Jump to content

Ian Lenegan speaks on Super League, RFL and 4


Recommended Posts


Jeez he's just an embarrassment sometimes. The realignment with the RFL being proof of why breaking away was such a great idea is laughable. As is the claim that nobody knew what the RFL's other income streams were bringing in pre breakaway.

It doesn't take much to see why Wigan are such a mess when this is the quality of the leadership there.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s a delusional in that article as he was in his short time at the Broncos. Comical really 

 

…and only rugby league could address the problem of two governing bodies creating duplication, confusion and excess cost by…. drum roll please…. setting up a third bureaucracy instead of merging into one for obvious efficiencies!
 

Absolute bunch of muppets the lot of them…. much as Alan Clark contrasted the troops with the generals of WW1, in our game we’re “lions led by donkeys”. 
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

So "realigning the two governing bodies" actually means keeping the two separate and creating a third body?

You really couldn't make it up.

Perhaps the amateur clubs could then break away and form a 4th body just for the lols.

Trying to think of a name .... British Amateur ..... RL or something. Get right back to the 1980s when everything was ace 😕 .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Smudger06 said:

RL admin is like the civil service. 

RL admin is run by sychophant members of the middle classes for the ultimate benefit of the ruling classes?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, its that time of year again, I see.

Maybe we should give the running of the whole sport over to the new saviours, C4.

Alternatively,  give the whole thing over to a commitee of forum experts. specialists. 

😊😊😊😊😊

I'm interested in that drive, that rush to judgment, that is so prevalent in our society. We all know that pleasurable rush that comes from condemning, and in the short term it's quite a satisfying thing to do, isn't it?

J. K. Rowling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

He’s a delusional in that article as he was in his short time at the Broncos. Comical really 

…and only rugby league could address the problem of two governing bodies creating duplication, confusion and excess cost by…. drum roll please…. setting up a third bureaucracy instead of merging into one for obvious efficiencies!

Absolute bunch of muppets the lot of them…. much as Alan Clark contrasted the troops with the generals of WW1, in our game we’re “lions led by donkeys”.

His statement, “We didn’t know that three years ago, we thought it was far higher in the other direction" about the fact that SL generates 90% of the game's revenue (presumably he means from TV and sponsorship) and the Challenge Cup and the international game only 10% is staggering.  When SL has 2-3 televised matches per week and the CC and Internationals are only a fraction of that and the BBC pays only a fraction per match of what Sky pays, simple math would show that the ratio would be in that region of 90-10.  That someone in his position couldn't have worked that out on his own speaks volumes about how poor the game's leadership is.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Big Picture said:

His statement, “We didn’t know that three years ago, we thought it was far higher in the other direction" about the fact that SL generates 90% of the game's revenue (presumably he means from TV and sponsorship) and the Challenge Cup and the international game only 10% is staggering.  When SL has 2-3 televised matches per week and the CC and Internationals are only a fraction of that and the BBC pays only a fraction per match of what Sky pays, simple math would show that the ratio would be in that region of 90-10.  That someone in his position couldn't have worked that out on his own speaks volumes about how poor the game's leadership is.

Indeed. Also to basically say “we’re bigger and better than you and hold all the cards” really isn’t a good way to ‘bring the game together’. No wonder we’re about to get a shiny new bonus third party to help rule our sport - he can’t swallow his pride for even a second.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Chris22 said:

I'd laugh or slag him off, but my club's chairman (Eamonn McManus) has had to make a similar embarrassing u turn.

And where is Moran to make up the "Fun Boy Three" that was at the unveiling party for Mr Elstone, I have said it before Elstone never stood a chance with those puppet masters pulling the strings.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Big Picture said:

His statement, “We didn’t know that three years ago, we thought it was far higher in the other direction" about the fact that SL generates 90% of the game's revenue (presumably he means from TV and sponsorship) and the Challenge Cup and the international game only 10% is staggering.  When SL has 2-3 televised matches per week and the CC and Internationals are only a fraction of that and the BBC pays only a fraction per match of what Sky pays, simple math would show that the ratio would be in that region of 90-10.  That someone in his position couldn't have worked that out on his own speaks volumes about how poor the game's leadership is.

I liked that and also the bit where it says "Lenagan insists the breakaway was needed to redress the balance of central distribution. Super League clubs now get a bigger slice of the cake; and has created a position from which the whole game can now grow."

