IMG Strategic Partnership Announced

[Oxford]

It is amazing how often threads drift off the point usually led by pet hates and prejudices.

It is also really interesting that rather than celebrating a 12 year strategy with a major company we're  looking for the catches and seeing the darkside.

Sort of OMG it's IMG what else can go wrong.

2 minutes ago, Scubby said:

So Saints playing the Panthers in the WCC during a bye round makes sense financial for example.

Financial maybe but for NRL coaches there's only SOO that can't be agrued against and this would probably be too much of a risk for their players. I think they'd also assume it's a rubbish idea because they didn't think of it.

In any case the NRL have been looking down their noses at us for so long they'd need a microscope t see anything.

2 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I believe that horse has bolted now: no free NRL weekends from next year.

I actually think a European tournament midseason just with Europe-based players IS what we should be looking to develop, but there's a whole load of issues both on an off the pitch so it really would need a long-term commitment and some innovation. It doesn't need to rival a series vs the giants, but carve an niche of its own. And still not guaranteed to succeed,    

Yes we need to look to sorting our own end and have done.

The NRL, more often than not, works on the  isolation model of Aussie rules.

 

[RL Sonja]

I wouldn't be putting all the eggs in any basket marked IMG.

[RL Sonja]

2 minutes ago, Oxford said:

 

The NRL, more often than not, works on the  isolation model of Aussie rules.

 

Quite well put. The NRL are pretty backward in their thinking as well. 

[Damien]

40 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I would be more than happy for the season to be shortened to carve out a gap in the calendar for England to travel to Australia and take part in the one mid-season international slot the NRL deigns to carve out for internationals around ANZAC day, but our clubs would never go for it because "wE nEeD tHe FiXtUrEs!" 

Have a three-week break in the SL season, one week for prep and travel, play internationals in the middle of that break and then, to give the players some recovery time from the travel, bring forward the Bash weekend for an exclusive weekend for Sky TV in the third week? 

The NRL have already said they are scrapping mid season internationals from next year.

[Toby Chopra]

1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

Why not? the casual audience which are the real market for internationals neither know or care who is in the NRL.  

 

Sure, but they know competitive sport when they see it, and if they see England putting 60+ on a domestically sourced Wales, Ireland and Scotland each year interest will wane. 

The issue with the NRL is that hundreds of the world's best players play in it, and that won't change, and that includes players eligible for the home nations. 

Without them, building a European nations tournament becomes a very different prospect. 

But they ARE available at the end of season - along with the Aussie and NZ players - so I'm not opposed to increasing the amount of end-of-season games against European opposition (although not at the cost of freezing out Australian and NZ, which is totally unnecessary)

But the holy grail is an (additional) mid-season euro tournament on our own terms played in football grounds in the summer. But it's always been hard to see how it can be sustained with just UK/French based players, so the RFL have swerved it.

Maybe IMG could find a clever way of creating some sort of competitive balance, without undermining its credibility.       

[Dave T]

3 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

A single good Tongan team caused the NRL to rethink its entire internationals strategy, implement a new competition and even adapt its own eligibility rules for Origin.

We played Scotland once, got a very healthy crowd, were losing at half time, then continued to complain that no one in the Northern Hemisphere is worth us playing.

If you really think Scotland are any kind of answer to any question at all in the Northern Hemisphere then I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree. 

You appear to be ignoring literally every weak thing about Scotland RL just because of a one-off strong viewing figure on the BBC. 

[Dave T]

England is an RL playing nation with a large number of players and pro teams. It is right that they should be playing the other strong nations like Australia, NZ, PNG and France, and then we have the opportunistic teams like the Pacific Nations who have benefitted from the diversity of players in the NRL. 

Im not sure how anyone can believe we should be dismissing all those (who are wholly reliant on the NRL with the exception of France), and basing our development of the England team focusing on nations who are built on foundations of sand.

I'm not sure why people are so keen to keep pushing for things that have no foundations at all, and then spend all their time sagging off the RFL when things fail. 

I'm all for these teams playing more games and supporting them more, but the real opportunities here are the likes of Samoa, Tonga etc. 

[Tommygilf]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If you really think Scotland are any kind of answer to any question at all in the Northern Hemisphere then I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree. 

