Jump to content

IMG Strategic Partnership Announced


Recommended Posts

Last point.  Keep hearing that two 10's is part of this but decided on field.  That seems to be one of the dumbest decisions possible.  

We arent going to lock London out if they dont finish in required position for say Swinton. 

I can only assume the RFL is not being honest with clubs to try and get any vote they need through and going to financially damage clubs who take part in the arms race.

And We are still calling it SL 2 or B when everyone who would pay for it be that sky or fans know its just a reduced championship? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Two World Cups three years apart in England then France give the game a great opportunity to get some new eyeballs on it. Hopefully England and France organise some matches each year between WCs, feel like a lot is riding on how well France can be competitive at this year's world cup as they're quite obviously the only country that could feasibly have a competitive series with England within 5 - 10 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Balmainboy said:

Two World Cups three years apart in England then France give the game a great opportunity to get some new eyeballs on it. Hopefully England and France organise some matches each year between WCs, feel like a lot is riding on how well France can be competitive at this year's world cup as they're quite obviously the only country that could feasibly have a competitive series with England within 5 - 10 years. 

*northern hemisphere team have a competitive series with England

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

There is a peculiarity where familiarity with RL decreases success chances for certain international fixtures.

Most regular RL fans will know what games are foregone conclusions. Some will still go to those games but many won't. Hence poor crowds in Leigh for example.

That logic doesn't seem to stick as strongly elsewhere.

To be honest that why something like England v France, if played in England, should be played at somewhere like Brentford. A good sized, new stadium in London, a place that consistently gets our best international crowds, selling to a different audience. I could see us selling out a venue like that with a bit of a push.

No baggage, no France are ****, just appeal to London folk who want to watch international sport and think that England v France sounds like a good match and a cheap, affordable family day out. Even if England win by 30 they come away happy after seeing some great tries and are delighted with their national team winning convincingly, as happens in other sports (strange I know!).

Edited by Damien
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Last point.  Keep hearing that two 10's is part of this but decided on field.  That seems to be one of the dumbest decisions possible.  

We arent going to lock London out if they dont finish in required position for say Swinton. 

I can only assume the RFL is not being honest with clubs to try and get any vote they need through and going to financially damage clubs who take part in the arms race.

And We are still calling it SL 2 or B when everyone who would pay for it be that sky or fans know its just a reduced championship? 

 

Yes, that’s a strange one. I found the proposal of “let’s go to 14, relegate 4 and place them with the top 6 of the championship” as a dumb plan because of the “risk”, for want of a better word, of including unsuitable clubs and/or excluding more suitable clubs in the Championship and League One and any proposal that is a 2x10’s one should not be based wholly upon onfield results but other metrics away from a patch of grass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Damien said:

To be honest that why something like England v France, if played in England, should be played at somewhere like Brentford. A good sized, new stadium in London, a place that consistently gets our best international crowds, selling to a different audience. I could see us selling out a venue like that with a bit of a push.

No baggage, no France are ****, just appeal to London folk who want to watch international sport and think that England v France sounds like a good match and a cheap, affordable family day out. Even if England win by 30 they come away happy after seeing some great tries and are delighted with their national team winning convincingly, as happens in other sports (strange I know!).

Yep,  clear difference between the tragics on here saying I wont watch and our need to take it as far away from the heartlands as possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Damien said:

To be honest that why something like England v France, if played in England, should be played at somewhere like Brentford. A good sized, new stadium in London, a place that consistently gets our best international crowds, selling to a different audience. I could see us selling out a venue like that with a bit of a push.

No baggage, no France are ****, just appeal to London folk who want to watch international sport and think that England v France sounds like a good match and a cheap, affordable family day out. Even if England win by 30 they come away happy after seeing some great tries and are delighted with their national team winning convincingly, as happens in other sports (strange I know!).

My thoughts exactly.

Same logic applies with England vs Wales or any other non-SH nation imo. London, even Bristol or the midlands should be the sort of places these games could be pitched at (if England are to play at home rather than away that is). Only Leeds in the Heartlands should be considered imo given its good record for international crowds.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Even when the England football team plays San Marino or Andorra at Wembley, the match is commercially viable. Even if tickets are discounted (by football standards), people attend it. 

