Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, The Future is League said:

 

That's great but kens team would be in the 2nd division 

 

No offence Ken as you are an esteemed man and I'm just a small business owner 

Edited by The storm
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


10 minutes ago, Damien said:

Also Davy always quite liking the idea and now being interim chairman is no reason to push this through. Decisions like that on the whim of one person is what led to more stupid decisions like the middle 8s. Have they researched this? Have they spoken to fans? Have they done any market research at all?

According to Hetherington on 23rd August -

Quote

Currently everyone is making assumptions about the structure of the game, but there should no assumptions made.

Any recommendations need to be on the back of market research, facts and figures, forecasts and with very rational judgment put in to that recommendation.

At present, that work has not been done. It’s not even been started yet.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JohnM said:

Clearly, people like Ken Davey have no place in our sport. Far to positive, invested and keen.  Far better to moan and groan and pick, like real fans.

No one here is saying people like Ken Davy don't belong in our game, it's universally accepted that he has done so much for Huddersfield.

He should not however be chairman of SL making critical decisions about restructures and private equity funding. 

It seems like the club owners want to make these decisions first and then appoint an 'independent commission', which could restrict the impact and effectiveness of this commission. Essentially it seems as though they want to make decisions that benefit them before a commission is appointed. 

We need an effective independent commission running the game as a matter of urgency 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Daddy said:

No one here is saying people like Ken Davy don't belong in our game, it's universally accepted that he has done so much for Huddersfield.

He should not however be chairman of SL making critical decisions about restructures and private equity funding. 

It seems like the club owners want to make these decisions first and then appoint an 'independent commission', which could restrict the impact and effectiveness of this commission. Essentially it seems as though they want to make decisions that benefit them before a commission is appointed. 

We need an effective independent commission running the game as a matter of urgency 

Ken Davy has our total respect 

 

He must also consider the fact that in a super league of 10 Huddersfield would not be in that group 

 

Its extremely gracious for Ken to fall on his sword of course 

 

But that is the reality 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, M j M said:

FFS do people really want two small leagues with convoluted cross league games that will mostly have only one winner?

The sport is crying out for some stability and clarity of leadership and all we're getting are promises of more change, confusing league structures, less credibility and more loop fixtures.

Just stop it will you.

Completely agree. 

For me, any structure - any that you care to propose - has to pass a very simple test - does it get people who don't currently watch rugby league watching rugby league? If the answer is "no", "probably not" or anything else that isn't a resounding "yes", then we're wasting our time. 

All this talk about 2x10 just smacks of a bunch of accountants sitting around a table working out how much thinner they can spread what little they have whilst keeping everybody happy - it's a zero growth mindset.

In the article that Arron Bower wrote about falling attendances, he talks to club owners who give the impression that they are doing very little proactively about the issue - very much a "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" vibe. Michael Carter's talks about the need to "get back to pre-pandemic crowd levels quickly" without explaining what he is doing to achieve that. He talks about fans having options like "going walking and having days out" as if these are new things that were invented during the pandemic and he talks about RL being "the expensive option" with no mention (and I don't know whether he was questioned) about what he, as one of the 12 most influential men in Super League, was doing to add value to the experience to justify that expense. I'm not just picking on Carter here, because there are worrying comments around this issue from other quarters, but Carter puts his comments out there and it isn't difficult to poke holes. 

I've said before that the sport is crying out for people who made their money in the leisure and entertainment industries - people who know what it takes to pull in a crowd and add value to an event and experience. We don't need more people who's specialisms are selling widgets or filling in self-assessment forms. 

Ensure that we have a simple structure, ensure that we can put the best product on the field as often as we possibly can and, when we can't, ensure that people can still come away from an RL ground feeling that they have had a good time that has lived up to the admission price. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Completely agree. 

For me, any structure - any that you care to propose - has to pass a very simple test - does it get people who don't currently watch rugby league watching rugby league? If the answer is "no", "probably not" or anything else that isn't a resounding "yes", then we're wasting our time. 

All this talk about 2x10 just smacks of a bunch of accountants sitting around a table working out how much thinner they can spread what little they have whilst keeping everybody happy - it's a zero growth mindset.

In the article that Arron Bower wrote about falling attendances, he talks to club owners who give the impression that they are doing very little proactively about the issue - very much a "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" vibe. Michael Carter's talks about the need to "get back to pre-pandemic crowd levels quickly" without explaining what he is doing to achieve that. He talks about fans having options like "going walking and having days out" as if these are new things that were invented during the pandemic and he talks about RL being "the expensive option" with no mention (and I don't know whether he was questioned) about what he, as one of the 12 most influential men in Super League, was doing to add value to the experience to justify that expense. I'm not just picking on Carter here, because there are worrying comments around this issue from other quarters, but Carter puts his comments out there and it isn't difficult to poke holes. 

I've said before that the sport is crying out for people who made their money in the leisure and entertainment industries - people who know what it takes to pull in a crowd and add value to an event and experience. We don't need more people who's specialisms are selling widgets or filling in self-assessment forms. 

