disgraceful aspect of the restart that seems to have had little comment is that only a small number of grounds have been made available for the next set of games including triple headers yet Leeds have got 2 of their first 3 matches at Headingley.

Yet Toronto and likely Catalans will have to play all games over in England.

 

If Leeds win it this year it will be a bit tainted for mine.

All clubs were able to apply to host games. Only a handful did and they have all been allocated games. If you don't like it, take it up with the clubs who didn't, or couldn't, make their stadia available.

To correct another mistruth, Catalans will be playing at home from September.

[Damien]

33 minutes ago, arcticchris said:

A disgraceful aspect of the restart that seems to have had little comment is that only a small number of grounds have been made available for the next set of games including triple headers yet Leeds have got 2 of their first 3 matches at Headingley.

Yet Toronto and likely Catalans will have to play all games over in England.

 

If Leeds win it this year it will be a bit tainted for mine.

I would prefer to see RL grounds being used and money kept within the sport. If say the DW was being used then money would be going to the stadium company and also all money from food and drink. I would like to think that using RL grounds keeps more money within the sport and can allow income to be redistributed amongst all clubs. Whether this happens or not is a matter for Super League. If that doesnt happen and the host club simply pockets the money then there are obviously issues there.

[arcticchris]

1 hour ago, M j M said:

All clubs were able to apply to host games. Only a handful did and they have all been allocated games. If you don't like it, take it up with the clubs who didn't, or couldn't, make their stadia available.

To correct another mistruth, Catalans will be playing at home from September.

Thanks for the second part. I knew clubs were kicking up a fuss about Catalans playing at home as the French Government are now allowing crowds of up to 5000.

 

I can live with neutral grounds and the teams that host games getting money for doing so but don’t think that while there are only a handful of venues being used that any team should play at their home ground.

[M j M]

Home advantage without home fans is barely home advantage, as has been shown in the NRL and elsewhere.

[Rupert Prince]

8 hours ago, John Drake said:

These are not normal times.

It can only have been a logistical nightmare for those making these decisions, in terms of keeping the participating clubs happy, honouring existing contractual obligations with sponsors, venues, broadcasters and ensuring the health and safety of the players, all under the ever-changing rules and regulations relating to the pandemic.

I think we have to cut those in charge of getting Rugby League's show back on the road a little bit of slack right now.

Not everything that unfolds over the weeks and months ahead is going to be ideal, but considering what the entire world has been through so far in 2020, if the Rugby League season is completed at all - and it is still a massive 'if' considering the virus is still out there and we don't have a vaccine - I think those who made it possible will deserve immense credit, rather than nitpicking criticism.

My point is the decisions, the difficult decisions, real difficult decisions, should have been done earlier.  As it is both RFL and SL are making it up as they go along. We have not got any fixtures beyond the first 2.

Take the Challenge Cup.  Let's ignore the rather farcical possibility of playing the game with the conductor in white suit singing to an empty stadium...   we have a big  headline telling us the great news, but we have a number of Championship teams who simply cannot afford to play to empty stadiums and cannot afford the special measures and are not training,  ie all those associated games will be byes.

That is clever is it? I suggest to you it's not.  The Cup should have been redrawn, and for this year renamed, and final played at Headingly.  To paraphrase Crocodile Dundee. "That's a difficult decision."

[Rupert Prince]

7 hours ago, wiganermike said:

They will have hosted 3 soccer internationals in the fortnight previous to the Challenge Cup final, at least one of which will be behind closed doors and they will have held the 3 EFL playoff finals, 2 FA Cup semi finals and the FA Cup final without paying crowds. They have a lot of expected and budgeted for lost revenue to make up for so I don't see why we should expect a significant reduction in rental costs. Certainly not significant enough to make up for the losses that would result from a smaller than average attendance.

The point about Wembley might be that the England team will have to go to lockdown type restrictions, like the Cricket do, so playing 3 games can be managed.  The F1 are doing similar restrictions... eg with 2 successive events at Silverstone

Cricket are using 2 grounds (?) I believe and there needs to be time to prepare the pitch. And we have seen the issue of Archer... his error could have cost millions I believe.

[wiganermike]

1 hour ago, Rupert Prince said:

My point is the decisions, the difficult decisions, real difficult decisions, should have been done earlier.  As it is both RFL and SL are making it up as they go along. We have not got any fixtures beyond the first 2.

Take the Challenge Cup.  Let's ignore the rather farcical possibility of playing the game with the conductor in white suit singing to an empty stadium...   we have a big  headline telling us the great news, but we have a number of Championship teams who simply cannot afford to play to empty stadiums and cannot afford the special measures and are not training,  ie all those associated games will be byes.