So Super League get more money at the expense of the rest of the game, but now the whole game can grow..... can you run that one by me again?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, bamfordsbeans said:

The way Wigan are declining under his leadership,he may change his views in the future.

The quality of administration at that club has been pretty abysmal since Mick Hogan left a decade or more ago. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RP London said:

I liked that and also the bit where it says "Lenagan insists the breakaway was needed to redress the balance of central distribution. Super League clubs now get a bigger slice of the cake; and has created a position from which the whole game can now grow."

So Super League get more money at the expense of the rest of the game, but now the whole game can grow..... can you run that one by me again?

Let me help RP

 

Quote

Super League clubs now get a bigger slice of the cake; and has created a position from which the whole game Super League can now grow

Hope that helps

What's ironic is that I don't even think they know how to grow Super League with the "bigger slice of the cake" that they were so keen to grab.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

Let me help RP

 

Hope that helps

What's ironic is that I don't even think they know how to grow Super League with the "bigger slice of the cake" that they were so keen to grab.

I had to look twice when reading it as I could have sworn i had misread it and what you put was actually what was said.. its quite scary really and I agree with your point too that Super League may well not know what to do! C4 though is a good first step, the irony IMHO is that more internationals during the season would also be a major move forward.. wont happen though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RP London said:

I had to look twice when reading it as I could have sworn i had misread it and what you put was actually what was said.. its quite scary really and I agree with your point too that Super League may well not know what to do! C4 though is a good first step, the irony IMHO is that more internationals during the season would also be a major move forward.. wont happen though.

Of course SL doesn't know what to do.  If Sean McGuire is right that the lack of money in the game is due to the clubs being located in the wrong sort of places, then their revenues are already maxed out and there's nothing they can do to grow them.

The RFL's acceptance of Toronto a few years ago was based on that very fact.  Eric Pérez's pitch was all based around his understanding that the game's revenues were maxed out as it was and something like Toronto is needed to grow the revenues further.

Edited by Big Picture
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, M j M said:

Of course SL doesn't know what to do.  If Sean McGuire is right

 

16 hours ago, M j M said:

BINGO!

(BTW he's not right)

Off course they know what to do, as individual club's - with the odd exception - utilise what money they receive in hoping to either buy success or avoid relegation, then they become reliant on club's from lower divisions assisting them in either developing some of their player's or helping out in the convalescence of returning injured or out of form player's. Then when they have failed miserably in improving and promoting the sport enough to receive more money for their offer from the broadcasters, simply cut the funding to the rest of the sport.

How small minded these people are, don't they realise that if they don't nurture the soil and in turn reduce the sustanance to the roots, that all the plant will eventually start suffering and will quickly die off. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Of course SL doesn't know what to do.  If Sean McGuire is right that the lack of money in the game is due to the clubs being located in the wrong sort of places, then their revenues are already maxed out and there's nothing they can do to grow them.

The RFL's acceptance of Toronto a few years ago was based on that very fact.  Eric Pérez's pitch was all based around his understanding that the game's revenues were maxed out as it was and something like Toronto is needed to grow the revenues further.

Their is a consideration that within the UK if you do have clubs in big cities then as soccer is so big in those cities then your revenues would be maxed out too. Taking account of soccer totally dominating all aspects of media and potential fans awareness of the game.

Plus if one was to try and remedy by starting up clubs in those cities or moving existing you lose fans or interest anyway.

In my opinion we have what we have and hence need to message or market within that context. Their is still potential for increased fans and commercial revenue, all-be-it maybe not as big if situated differently to attract the worldwide brands - but then their only be interested in soccer or Olympic type events anyway.

Edited by redjonn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

so when this third party makes a decision will they have to run it by the other two parties to get it ratified?

Through the fish-eyed lens of tear stained eyes
I can barely define the shape of this moment in time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, my missus said:

so when this third party makes a decision will they have to run it by the other two parties to get it ratified?

No, there will be an independent 4th party to govern these decisions, who will in turn have governance from a 5th party made of of club representatives. This 5th party will have overall authority, that will be ratified by a 6th party, which will be independent, but have oversight from a 7th party made up of club representatives.

Its a good plan, gives everything a nice streamlined organisation to ensure all decisions go through quickly and efficiently.

Edited by dkw
  • Haha 2
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...