Ensure that we have a simple structure, ensure that we can put the best product on the field as often as we possibly can and, when we can't, ensure that people can still come away from an RL ground feeling that they have had a good time that has lived up to the admission price. 

I tend to agree 

 

Apart from eamon mcmamus and Simon Moran I think the Rich list of owners are fairly poor 

 

Adam Pearson is the worst by a country mile 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The storm said:

I tend to agree 

 

Apart from eamon mcmamus and Simon Moran I think the Rich list of owners are fairly poor 

 

Adam Pearson is the worst by a country mile 

Caddick, Moran, Davey, Hughes, Coleman at Saints and the new part-owner at Wigan have serious wealth. The rest don't.

Pearson is an investor/owner in Hull whereas as far as I'm aware the others aren't looking for a return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Completely agree. 

For me, any structure - any that you care to propose - has to pass a very simple test - does it get people who don't currently watch rugby league watching rugby league? If the answer is "no", "probably not" or anything else that isn't a resounding "yes", then we're wasting our time. 

All this talk about 2x10 just smacks of a bunch of accountants sitting around a table working out how much thinner they can spread what little they have whilst keeping everybody happy - it's a zero growth mindset.

In the article that Arron Bower wrote about falling attendances, he talks to club owners who give the impression that they are doing very little proactively about the issue - very much a "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" vibe. Michael Carter's talks about the need to "get back to pre-pandemic crowd levels quickly" without explaining what he is doing to achieve that. He talks about fans having options like "going walking and having days out" as if these are new things that were invented during the pandemic and he talks about RL being "the expensive option" with no mention (and I don't know whether he was questioned) about what he, as one of the 12 most influential men in Super League, was doing to add value to the experience to justify that expense. I'm not just picking on Carter here, because there are worrying comments around this issue from other quarters, but Carter puts his comments out there and it isn't difficult to poke holes. 

I've said before that the sport is crying out for people who made their money in the leisure and entertainment industries - people who know what it takes to pull in a crowd and add value to an event and experience. We don't need more people who's specialisms are selling widgets or filling in self-assessment forms. 

Ensure that we have a simple structure, ensure that we can put the best product on the field as often as we possibly can and, when we can't, ensure that people can still come away from an RL ground feeling that they have had a good time that has lived up to the admission price. 

They don't see the value of marketing or media compared to a 4th rate second rower from the NRL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Daddy said:

No one here is saying people like Ken Davy don't belong in our game, it's universally accepted that he has done so much for Huddersfield.

He should not however be chairman of SL making critical decisions about restructures and private equity funding. 

It seems like the club owners want to make these decisions first and then appoint an 'independent commission', which could restrict the impact and effectiveness of this commission. Essentially it seems as though they want to make decisions that benefit them before a commission is appointed. 

We need an effective independent commission running the game as a matter of urgency 

The "independent commission" idea has been explored on here ad nauseum. Not going to happen.

 

  • Like 1

Four legs good - two legs bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

They don't see the value of marketing or media compared to a 4th rate second rower from the NRL.

What should the objective be? Follow that with the strategy, tactics, metrics, resources, timescales, milestones, checkpoints, reviews, overall and segmented budget, finance. success criteria etc etc

Four legs good - two legs bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, JohnM said:

The "independent commission" idea has been explored on here ad nauseum. Not going to happen.

 

So your content with the existing governance of SL and club owners having direct involvement in strategic decision making of the competition and going out to seek private equity? 

The SL and sport should be governed either by a strong, robust RFL or independent commission, a few posters on here disagreeing with it doesn't change that fact.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 divisions of 10 means the same problem we have now with relegation, small leagues have been tried before and abandoned because they dont achieve their stated aims...how many times has the league changed in the last 10 years? How often has it changed since 1973? 

 

Other than that, we absolutely need some positivity from chairman and pundits alike

 

Also, why are people suggesting the Giants wont be in the top 10? They've only been out of the top 10 once since 2002, finishing higher than 10th all but twice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Daddy said:

You can keep changing the structure as much as you want but unless RL addresses the following key issues it will always wind up in the same predicament: 

- Take steps to have a national game with teams in major centres across the country 

- Greater visibility and meaningful competition for the England national team 

We will be back here in a year or two talking about the same issues if this two tens goes ahead. 

Again this comes down to vested interests, club owners like Davy aren't going to propose anything that's going to inconvenience them so him being the chairman and proposing 'solutions' is a problem 

This is exactly it. Structure and re-structure is all well and good but until we, as a sport, can have a vision and purpose behind it we will continue to be in a repetitive cycle.

For me, the priorities of the sport's structure at a professional level have to be:

- Expanding the sport geographically in a sustainable and focused manner

- Supporting a consistent, competitive international calendar in the northern hemisphere that can act as a flagbearer for the sport

- Striving to raise the floor of professional rugby league rather than holding down the ceiling

 

What shape and form that comes in I am completely receptive to.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JohnM said:

Clearly, people like Ken Davey have no place in our sport. Far to positive, invested and keen.  Far better to moan and groan and pick, like real fans.

Looking at his record at Huddersfield it ain't too successful.