That is clever is it? I suggest to you it's not.  The Cup should have been redrawn, and for this year renamed, and final played at Headingly.  To paraphrase Crocodile Dundee. "That's a difficult decision."

As much of a bonus as it would be for my club to have a re-draw made should the 5 non-SL clubs withdraw, and to have the possibility of a bye rather than a tie (yet another) against Warrington (and I'm sure Wire would appreciate a bye rather than having to play to reach the last 8 too), a re-draw would materially change little so I don't see the need. We would still need 8 teams from 11 progressing so would have 3 ties played and 5 teams (those not drawn) getting byes. That their opponents may have no option but to withdraw is not the fault of those 5 teams drawn to play them back in March. We may as well just carry on as proposed to do.

[Tommygilf]

17 hours ago, M j M said:

Home advantage without home fans is barely home advantage, as has been shown in the NRL and elsewhere.

Indeed. And at Leeds for example we are the "away side" against Huddersfield for example. I'd imagine that would mean using the away changing rooms in normal circumstances.

[John Drake]

17 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

My point is the decisions, the difficult decisions, real difficult decisions, should have been done earlier.  As it is both RFL and SL are making it up as they go along. We have not got any fixtures beyond the first 2.

Take the Challenge Cup.  Let's ignore the rather farcical possibility of playing the game with the conductor in white suit singing to an empty stadium...   we have a big  headline telling us the great news, but we have a number of Championship teams who simply cannot afford to play to empty stadiums and cannot afford the special measures and are not training,  ie all those associated games will be byes.

That is clever is it? I suggest to you it's not.  The Cup should have been redrawn, and for this year renamed, and final played at Headingly.  To paraphrase Crocodile Dundee. "That's a difficult decision."

You present easy solutions where none exist. 

You accuse the RFL and SL of making it up as they go along. What else do you expect? The whole WORLD has been making it up as it goes along because this global pandemic is unprecedented in modern times. The terms on which governments are allowing things to proceed is changing on a daily basis as new facts about the virus emerge. Sporting governing bodies are having to build their plans to restart on those shifting sands. Mistakes will be made. Non-ideal fixes will be applied. Compromises will be made to existing plans and schedules. And things will keep changing to fit the circumstances of the day. That's life for everyone now, until such time as a vaccine is made widely available.

Whatever the RFL/SL choose to do in order to get games played and competitions completed, it will not please everyone.

Your own suggestion is so simplistic as to be laughable in my view.

[Rupert Prince]

2 hours ago, John Drake said:

You present easy solutions where none exist. 

You accuse the RFL and SL of making it up as they go along. What else do you expect? The whole WORLD has been making it up as it goes along because this global pandemic is unprecedented in modern times. The terms on which governments are allowing things to proceed is changing on a daily basis as new facts about the virus emerge. Sporting governing bodies are having to build their plans to restart on those shifting sands. Mistakes will be made. Non-ideal fixes will be applied. Compromises will be made to existing plans and schedules. And things will keep changing to fit the circumstances of the day. That's life for everyone now, until such time as a vaccine is made widely available.

Whatever the RFL/SL choose to do in order to get games played and competitions completed, it will not please everyone.

Your own suggestion is so simplistic as to be laughable in my view.

Real money was at stake with F1 and cricket and they made decisions appropriately... determined decisions. These are international venues as well.

And Melbourne is put into lock down... and...?   The whole AFL(alright 6 Victorian teams)... upped their stick and moved to Queensland overnight. (2 Jul). See Guardian or ABC if you want to see an organisation make action.

But let's start at the beginning of your reply.  I did NOT claim they were "easy" decisions.  I asked for "difficult" decisions.  As such your whole reply is totally wrongly characterized.

What I will say to you and other RL journalists is that you regularly make weasely excuses for the way our game is mismanaged... that refers to both administrators and club managers.  

But look at us... NRL are well into their season, so are the AFL (see above)  and what at we doing?  Do we know if the Championship teams will be playing in the Cup, where are the venues and fixtures for the rest of the season.  Are we really preparing for the World Cup next season... a French fixture ... an exiles ... a Welsh fixture?  Err...    Are we willing to make time for international players to get some games... even get together ....

Go ahead and carry on with making excuses as opposed to journalism.

[Rupert Prince]

19 hours ago, Moove said:

We have TV obligations with the BBC maybe?

Shock horror the BBC have to keep paying Gary Linaker his £1.75 million

[wiganermike]

24 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Real money was at stake with F1 and cricket and they made decisions appropriately... determined decisions. These are international venues as well.

And Melbourne is put into lock down... and...?   The whole AFL(alright 6 Victorian teams)... upped their stick and moved to Queensland overnight. (2 Jul). See Guardian or ABC if you want to see an organisation make action.