You appear to be ignoring literally every weak thing about Scotland RL just because of a one-off strong viewing figure on the BBC. 

That is strawmanning and you know it

[RP London]

51 minutes ago, idrewthehaggis said:

just a thought. Bastille Day. Pit France against an England side in say Avignon or Toulouse mid season. Make it a regular fixture. 

an England with no NRL players (due to obvious logistical reasons) should mean a good match up too.. its a great run out for those on the fringes of the England team, a reason for the group to get together. No one outside of RL will know that the team isnt 100% full strength but even if they do its not now uncommon for this to happen (at least 1 RU international in the autumn is with a weaker side, against a weaker side but its where some shocks happen). 

I'll bang this drum hard and as often as i can but why do we not want to play without our NRL players, surely we cant think we will be beaten without them otherwise the match with them would be closer and nullify the argument that with them it would be a walkover so lets not play! Get internationals on, no NRL players mean the walkover fear should be less, the exposure can only be positive and your building more real estate to sell to the TV companies down the line. 

[Dave T]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

That is strawmanning and you know it

Its not in the slightest. 

Pushing a BBC viewing figure and some competitive games using heritage players as a reason to be pursuing the likes of Scotland and Ireland ignores the fact that the game in these countries is no more than a handful of amateur players. 

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

he real market gets Wales vs England and England vs France 

There is no such market. This is made up in your head. 

Which non-RL fans are craving these games? 

[UTK]

43 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Because that is probably not going to happen.  The NRL tanked a World cup and have oceanic cup now end of season, they do not need us. 

The best you Will get is one nation a year and if England prioritise that over building their own commercial product it is poor. 

Compromise is three consistent European nations  (England Wales France) plus an Oceanic nation on rotation. 

England get two games against oceanic nations a year whilst actually building the game in Europe. The aim has to be to wean ourselves off needing NRL for anything international bar a World cup. 

This is the reality that some just aren't getting - one nation a year touring the NH or England touring downunder is the best you'll get.

The 4 Nations is not coming back - the Oceanic Cup is a more attractive prospect for everyone involved except England, the Pacific Nations aren't going to throw that out the window just to include England for the sake of it.

No one is suggesting England toss playing Pacific Nations out the window in favour of dedicating themselves to Europe - but the reality is Europe is always going to be available for a consistent schedule of matches, so why not build something meaningful to supplement the sporadic activity with SH nations instead of ignoring it altogether. 

[Damien]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If you really think Scotland are any kind of answer to any question at all in the Northern Hemisphere then I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree. 

You appear to be ignoring literally every weak thing about Scotland RL just because of a one-off strong viewing figure on the BBC. 

The only real growth in the northern hemisphere international game in the short to medium term can come from France and Wales. As this is a strategy thread then in my mind this strangely enough requires a vision and a strategy to achieve that. That is what I would love to see as much as anything from all this, the game saying this is what we want to do as a sport and this is how we will achieve it. It requires a whole game approach and internationals and SL can only benefit each other.

I am firmly convinced that the only way to achieve any sort of sustainable northern hemisphere international game is to have more French and Welsh clubs and players playing at a higher level. That requires a whole game approach and things like 2 French SL clubs and 1 Welsh club playing in SL and the necessary funds to achieve that. That allows for more mid season internationals etc and proper growth through giving people in those countries a team to support and interest in the game that translates to the international scene. It also requires more of a shift to the European Super League model, or at least UK and France.

Now people may disagree with that and whether that should be done but at least its a proper vision of how domestic RL can grow international RL to grow the whole game. If that's not what people want then I understand that but then don't complain we have no mid season international games and the likes of France and Wales just trundle along. Just expecting teams to compete with England as is isn't going to happen.

That is with also concentrating on two countries with a long, proud history in the game and some sort of domestic RL scene. Scotland, Ireland and the like are a completely different level with next to no roots. They fill a place when it comes to World Cups stacked with heritage players but we are kidding ourselves if we think that isn't built on sand and is any sort of solid foundation for growth in the international game going forward.

[idrewthehaggis]

I think the debate should move on from why to what the IMG partnership should and could do.

