These People Must Be In a UK Rugby League Independent Commission

[steve oates]

17 hours ago, The Daddy said:

Rugby League desperately needs an independent commission, it's been suggested  by Shane Richardson recently and Lindsay Hoyle.

If it doesn't happen soon then professional Rugby League in the UK is toast.

Mick Hogan Sally Bolton Richard Lewis Eddie Hearn Jamie Peacock or Kevin Sinfield Lastly, this commission needs a Commercial Director  I don't have any knowledge of industry financial controllers so suggestions are welcome. 

I'd suggest that we pay some repect to the successful businessmen who have put ££Millions into the game via their own clubs. Their longstanding investment into Rugby League in tems of creating a Superleague profesional game that SKY buy into saved the game in 1996 when Union went pro.

The RFL have tried to muscle in when Lewis was in charge but his ideas came to nothing, then we had this current deal with a greatly changed format that failed badly as well puting the onus on the relegation show.

Hearn may have made Darts a TV show, but it was TV that originally made Snooke, just as TV remains our saviour. With respect to you to list a load of names of people who I have respect for, but then suggest they go and tell the SL owners what to do to develop the game as if they are fools is a little naive..........

[whatmichaelsays]

6 hours ago, The Rocket said:

Unrelated to above post, but it it sticks in my memory that you once said that you don`t see the limited geographical footprint of League in England as being the problem, more that the game isn`t being sold properly to reach a broader audience and the advantages that go with that.

But don`t you think the entrance into Super League of another strong club from France, especially if we could see them both regularly challenging for titles, would address those perceptions, even purely just as a by-product of having two strong foreign clubs being successful in your competition, their mere presence and the credibility they will bring.

The point I`m trying to make is that I think English Rugby League is on the right track, I don`t think they get the credit for what they have achieved with Le Dracs, but I think patience is called for and a little bit of faith in where they are headed.

I`d go as far as saying that I think France is the key for Rugby League in England. The stronger that France gets, the better the rivalries, the more likely to be able to negotiate a broadcast deal to supplement the British one, and so could begin a virtuous circle out of the current predicament.

More or less. 

My argument is that the issue of "expansion" is not a geographic problem, but an audience problem. When you frame it as a geographic problem, you frame it as somebody elses (eg, a millionaire investor) problem and as a threat to the status quo (if this millionaire is too successful, they might threaten my club). When you frame expansion as an audience problem, it is everybody's responsibility to fix it. 

Don't get me wrong, life would be a hell of a lot easier if we did have clubs that were more geographically spread, but we don't have that and there isn't the will or the investment there to make it so, so we have to work with what we have. 

It relates to a point I made in another thread yesterday - that we have to get out of the mindset that a 'fan' is only worthwhile if they're ticking through a turnstile, buying season tickets and going to every away game - and I think that RL's brands (particularly Super League) needs to see themselves as more as a media property, rather than an events promoter.  What we're selling is not 'tickets' but instead, 'content'. 

We all like to think that RL is an objectively great sport, or that it has objectively great content that people would be amazed at, but we don't need a team in Bristol, London or Glasgow for people in Bristol, London or Glasgow to see that content. My big criticism of RL in recent years is that it makes it incredibly difficult to follow the sport if you're not within earshot of the M62 and, with the technology that the sport has at it's disposal, there's no excuse for that to be the case. 

I'd be careful giving too much credit to English RL for the success of Catalans. The Catalans have largely been left to their own devices and, as incidents like the Challenge Cup bond show, the sport on this side of the channel hasn't been shy in trying to make life difficult for them. 

[JohnM]

Oops. 

[JohnM]

21 minutes ago, steve oates said:

I'd suggest that we pay some repect to the successful businessmen who have put ££Millions into the game via their own clubs. Their longstanding investment into Rugby League in tems of creating a Superleague profesional game that SKY buy into saved the game in 1996 when Union went pro.

The RFL have tried to muscle in when Lewis was in charge but his ideas came to nothing, then we had this current deal with a greatly changed format that failed badly as well puting the onus on the relegation show.

Hearn may have made Darts a TV show, but it was TV that originally made Snooke, just as TV remains our saviour. With respect to you to list a load of names of people who I have respect for, but then suggest they go and tell the SL owners what to do to develop the game as if they are fools is a little naive..........