But let's start at the beginning of your reply.  I did NOT claim they were "easy" decisions.  I asked for "difficult" decisions.  As such your whole reply is totally wrongly characterized.

What I will say to you and other RL journalists is that you regularly make weasely excuses for the way our game is mismanaged... that refers to both administrators and club managers.  

But look at us... NRL are well into their season, so are the AFL (see above)  and what at we doing?  Do we know if the Championship teams will be playing in the Cup, where are the venues and fixtures for the rest of the season.  Are we really preparing for the World Cup next season... a French fixture ... an exiles ... a Welsh fixture?  Err...    Are we willing to make time for international players to get some games... even get together ....

Go ahead and carry on with making excuses as opposed to journalism.

The 5 non-SL clubs still in the cup were given a deadline of 23rd July by which to confirm whether or not they will compete in their round 6 ties. This was announced after the RFL Board meeting on 6th July. We await their individual decisions being made public.

The RFL as part of the planning that has gone into revising the fixture lists and restarting the SL and Challenge Cup campaigns will have drawn up a complete list of venues for use in those competitions up until completion in the event that home venues cannot be used. However with the uncertainty hanging over all sport with regard to when if at all fans will be able to attend they have decided to only publicly confirm those venues for the next few weeks of the season when the situation is clearer. Why publish a whole season plan for venues now when changing circumstances may remove the need to use it? Why publicise finals at Old Trafford and Wembley when you can't be certain that is where they will be? We don't have the cash like soccer and F1 to use large, empty venues and take the hit.

The priority right now is getting the domestic campaigns (where possible) up and running and keeping them running. While WC prep and warm up games etc. for the home nations are important things to consider there are other issues taking up the RFL's time right now. The lack of announcement doesn't mean they aren't being planned. Once the season has actually resumed and is progressing without too many issues then I imagine announcements of such WC prep elements will start to be forthcoming.

We are all frustrated after nearly 4 months of lockdown, social distancing and disruption so I understand your frustration at seeming lack of developments and progress.

[Wiltshire Warrior Dragon]

4 hours ago, John Drake said:

You present easy solutions where none exist. 

You accuse the RFL and SL of making it up as they go along. What else do you expect? The whole WORLD has been making it up as it goes along because this global pandemic is unprecedented in modern times. The terms on which governments are allowing things to proceed is changing on a daily basis as new facts about the virus emerge. Sporting governing bodies are having to build their plans to restart on those shifting sands. Mistakes will be made. Non-ideal fixes will be applied. Compromises will be made to existing plans and schedules. And things will keep changing to fit the circumstances of the day. That's life for everyone now, until such time as a vaccine is made widely available.

Whatever the RFL/SL choose to do in order to get games played and competitions completed, it will not please everyone.

Your own suggestion is so simplistic as to be laughable in my view.

 

19 minutes ago, wiganermike said:

The 5 non-SL clubs still in the cup were given a deadline of 23rd July by which to confirm whether or not they will compete in their round 6 ties. This was announced after the RFL Board meeting on 6th July. We await their individual decisions being made public.

The RFL as part of the planning that has gone into revising the fixture lists and restarting the SL and Challenge Cup campaigns will have drawn up a complete list of venues for use in those competitions up until completion in the event that home venues cannot be used. However with the uncertainty hanging over all sport with regard to when if at all fans will be able to attend they have decided to only publicly confirm those venues for the next few weeks of the season when the situation is clearer. Why publish a whole season plan for venues now when changing circumstances may remove the need to use it? Why publicise finals at Old Trafford and Wembley when you can't be certain that is where they will be? We don't have the cash like soccer and F1 to use large, empty venues and take the hit.

The priority right now is getting the domestic campaigns (where possible) up and running and keeping them running. While WC prep and warm up games etc. for the home nations are important things to consider there are other issues taking up the RFL's time right now. The lack of announcement doesn't mean they aren't being planned. Once the season has actually resumed and is progressing without too many issues then I imagine announcements of such WC prep elements will start to be forthcoming.

We are all frustrated after nearly 4 months of lockdown, social distancing and disruption so I understand your frustration at seeming lack of developments and progress.

Two excellently worded replies, gents, for which, thanks!

[fighting irish]

4 hours ago, John Drake said:

You present easy solutions where none exist. 

You accuse the RFL and SL of making it up as they go along. What else do you expect? The whole WORLD has been making it up as it goes along because this global pandemic is unprecedented in modern times. The terms on which governments are allowing things to proceed is changing on a daily basis as new facts about the virus emerge. Sporting governing bodies are having to build their plans to restart on those shifting sands. Mistakes will be made. Non-ideal fixes will be applied. Compromises will be made to existing plans and schedules. And things will keep changing to fit the circumstances of the day. That's life for everyone now, until such time as a vaccine is made widely available.