I see the overall aim being to at least stabilize, if not enhance all of the game.

As the RFL has, the target should be greater participation, resources, standards and infrastructure backed by increased revenue and exposure.

So what then?

Certainly the brief RFL press release indicates something around internationals. The ideal would be regular Aussie and Kiwi matches. But also re-generating the European international structure.

Then there is structure. It is not the magic bullet, but would be a toxin if it done wrong like say 10x10, or insufficiently funding tier two and keeping relegation. 

I would be hoping IMG might be looking at-

Increasing the collective action for the club game. Eg unified ticketing, marketing, central player contracts, unified regional academies rather than club, centres of excellence, financing of improved infrastructure. A possibility to increase standards and reduce costs.

Identifying and strengthening key areas such as London, Manchester/Salford, south Yorkshire, Cumbria, Wales and the North east of England. From development officers to additional salary cap and better infrastructure.

I also query whether IMG's criteria extends into France? Now support here would significantly make a difference to the European game. The aim would be to stabilize Elite One plus, bring it up to Championship standard, integrate the whole European club game and maybe see more French teams aspire for Super League.

Lastly I think transparency is crucial. The fear that any gains are seized by a few officials and club owners. We need clear agreed aims, we need a process of accountability and responsibility.

[Toby Chopra]

6 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

They arent frozen out,  They dont need us.  Noone is going to invest in a majority European tournament without England and if England say we'll take part except when Australia say we can have a 3 game series then do one, it isnt going to happen. 

3 european nations and an oceanic one.  Tragics get there 2 games,  the real market gets Wales vs England and England vs France 

We can, and should, be aiming to have both.

End of season: Aussies/ NZ/series down under/World Cup

Mid-season: European tri nations

If Australia and NZ are willing to travel once every 4 years - which they've indicated they are - then we should keep the Ashes/Baskerville series.

If they're not, then we rethink

 

[Dave T]

Just now, Damien said:

The only real growth in the northern hemisphere international game in the short to medium term can come from France and Wales. As this is a strategy thread then in my mind this strangely enough requires a vision and a strategy to achieve that. That is what I would love to see as much as anything from all this, the game saying this is what we want to do as a sport and this is how we will achieve it. It requires a whole game approach and internationals and SL can only benefit each other.

I am firmly convinced that the only way to achieve any sort of sustainable northern hemisphere international game is to have more French and Welsh clubs and players playing at a higher level. That requires a whole game approach and things like 2 French SL clubs and 1 Welsh club playing in SL and the necessary funds to achieve that. That allows for more mid season internationals etc and proper growth through giving people in those countries a team to support and interest in the game that translates to the international scene. It also requires more of a shift to the European Super League model, or at least UK and France.

Now people may disagree with that and whether that should be done but at least its a proper vision of how domestic RL can grow international RL to grow the whole game. If that's not what people want then I understand that but then don't complain we have no mid season international games and the likes of France and Wales just trundle along. Just expecting teams to compete with England as is isn't going to happen.

That is with also concentrating on two countries with a long, proud history in the game and some sort of domestic RL scene. Scotland, Ireland and the like are a completely different level with next to no roots. They fill a place when it comes to World Cups stacked with heritage players but we are kidding ourselves if we think that isn't built on sand and is any sort of solid foundation for growth in the international game going forward.

I do worry about Wales tbh, I fear we have missed the boat there when we failed to capitalise on the 90s resurgence. 

I agree these are the areas that we need to focus on, but I think it needs millions and millions of quid of investment in the roots of the game there and a lot of patience rather than just trying to stage international tournaments with them as the solution. 

Unfortunately, the World Cup and relative success of some of the heritage teams has completely masked the lack of development. 

I do think the main way we are going to support real growth in France and Wales is through the club game, and dare I say it, licensed clubs. 

[Big Picture]

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

You could just say, "I don't know."

We obviously need internationals to raise the profile of the game. It's the shortcut to the general public that works for every sport.

If IMG can work out how we can find enough players for enough European teams for a regular, decent tournament then good luck to them. It appears to have defeated everyone else - although that's mostly because no one can be bothered. I'm not sure they will either, TBH.