When the England RL team plays Wales or France, we play it in Leigh, try and charge £15, everyone complains about how it should be a fiver at best and included in their season ticket, and it proves to be a waste of everybody's time.  

You don't believe hard enough. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

Hi Rocket.  The cost of something is always mentioned when an idea is put forward.

Quite simply if you have a product to offer you have to get out there and find sponsors.

Yep and I suppose the hope is, that`s what IMG can bring to the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

We're looking at tv figures though surely as what makes something commercially viable though in the long run surely?

Maybe stop holding internationals that you are trying to promote by holding them in Leigh? For a World cup with two non english nations fine but location is important. 

I think one comes before the other on this one. Recent years have shown that there isn't a huge appetite from TV companies to go too deep into their pockets for international RL rights. It wasn't that long ago that we were hosting an England international on PPV via Our League and, whilst I'm sure the BBC would have an interest, their willingness to pay is another matter. 

I agree, location is important. But let's not ignore the fundamental flaws with the product on sale....

1 hour ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

Totally agree.  That is because the games are; sometimes put on at short notice; stand alone games with nothing at stake; poorly promoted; sometimes played on a weekday evening.  So it’s no wonder fans can’t be bothered attending.

But if England RL games are part of a tournament that the Governing Bodies seriously buy into and commit to over a number of years then just perhaps this attitude might change.  

Improving all of that stuff doesn't really change unless you can get very good at selling to different audiences. RL supporters aren't daft - you can't fool them that and England, France and Wales triangular tournament is something that it isn't, and you can't fool them that it's worth a price that it clearly isn't. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

RL supporters aren't daft - you can't fool them that and England, France and Wales triangular tournament is something that it isn't, and you can't fool them that it's worth a price that it clearly isn't. 

Some things are very different about RL supporters, other sports' fans will turn up to the opening of envelope whereas RL fans won't bother in numbers fo a major final. It's not so much they can't be fooled as they can't be bothered.

 

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:

#CorbynwasrightandFordesaidso!  Trusscouldn'tcareless v Keith AWOL Tory vast majority in the making.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe its been announced before but its the first time I've seen this detail. Again though one seat out of five and talk of what IMG recommend sounds very advisory to me and the will still has to come from the game to drive any change through:

Significantly, IMG will have a representative on a new five-person rugby league commercial board.

An insider told The Times: “That’s where IMG’s clout will come — through the board of rugby league commercial. It will be a key relationship.

“Super League clubs broke away in 2018 but ended up getting far less money in the current Sky deal. IMG’s first challenge from 2024 onwards is to get the game to a position where the TV deal starts going back up rather than keep going back down.

“IMG like the idea of getting their hands on a sport and being able to reshape it. It could be hugely significant in terms of how the game is structured moving forward.

“This is rugby league’s equivalent of when the game switched to a summer sport and Super League was formed in 1996. Everything is on the table in terms of what IMG recommend – it’s a blank sheet of paper.”

Rugby league’s deal with IMG ‘can propel the game to where it’s never been before’ | Sport | The Times

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

21 minutes ago, Damien said:

Maybe its been announced before but its the first time I've seen this detail. Again though one seat out of five and talk of what IMG recommend sounds very advisory to me and the will still has to come from the game to drive any change through:

Significantly, IMG will have a representative on a new five-person rugby league commercial board.

An insider told The Times: “That’s where IMG’s clout will come — through the board of rugby league commercial. It will be a key relationship.

“Super League clubs broke away in 2018 but ended up getting far less money in the current Sky deal. IMG’s first challenge from 2024 onwards is to get the game to a position where the TV deal starts going back up rather than keep going back down.

“IMG like the idea of getting their hands on a sport and being able to reshape it. It could be hugely significant in terms of how the game is structured moving forward.

“This is rugby league’s equivalent of when the game switched to a summer sport and Super League was formed in 1996. Everything is on the table in terms of what IMG recommend – it’s a blank sheet of paper.”

Rugby league’s deal with IMG ‘can propel the game to where it’s never been before’ | Sport | The Times

One of the articles I read on this yesterday suggested that they won't have a place on this board and the 5th member would be independent, but they may buy in in future. 