I agree completely. I wish I'd said that. 

[Dunbar]

While I enjoyed seeing thousands of Canadians watch professional Rugby League and I would equally welcome a second French team into Super League, any talk of expansion at the top tier is a red herring for me.  It is so difficult to shift the power base at the top of a professional structure and I am not sure we should even try (or want to).

As far as I am concerned, Rugby League has had one great opportunity in my lifetime and that was the rapid expansion of the game at amateur and schools level between circa 1999 and 2004 with the establishment of the Rugby League Conference and the use of RL Development Officers across schools.

Our playing numbers boomed across non traditional areas with teams the length and breadth of the country.  If that momentum had continued or even if the expansion had stabilized then we would be in a far better position some 15/20 years later as our national footprint would be significantly higher and with that would come proportional sponsorship and tv deals.

Some teams and leagues persevere of course and that is fantastic but the opportunity was never fully realised.  I am not concerned on this thread of the reasons why, I am just lamenting the lost the opportunity.

With that in mind, I still have two areas of optimism. 

The first is the growth of the women's and girl's game.  It has the potential to do what the RL Conference tried to do and grow the sports footprint nationwide.  That would be some achievement.

The second is the establishment of teams from non traditional countries.  While we discuss Australia, New Zealand (NRL) and England (Super League and lower Leagues ) ad nauseum, more and more countries are starting to see grass roots Rugby League established and they will have the benefit of not trying to break down barriers that are centuries old. 

When we discuss the future of Rugby League we should be thinking nationally and globally.  As a sport, in this country, we won't of course, but that is the heart of the problem.

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Thats the revered Sally Bolton who gave away World Cup tickets for peanuts and sponsorships for as little as 10K a career champagne socialist sports administrator jumping from one sport to another.

Others have long gone apart from Mick Hogan (Excellent choice)

 

 

2 hours ago, Oxford said:

This is all completely false and mistaken we need a board of people like these : Victor Lustig, Reed Waddell, John St. John Long, William Elmer Mead,Henri Lemoine, Lord Gordon Gordon, Boris johnson, Tony Blair and St Francis for the accounts.

 

 

[Mumby Magic]

This is highly important in my eyes and it should be taken seriously. We have a gulf of no communication with the NRL. How many sports have different rules depending on when you play?

As for naming an independent panel here's my 2 penneth.

Tony Adams/Stuart Pearce 

Andy Burnham MP 

Claire Balding

And established business person (was thinking Dyson )

Joey Essex

Zippy 

Mr Motivator.

I did start off serious though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ATLANTISMAN]

5 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

This is highly important in my eyes and it should be taken seriously. We have a gulf of no communication with the NRL. How many sports have different rules depending on when you play?

As for naming an independent panel here's my 2 penneth.

Tony Adams/Stuart Pearce 

Andy Burnham MP 

Claire Balding

And established business person (was thinking Dyson )

Joey Essex

Zippy 

Mr Motivator.

I did start off serious though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You need commercially minded business people DYSON would be the only one others a waste of time.

 

P 

[marklaspalmas]

Three pages into the list of candidates and I'm surprised my name hasn't been mentioned yet.

Totally unbiased and Ive watched (and read) Moneyball.

I don't come cheap, but happy to help.

[gingerjon]

30 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

You need commercially minded business people

Why?

Have we decided the problem is that we need to improve the profit margin on our hoovers?

[Dave T]

4 hours ago, Dunbar said:

While I enjoyed seeing thousands of Canadians watch professional Rugby League and I would equally welcome a second French team into Super League, any talk of expansion at the top tier is a red herring for me.  It is so difficult to shift the power base at the top of a professional structure and I am not sure we should even try (or want to).

 

I agree with all of your post, but I have call this point out in particular. I've always been an expansionist, but have come to accept that as a sport we don't have the levels of finance needed to expand top-down. The one success has been Catalans - which was built on solid foundations, that should tell us all we need to know. We have got to the point where these attempts actively harm the sport here. 

I made the point in my post which was similar to your, grassroots/foundations and internationals are the no-brainers with the pro comp just doing its thing, trying to be the best it can, without constant tinkering and trying to be the saviour of everything.