You overlook that the other sports are national sports played up and down the country, none is a regional sport hemmed into a region which is economically disadvantaged from its loss of industry.  You're also overlooking what @Harry Stottlehas said about his experience trying to talk the game up with associates on his travels in his business career, only to find that most had no idea that a second version of rugby even exists!

As such the idea that RL internationals can raise the game's profile and win over the general public is an assumption not supported by facts.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

You overlook that the other sports are national sports played up and down the country, none is a regional sport hemmed into a region which is economically disadvantaged from its loss of industry.  You're also overlooking what @Harry Stottlehas said about his experience trying to talk the game up with associates on his travels in his business career, only to find that most had no idea that a second version of rugby even exists!

As such the idea that RL internationals can raise the game's profile and win over the general public is an assumption not supported by facts.

Your last para simply isn't true. 

RL internationals on the BBC are usually the biggest games of the year, and the RLWC this year will see 61 (iirc) games broadcast Live on the BBC platforms, including many on BBC One and Two. 

This will absolutely see a raising of the games profile, far more than anything else we can do. 

[Scubby]

3 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

You overlook that the other sports are national sports played up and down the country, none is a regional sport hemmed into a region which is economically disadvantaged from its loss of industry.  You're also overlooking what @Harry Stottlehas said about his experience trying to talk the game up with associates on his travels in his business career, only to find that most had no idea that a second version of rugby even exists!

As such the idea that RL internationals can raise the game's profile and win over the general public is an assumption not supported by facts.

In 2013 there were 67,500 at Wembley for Eng v NZ. I can confidently say that around 40-45,000 of those in attendance were from outside the heartlands. It was almost like an out of body experience being there, the number of new fans, families, southern-based accents etc. These guys were there for a big event in London with a national team.

[Damien]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I do worry about Wales tbh, I fear we have missed the boat there when we failed to capitalise on the 90s resurgence. 

I agree these are the areas that we need to focus on, but I think it needs millions and millions of quid of investment in the roots of the game there and a lot of patience rather than just trying to stage international tournaments with them as the solution. 

Unfortunately, the World Cup and relative success of some of the heritage teams has completely masked the lack of development. 

I do think the main way we are going to support real growth in France and Wales is through the club game, and dare I say it, licensed clubs. 

I agree but this is where I keep coming back to a whole game solution. It takes the whole game on a strategic level to decide that and maybe this joint body is the vehicle to do that. I'm not holding my breath that will be the direction that is taken though.

There's a few key questions that need to be answered to then formulate any strategy. Many in fact. How do we get more people playing the game? How do we grow the community game? Do we want to really expand our elite level footprint beyond the M62 and give the necessary support? If so how do we do that? Is it additional funding for London, licensing etc. Do we want an international game on out doorstep? If so how do we achieve that, do we have 2 SL spots reserved for French clubs? etc... I think a lot of this is intertwined and the tough questions need to be asked and answered because in many cases you cant have one without the other. Not everyone will like the answers but until it is clear in the heads of the powers that be what they want and what they want to achieve then its just more of the same. Clear objectives and deliverables are needed.

I think Celtic Crusaders showed the potential of the game in Wales when it came to players, a fair few still knocking about even in recent years. I don't know the financials, and obviously when Samuels pulled the plug that was it, but even a couple of well funded clubs in Swansea and Cardiff even at Championship level would be a great boost I feel. Again though I understand I probably have different view of how we do this, particularly when it comes to funding, than others.

I don't think I have really seen a vision of where RL wants to be since the Richard Lewis days. People may not have liked that vision but at least he had one.

[Big Picture]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Your last para simply isn't true. 

RL internationals on the BBC are usually the biggest games of the year, and the RLWC this year will see 61 (iirc) games broadcast Live on the BBC platforms, including many on BBC One and Two. 

This will absolutely see a raising of the games profile, far more than anything else we can do. 

You too are overlooking @Harry Stottle's points about the lack of awareness among his business associates up and down the country.  Yes RL internationals on the BBC are usually the biggest games of the year, but those matches did not cut through to the likes of his business associates one bit.

I don't disagree that all the matches on the BBC platforms this year are the best the game can do at present, but I don't foresee a great upsurge of interest resulting from them.