They share a stadium with a soccer club.He has gone through more head coaches than probably any other Super League club,this millennium. He has devalued the sport,and the 'elite' players,by offering the cheapest of cheap season tickets;without increasing attendances. 

Although the link to the press report doesn't mention it - he does want the relegated Super League club to be handed a parachute payment so the 'elite' can be one happy family again - should another promotion be hastened for the Super League club temporarily away from being 'elite'.

It was also risible that he gave 5 million pounds to the RFL - after it being the RFL who bot the larger contract from the USA owned Sky TV,and not the expert recruited by the 3 wise men from Super League clubs.

Our sport is safe in their hands...

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Some utter tosh

 

 

 

Ken Davey took a club in the edge of bankruptcy to the League Leaders Shield, challenge cup finalists one of the best academies in the game, playing out of a world class stadium (which the soccer club wouldnt have got either, if not for the Giants inclusion) that they jointly own, not rent and he has been probably over loyal to his coaches over the years. 

Could some things be better? Hell yes, but he has always built for long term gains, not flash in the pan then gone 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't get particularly excited about a restructure of the professional game... as I said on a previous thread, it is just moving the pieces around the board.

The game is desperate for a long term strategic plan at the international and grass roots levels but as usual we just focus on the bit in the middle.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, The Daddy said:

So your content with the existing governance of SL and club owners having direct involvement in strategic decision making of the competition and going out to seek private equity? 

The SL and sport should be governed either by a strong, robust RFL or independent commission, a few posters on here disagreeing with it doesn't change that fact.

It's not a fact. It's merely  your opinion.

Four legs good - two legs bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/09/2021 at 21:45, M j M said:

As Hetherington said the other week, if we're going to make changes at least do some research on what might work, what fans think and what the consequences would be. 

I can tell you what one consequence will be if this 2 x 10 reduced funding plan goes ahead; the World Club Challenge will become an absolute one-sided farce that to anyone watching, who may not be involved in the week to week watching of your competition, will only reveal to them how small-time your competition has become.

One other thing off the top of my head, why on earth would you place restraints on clubs like Toulouse or Catalans. Two clubs, the former from what I can gather, have the potential to be that big-time glamour club that your competition so desperately needs.

Can you imagine the publicity of a WCC match played between a powerhouse Toulouse and the Sydney Roosters played in Toulouse or the Sydney Football Stadium, not much good though if Toulouse are going to be hamstrung with how big they can grow.

Don`t get it at all. For me if your not going to have an independent commission directing the game, then it is up to the 12 Super League Club chiefs to convince SKY that the game is heading in the right direction, re: Toulouse/Newcastle etc. so stick with us, maintain the same level of funding (an increase would be nice though) and we will deliver you, one day, a truly international Super League. I think that would be the best strategy, work with SKY, convince them of your long term plans, you do have some runs on the board it ain`t just talk.

 

Edited by The Rocket
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/09/2021 at 12:33, JohnM said:

..but too many fans complain at whatever anyone in power and authority says and does.  Of the 13 or so posts before this one,  8 have been negative and critical.  Whatever RFL/SL/Clubs come up with, the autonomous reaction is to dismiss it. 

There's lots of this negativity on social media.

The irony of Ken Davy asking people to be less negative then getting slated on social media.

It's as if fans look for reasons to be infuriated. If you ran a business what type of people would you like in your team, RL fans? (I'm generalising I know!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

There's lots of this negativity on social media.

The irony of Ken Davy asking people to be less negative then getting slated on social media.

It's as if fans look for reasons to be infuriated. If you ran a business what type of people would you like in your team, RL fans? (I'm generalising I know!)

But the 'negative' questioning (to use your buisness analogy) in a boardroom, can raise other scenarios and implications that otherwise everyone in agreement with the same mindset to just forge ahead with any given scenario can quite often miss.

Some people think that it is just an obstructive attitude but to those who raise alternative suggestions propositions or proposals, it can be quite constructive in the long run, not always mind. 

Through the experiences we have all witnessed with the formulations and stratergies that have emanated previously out of the Rugby League/SL Boardrooms it is a natural reaction for people to be erring on the side of caution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

But the 'negative' questioning (to use your buisness analogy) in a boardroom, can raise other scenarios and implications that otherwise everyone in agreement with the same mindset to just forge ahead with any given scenario can quite often miss.

Some people think that it is just an obstructive attitude but to those who raise alternative suggestions propositions or proposals, it can be quite constructive in the long run, not always mind. 

Through the experiences we have all witnessed with the formulations and stratergies that have emanated previously out of the Rugby League/SL Boardrooms it is a natural reaction for people to be erring on the side of caution.

Have you looked at the comments on Twitter Harry?  It is a cesspit of bile at times.  To add to this, we have a glut of internet based RL ‘journos’ who rely and regularly use Twitter quotes for their content. Negativity is their stock in trade.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

Have you looked at the comments on Twitter Harry?  It is a cesspit of bile at times.  To add to this, we have a glut of internet based RL ‘journos’ who rely and regularly use Twitter quotes for their content. Negativity is their stock in trade.

 

Fans being negative has next to know influence and are the least of our worries when there are floods of negative comments from owners, chairmen and players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...