[Dunbar]

22 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I made the point in my post which was similar to your, grassroots/foundations and internationals are the no-brainers with the pro comp just doing its thing, trying to be the best it can, without constant tinkering and trying to be the saviour of everything.

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with this.

We can have a sport wide strategy that supports the international game and we can have a sport wide strategy that supports the development of the sport at the grass roots level.

But what we always seem to land on as a sport is trying to create a strategy that reshapes the professional game.  That is just moving the pieces around the board and achieves nothing in the long run.

[gingerjon]

15 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

we ways seem to land on as a sport is trying to create a strategy that reshapes the professional game. 

And the reason for that is somewhat obvious.

It's what happens when the governing/development body is utterly at the mercy of those professional clubs.

[Mumby Magic]

3 hours ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

You need commercially minded business people DYSON would be the only one others a waste of time.

 

P 

Surely it's a balance. People in certain area of expertise and mainly neutral.

[DavidM]

Jacob Rees Mogg

[ATLANTISMAN]

48 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Jacob Rees Mogg

Funny enough a friend of mine works for Dods political a fully committed labour party trade unionist (Giants fan but lives in Beckenham) and he once told me he is one of the most approachable and nicest person in the commons.

 

P 

[fighting irish]

9 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

More or less. 

My argument is that the issue of "expansion" is not a geographic problem, but an audience problem. When you frame it as a geographic problem, you frame it as somebody elses (eg, a millionaire investor) problem and as a threat to the status quo (if this millionaire is too successful, they might threaten my club). When you frame expansion as an audience problem, it is everybody's responsibility to fix it. 

Don't get me wrong, life would be a hell of a lot easier if we did have clubs that were more geographically spread, but we don't have that and there isn't the will or the investment there to make it so, so we have to work with what we have. 

It relates to a point I made in another thread yesterday - that we have to get out of the mindset that a 'fan' is only worthwhile if they're ticking through a turnstile, buying season tickets and going to every away game - and I think that RL's brands (particularly Super League) needs to see themselves as more as a media property, rather than an events promoter.  What we're selling is not 'tickets' but instead, 'content'. 

We all like to think that RL is an objectively great sport, or that it has objectively great content that people would be amazed at, but we don't need a team in Bristol, London or Glasgow for people in Bristol, London or Glasgow to see that content. My big criticism of RL in recent years is that it makes it incredibly difficult to follow the sport if you're not within earshot of the M62 and, with the technology that the sport has at it's disposal, there's no excuse for that to be the case. 

I'd be careful giving too much credit to English RL for the success of Catalans. The Catalans have largely been left to their own devices and, as incidents like the Challenge Cup bond show, the sport on this side of the channel hasn't been shy in trying to make life difficult for them. 

Yes mate, yes indeed. The pro clubs don't seem to care about expanding the viewership through technology (eyeballs) and if they do, they haven't got a clue how to do it, or to monetise the increased viewership. They obviously don't value the Catalans (and latterly, Toulouse) involvement and certainly don't see it as a way of ''expanding the interest in the game globally''. The bond, was the biggest indicator of the warmth of the welcome. I'm personally convinced also, that it was Robert Elstone's treatment of David Argyle, rather than financial difficulties that made him walk away. 

8 hours ago, Dunbar said:

While I enjoyed seeing thousands of Canadians watch professional Rugby League and I would equally welcome a second French team into Super League, any talk of expansion at the top tier is a red herring for me.  It is so difficult to shift the power base at the top of a professional structure and I am not sure we should even try (or want to).

As far as I am concerned, Rugby League has had one great opportunity in my lifetime and that was the rapid expansion of the game at amateur and schools level between circa 1999 and 2004 with the establishment of the Rugby League Conference and the use of RL Development Officers across schools.

Our playing numbers boomed across non traditional areas with teams the length and breadth of the country.  If that momentum had continued or even if the expansion had stabilized then we would be in a far better position some 15/20 years later as our national footprint would be significantly higher and with that would come proportional sponsorship and tv deals.

Some teams and leagues persevere of course and that is fantastic but the opportunity was never fully realised.  I am not concerned on this thread of the reasons why, I am just lamenting the lost the opportunity.