TBH, the detail does appear to be a little all over the place, I was always under the impression that the independent board member would be from the strategic partner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Some things are very different about RL supporters, other sports' fans will turn up to the opening of envelope whereas RL fans won't bother in numbers fo a major final. It's not so much they can't be fooled as they can't be bothered.

 

I don't fully disagree, RL's fanbase is of a type that is different to some other sports, but then most sports are quite different, but I think the reality is that it is simpler than that and it is just a numbers game.

If you have a huge fanbase built up (RU nations could sell out the biggest 6N games two or three times over) then only having 25% of them interested in a lower ranked Autumn international can still deliver a huge crowd of 50k plus.

In reality, RL's top end number is probably around 50k (we know this because our grounds are never full, so we see the top number) so if we put on games that appeal to only 25% of fans, then we maybe end up with 10 to 12k, which is what we see.

If we regularly got 70k for England in the big games, we could then be pushing for 25k for the lower ranked games and these paying - but it wasn't too long ago we only had just over 17k at Hull for a game versus the Kiwis.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not trying to push any narrative here or create a story but from what I can see on Twitter, only four clubs (Saints, York, Wigan, Warrington) having retweeted the news either via the Super League Twitter page or the RFL Twitter page. Our clubs’ use of social media is not good at all. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Jughead said:

I’m not trying to push any narrative here or create a story but from what I can see on Twitter, only four clubs (Saints, York, Wigan, Warrington) having retweeted the news either via the Super League Twitter page or the RFL Twitter page. Our clubs’ use of social media is not good at all. 

Would you expect Turkey's to be promoting the announcement of Christmas on their Twitter accounts? (or Gobble accounts... I don't know I'm not Chris Packham am I). 

I was born to run a club like this. Number 1, I do not spook easily, and those who think I do, are wasting their time, with their surprise attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I don't fully disagree, RL's fanbase is of a type that is different to some other sports, but then most sports are quite different, but I think the reality is that it is simpler than that and it is just a numbers game.

If you have a huge fanbase built up (RU nations could sell out the biggest 6N games two or three times over) then only having 25% of them interested in a lower ranked Autumn international can still deliver a huge crowd of 50k plus.

In reality, RL's top end number is probably around 50k (we know this because our grounds are never full, so we see the top number) so if we put on games that appeal to only 25% of fans, then we maybe end up with 10 to 12k, which is what we see.

If we regularly got 70k for England in the big games, we could then be pushing for 25k for the lower ranked games and these paying - but it wasn't too long ago we only had just over 17k at Hull for a game versus the Kiwis.

That 17k was affected by also having a game in Leeds which is a far more popular for Yorkshire based fans given the choice. When there was only one Yorkshire game and that was in Hull then it was better attended.

The 3 test formula against Oz and NZ that should be followed except for extraordinary circumstances should be 1 game London, 1 game Leeds, 1 game North West or elsewhere like Coventry or Newcastle. Multiple games in either of those regions would unnecessarily cannibalise eachother as we saw with Leeds and Hull in the example you gave.

For less marquee fixtures, such as those against European opposition, then venues like Brentford could be explored. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jughead said:

Yes, that’s a strange one. I found the proposal of “let’s go to 14, relegate 4 and place them with the top 6 of the championship” as a dumb plan because of the “risk”, for want of a better word, of including unsuitable clubs and/or excluding more suitable clubs in the Championship and League One and any proposal that is a 2x10’s one should not be based wholly upon onfield results but other metrics away from a patch of grass. 

Thats why I think they are lying to be frank. No way any company is dumping London or Sheffield for Bradford and Batley. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

That 17k was affected by also having a game in Leeds which is a far more popular for Yorkshire based fans given the choice. When there was only one Yorkshire game and that was in Hull then it was better attended.

The 3 test formula against Oz and NZ that should be followed except for extraordinary circumstances should be 1 game London, 1 game Leeds, 1 game North West or elsewhere like Coventry or Newcastle. Multiple games in either of those regions would unnecessarily cannibalise eachother as we saw with Leeds and Hull in the example you gave.

For less marquee fixtures, such as those against European opposition, then venues like Brentford could be explored. 