Whatever the RFL/SL choose to do in order to get games played and competitions completed, it will not please everyone.

Your own suggestion is so simplistic as to be laughable in my view.

Don't pussy-foot around John, tell him. 

[bobbruce]

1 hour ago, Rupert Prince said:

Real money was at stake with F1 and cricket and they made decisions appropriately... determined decisions. These are international venues as well.

And Melbourne is put into lock down... and...?   The whole AFL(alright 6 Victorian teams)... upped their stick and moved to Queensland overnight. (2 Jul). See Guardian or ABC if you want to see an organisation make action.

But let's start at the beginning of your reply.  I did NOT claim they were "easy" decisions.  I asked for "difficult" decisions.  As such your whole reply is totally wrongly characterized.

What I will say to you and other RL journalists is that you regularly make weasely excuses for the way our game is mismanaged... that refers to both administrators and club managers.  

But look at us... NRL are well into their season, so are the AFL (see above)  and what at we doing?  Do we know if the Championship teams will be playing in the Cup, where are the venues and fixtures for the rest of the season.  Are we really preparing for the World Cup next season... a French fixture ... an exiles ... a Welsh fixture?  Err...    Are we willing to make time for international players to get some games... even get together ....

Go ahead and carry on with making excuses as opposed to journalism.

Australia currently stand at 122 coronavirus deaths so trying to make out the RFL could just do what the NRL are doing is ridiculous. They also have a multi billion $ tv deal they need to service which gives them much more money to play with to get these games under way. Other than football what other domestic team sport is under way in the UK. 

[John Drake]

4 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

Real money was at stake with F1 and cricket and they made decisions appropriately... determined decisions. These are international venues as well.

And Melbourne is put into lock down... and...?   The whole AFL(alright 6 Victorian teams)... upped their stick and moved to Queensland overnight. (2 Jul). See Guardian or ABC if you want to see an organisation make action.

But let's start at the beginning of your reply.  I did NOT claim they were "easy" decisions.  I asked for "difficult" decisions.  As such your whole reply is totally wrongly characterized.

What I will say to you and other RL journalists is that you regularly make weasely excuses for the way our game is mismanaged... that refers to both administrators and club managers.  

But look at us... NRL are well into their season, so are the AFL (see above)  and what at we doing?  Do we know if the Championship teams will be playing in the Cup, where are the venues and fixtures for the rest of the season.  Are we really preparing for the World Cup next season... a French fixture ... an exiles ... a Welsh fixture?  Err...    Are we willing to make time for international players to get some games... even get together ....

Go ahead and carry on with making excuses as opposed to journalism.

I'm not making excuses, weasely or otherwise, for anyone or any organisation. I just appreciate the complexity of the situation they are dealing with.

You have criticised them for scheduling the Cup Final to go ahead at Wembley in October, and suggested a better alternative would be to redraw the competition, rename it, and play the final at Headingley.

I'll explain in detail why I think that's untenable and would create more problems than it fixed.

1. If you redraw the competition now, do you include or exclude Championship clubs, who are still waiting to decide if they should resume their season or not? If you exclude them, and later this week a decision is taken to resume their season, you have created a new problem of unfairly excluding clubs from a competition they have a valid part to play in. If you include them, and their season does not restart, you're back to square one, exactly where we are now.

2. Leaving aside the Championship conundrum, if you redraw the competition, you're guaranteed to spark immediate complaints from clubs who perceive they have been given a tougher draw. You've created a new problem, something else for people to argue and moan about.

3. You want to rename the competition. To what, exactly? It's the Challenge Cup, or more accurately, the Coral Challenge Cup. The moment you start messing with it, not only to you devalue it for the clubs and players, but you have to square it with the broadcaster and primarily the sponsors as you have changed the terms on which they agreed to sponsor it, and you risk them withdrawing their money and possibly withdrawing from the deal altogether.

4. You want to play the final at Headingley. The government announced late last week that crowds will potentially be allowed back into sports stadia from 1st October, but you want to proceed moving it to Headingley right now, on the assumption the final, now scheduled for the end of October, will be played behind closed doors. So what do you do if crowds ARE allowed back from October? What do you say to the several thousands of people who have already purchased Cup Final tickets for Wembley? Even if only 20k tickets have already been sold, with stadia accepting socially distanced crowds of 25-30% of capacity under government proposals, all those people could easily be accommodated at Wembley for this year's final, giving us at least some semblance of normality for one of the game's blue riband events. But if you'd already cancelled Wembley and shifted it to Headingley, at 25-30% capacity you'd have to turn a lot of those ticket holders away, which would be self defeating in the extreme. And how do you decide which of them gets in and who doesn't?

No governing body is or should be above criticism, but the criticism should at least be grounded in reality, not fantasy.