With that in mind, I still have two areas of optimism. 

The first is the growth of the women's and girl's game.  It has the potential to do what the RL Conference tried to do and grow the sports footprint nationwide.  That would be some achievement.

The second is the establishment of teams from non traditional countries.  While we discuss Australia, New Zealand (NRL) and England (Super League and lower Leagues ) ad nauseum, more and more countries are starting to see grass roots Rugby League established and they will have the benefit of not trying to break down barriers that are centuries old. 

When we discuss the future of Rugby League we should be thinking nationally and globally.  As a sport, in this country, we won't of course, but that is the heart of the problem.

Yes mate, yes indeed. The pro game is a circus, only concerned with filling the tent every week. The trouble is they have no idea how to get to the point where they will need a bigger tent. There should be a body, (what BARLA should have been all along) responsible for the game as a whole, whose primary focus is increasing participation and thereby increasing the number of people who grow up steeped in the game and let the circus carry on, on its own. The past success of using development officers, with a professionally designed (efficient) approach (ask Mick Hogan) screams for it's reinstatement as far and as wide as we can afford it. I too see reasons for optimism. The rise of the women's game is a real shot in the arm. Also, embarrassingly, the game is growing globally due to the efforts of countless volunteers, motivated by nothing more than the excitement of being involved in TGG, while our own administrators whine and moan while failing miserably in their duties. We could soon bear witness to the heartbreaking and utterly absurd situation where the game blossoms everywhere else, but withers and dies here in Blighty. 

4 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with this.

We can have a sport wide strategy that supports the international game and we can have a sport wide strategy that supports the development of the sport at the grass roots level.

But what we always seem to land on as a sport is trying to create a strategy that reshapes the professional game.  That is just moving the pieces around the board and achieves nothing in the long run.

Hear hear! 

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

And the reason for that is somewhat obvious.

It's what happens when the governing/development body is utterly at the mercy of those professional clubs.

Hear hear. Just as whatmichaelsays, the pro game needs to bring in some competent people to increase the numbers of ''eyeballs'' on the game and develop ways of making access to their product much easier, actually encouraging their involvement and monetising their interest. Then get a bigger circus tent. The game as a whole, needs a body to take responsibility for raising awareness of our game and (as Dunbar says) increasing participation on the ground, face to face (The British Rugby League Association). We have the knowledge within the game to do this efficiently and effectively with the use of development officers following a proven model pioneered at Newcastle by Mick Hogan and their team. Wherever we can't afford professional development officers, the amateur league administrators should grasp the nettle and attempt it themselves (just as they are doing in Jamaica, Ghana, Ukraine, California, Brazil ........etc, etc, etc, etc). If they can do it.........

[lucky 7]

9 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

More or less. 

My argument is that the issue of "expansion" is not a geographic problem, but an audience problem. When you frame it as a geographic problem, you frame it as somebody elses (eg, a millionaire investor) problem and as a threat to the status quo (if this millionaire is too successful, they might threaten my club). When you frame expansion as an audience problem, it is everybody's responsibility to fix it. 

Don't get me wrong, life would be a hell of a lot easier if we did have clubs that were more geographically spread, but we don't have that and there isn't the will or the investment there to make it so, so we have to work with what we have. 

It relates to a point I made in another thread yesterday - that we have to get out of the mindset that a 'fan' is only worthwhile if they're ticking through a turnstile, buying season tickets and going to every away game - and I think that RL's brands (particularly Super League) needs to see themselves as more as a media property, rather than an events promoter.  What we're selling is not 'tickets' but instead, 'content'. 

We all like to think that RL is an objectively great sport, or that it has objectively great content that people would be amazed at, but we don't need a team in Bristol, London or Glasgow for people in Bristol, London or Glasgow to see that content. My big criticism of RL in recent years is that it makes it incredibly difficult to follow the sport if you're not within earshot of the M62 and, with the technology that the sport has at it's disposal, there's no excuse for that to be the case. 

I'd be careful giving too much credit to English RL for the success of Catalans. The Catalans have largely been left to their own devices and, as incidents like the Challenge Cup bond show, the sport on this side of the channel hasn't been shy in trying to make life difficult for them. 