Yep, we are trying to get new markets. If that Aus series ever happens, Newcastle (because that would be the first sign of strategy to grow it) 

Then London and last game in heartlands. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Would you expect Turkey's to be promoting the announcement of Christmas on their Twitter accounts? (or Gobble accounts... I don't know I'm not Chris Packham am I). 

Excellent.. so you're not Chris Packham... I'm narrowing down who you actually are now. One down.. I'm going to take a punt that you're not David Attenborough either.. this may take a while though!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

That 17k was affected by also having a game in Leeds which is a far more popular for Yorkshire based fans given the choice. When there was only one Yorkshire game and that was in Hull then it was better attended.

The 3 test formula against Oz and NZ that should be followed except for extraordinary circumstances should be 1 game London, 1 game Leeds, 1 game North West or elsewhere like Coventry or Newcastle. Multiple games in either of those regions would unnecessarily cannibalise eachother as we saw with Leeds and Hull in the example you gave.

For less marquee fixtures, such as those against European opposition, then venues like Brentford could be explored. 

East, West, London - tbh, it worked for years and is still generally by far the best approach for a 3 test series (counting Manc as East).. We don't need to move too far from that formula and have a relatively nice selection of grounds to go at. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't fully disagree, RL's fanbase is of a type that is different to some other sports, but then most sports are quite different, but I think the reality is that it is simpler than that and it is just a numbers game.

If you have a huge fanbase built up (RU nations could sell out the biggest 6N games two or three times over) then only having 25% of them interested in a lower ranked Autumn international can still deliver a huge crowd of 50k plus.

In reality, RL's top end number is probably around 50k (we know this because our grounds are never full, so we see the top number) so if we put on games that appeal to only 25% of fans, then we maybe end up with 10 to 12k, which is what we see.

If we regularly got 70k for England in the big games, we could then be pushing for 25k for the lower ranked games and these paying - but it wasn't too long ago we only had just over 17k at Hull for a game versus the Kiwis.

The RFL basically set up an England RL fans membership scheme in 2019, then played as Great Britain that year and had no England games. This is how far back we are coming from.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't fully disagree, RL's fanbase is of a type that is different to some other sports, but then most sports are quite different, but I think the reality is that it is simpler than that and it is just a numbers game.

If you have a huge fanbase built up (RU nations could sell out the biggest 6N games two or three times over) then only having 25% of them interested in a lower ranked Autumn international can still deliver a huge crowd of 50k plus.

In reality, RL's top end number is probably around 50k (we know this because our grounds are never full, so we see the top number) so if we put on games that appeal to only 25% of fans, then we maybe end up with 10 to 12k, which is what we see.

If we regularly got 70k for England in the big games, we could then be pushing for 25k for the lower ranked games and these paying - but it wasn't too long ago we only had just over 17k at Hull for a game versus the Kiwis.

I think you agree more than you don't there Dave.

I did not want to use the example of kick and C simply because it would look like the same old same old. They spent years cultivating that result  with the help of press and Beeb, but the result is still the opening of an envelope.

  • Like 1

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:

#CorbynwasrightandFordesaidso!  Trusscouldn'tcareless v Keith AWOL Tory vast majority in the making.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Oxford said:

I think you agree more than you don't there Dave.

I did not want to use the example of kick and C simply because it would look like the same old same old. They spent years cultivating that result  with the help of press and Beeb, but the result is still the opening of an envelope.

I suppose the area of disagreement is that I don't believe it is just because our fans don't want to go. I think they behave broadly in line with other fans, there is more demand for bigger matches, less demand for smaller games. Just tge same as football, Union and cricket. 

@Scubby makes a good point regarding the incompetence, but even acknowledging that, RL fans support a lot of events. Almost blaming fans gives the governing bodies a free pass. 

We are just a modest sized group, which is ultimately the problem here. Adding fans/customers/viewers/investors to the existing base is the aim. 

Edited by Dave T
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scubby said:

The RFL basically set up an England RL fans membership scheme in 2019, then played as Great Britain that year and had no England games. This is how far back we are coming from.

The fan engagement in RL is horrendously bad. Really appalling. There are major improvements that can be delivered there via IMG, although it is fair to say benefits can take some time to materialise - but surely that's the point of a 12y agreement. 

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...