13 minutes ago, Scubby said:

In 2013 there were 67,500 at Wembley for Eng v NZ. I can confidently say that around 40-45,000 of those in attendance were from outside the heartlands. It was almost like an out of body experience being there, the number of new fans, families, southern-based accents etc. These guys were there for a big event in London with a national team.

That was one of the relatively few times an RL International conformed to their idea of what International sport is: a big match in a big stadium watched by a big crowd, so one would think it made a good impression on them.  Yet it was still a comparative rarity, with nothing to follow it up, so nothing of lasting benefit was achieved.

[Damien]

19 minutes ago, Scubby said:

In 2013 there were 67,500 at Wembley for Eng v NZ. I can confidently say that around 40-45,000 of those in attendance were from outside the heartlands. It was almost like an out of body experience being there, the number of new fans, families, southern-based accents etc. These guys were there for a big event in London with a national team.

I remember going to the NZ and Australia games at the Olympic Stadium too in the years (2015 and 2016)) after that, 44,393 and 35,569 respectively, and it was exactly the same, full of Southern fans and families. As an aside they couldn't believe how cheap the tickets were too for an international event.

I don't think we've played in London since 

Edited May 11, 2022 by Damien

[Scubby]

5 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

That game was awesome.  I got a few to come when I was at Surrey Uní and they enjoyed it. 

We then had 0 home internationals in the calendar for 2014 and there is currently 0 home internationals in the calendar for 2023.

Edited May 11, 2022 by Scubby

[Jughead]

17 minutes ago, Scubby said:

In 2013 there were 67,500 at Wembley for Eng v NZ. I can confidently say that around 40-45,000 of those in attendance were from outside the heartlands. It was almost like an out of body experience being there, the number of new fans, families, southern-based accents etc. These guys were there for a big event in London with a national team.

I think the quoted figures are some stretch, it certainly wasn’t that high in percentage terms. 

I may be wrong but I don’t think tickets were slashed, how we have done for other games since but I think there was a very good offer on Club Wembley seats (this may have been one of the first time anyone could buy tickets for that area) and I think a lot took that offer up, myself included. 

The only criticism was the order of the games that day but it was a good day. 

[RP London]

33 minutes ago, Dave T said:

There is no such market. This is made up in your head. 

Which non-RL fans are craving these games? 

I don't think any one is craving RL per se. However, there are a lot of general sports fans out there and if you can tap into them there is real growth to be had and i say this as one of them. Show me any sport and I will watch it, even more so if I have "skin in the game" which is why internationals are so important IMHO.

If the sport is then good enough I will stick around for a bit, longer if you can keep me hooked. NFL did this in the 80s and then has brought me back in with me having Sky and watching Americas Game etc. I went to a LA Lakers game while over there last month and loved it (never been a massive Basketball fan but it was a chance to watch a big sport and a big team so wasn't going to pass it up). Since being home i have actively looked out scores in the play offs, and looked on You Tube for Lakers historic games to build knowledge, next season I will watch some games when on the telebox where I can and will possibly look to go to some of the BBL games as my daughter has started pestering as she was loving everything around the game in LA (may not be the same in Sheffield though!)

In the 80s with grandstand I used to get to see a game that i rarely got exposed to at a private school (then onto boarding school) in Sheffield (then on to Worcestershire). I then started playing it as I loved watching it and my grandparents on my Mum's side are from Warrington and now I am on a message board after playing until I was 34 and helping out at clubs in London and Sheffield, now trying to help with Juniors in Sheffield too. 

Its extremes but I am not as much of a freak as my wife would like to make out. There are plenty of people like me that are happy to watch sport and can then become a hooked fan. The market doesnt know it is there but it is, it just needs to be tapped into properly and thats more about what you do around the game and after the game than it is the 1 game they see. For example its why I believe mid season internationals are huge because there is a club game to tune in to next week.. with my Lakers example I could be lost as it was the last home game of the season and I will need to be actively looking for the start of next season, and my interest may wane between now and then.

The "market" doesnt exist in terms of being able to pinpoint but there are people out there who can be brought into the fold, but its going to take a lot of work and the 1 game to hook them is only the very very start of it.. but you still need it, and IMHO internationals are the easiest way