For me when the RFL asked the Catalans for a bond to defend the challenge cup they won previous season to me showed how incompetent the RFL are under Rimmer and how they are incapable of promoting and selling a big Rugby League event

[unapologetic pedant]

On 07/07/2021 at 17:35, JohnM said:

It's a constant disappointment to me that the sport here does not emphasise the domination of RL over Union in Aus. Surely that should be a weapon in the fight for UK media coverage? 

One of the problems with our players and media talking up our chances of winning the Women`s WC is that it plays into the widespread assumption in the UK that RL is a Northern English game barely played anywhere else.

If the WCs go ahead we will have the Jillaroos and Kiwi Ferns on British soil for the first time in 8 years. These are the stars of women`s RL and some of the best female athletes in any sport. In recent years, the female game in Oz has exploded.

They could generate interest in parts of the country and among demographics that English men`s RL never has and probably never will. We won`t make the most of their presence here if people only realise their status when the tournament is over and they are ready to board the plane for home.

[unapologetic pedant]

10 hours ago, Dunbar said:

We can have a sport wide strategy that supports the international game and we can have a sport wide strategy that supports the development of the sport at the grass roots level.

A strategy for international RL always has the snag of requiring elite players to play extra games of a physically highly demanding sport. Compounded by the fact that most of the very best players already play more often in club finals series.

Bluntly, I don`t have an answer to this, unless interest can be created in international competitions and fixtures which don`t involve some, or even all, elite players.

The only example of this in RL I`m aware of is the President`s XIII game in Port Moresby. This team is selected from players whose clubs don`t make the finals. It succeeds because any team of NRL players is a big draw in PNG.

When Manchester were awarded the Commonwealth games for 2002, it was subject to the usual sniping that this wasn`t the Olympics. But the whole thing was well promoted, the media and public got behind it, and most of the events were well-attended.

[Lowdesert]

12 hours ago, lucky 7 said:

For me when the RFL asked the Catalans for a bond to defend the challenge cup they won previous season to me showed how incompetent the RFL are under Rimmer and how they are incapable of promoting and selling a big Rugby League event

As it stands now, the RFL have very little impact on our actual game or how it presents itself.  SLE have seen to that.  The evidence being Rimmers meetings with Hearn coming to nothing and the lack of SL clubs total commitment for the recent international.  

 

 

 

 

[Lowdesert]

17 hours ago, Dave T said:

I agree with all of your post, but I have call this point out in particular. I've always been an expansionist, but have come to accept that as a sport we don't have the levels of finance needed to expand top-down. The one success has been Catalans - which was built on solid foundations, that should tell us all we need to know. We have got to the point where these attempts actively harm the sport here. 

I made the point in my post which was similar to your, grassroots/foundations and internationals are the no-brainers with the pro comp just doing its thing, trying to be the best it can, without constant tinkering and trying to be the saviour of everything.

Good post.  Probably the best I’ve read in 5 years.

Although the Catalans had 1 thing going for it - an amalgamation between 2 good semi pro clubs.  It helps as does the amount of sport French kids are encouraged to play as well as having good training facilities and good weather in the south.  People are outside much of the time.

 

[lucky 7]

1 hour ago, Lowdesert said:

As it stands now, the RFL have very little impact on our actual game or how it presents itself.  SLE have seen to that.  The evidence being Rimmers meetings with Hearn coming to nothing and the lack of SL clubs total commitment for the recent international.  

 

 

 

 

The decision to ask the Catalans for a £500,000 was down to the RFL, which shows to me how inept they have become under Rimmer

[Lowdesert]

17 minutes ago, lucky 7 said:

The decision to ask the Catalans for a £500,000 was down to the RFL, which shows to me how inept they have become under Rimmer

I’m not disputing that but bellyaching about the RFL over a decision a couple of years ago will get us nowhere.

How does that impact on the call for an independent commission and the OP mate?

[lucky 7]

18 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

I’m not disputing that but bellyaching about the RFL over a decision a couple of years ago will get us nowhere.

How does that impact on the call for an independent commission and the OP mate?

The point i was making was how inept and insular the RFL have become under Rimmer. An independent commission would probably recommend that the whole of the RFL board be replaced with more able people who had a plan for the long term, and not make Rugby League the laughing stock of British sport which it has become