Can IMG make Rugby League into a more successful sport?

[JohnM]

It seems we all know the answer as to what IMG or anyone else might, could, would, will do.

In the "Lays of Ancient Rome" by Thomas Macaulay, Horatius and the bridge....

But those behind cried ‘Forward!’

    And those before cried ‘Back!’

And backward now and forward

    Wavers the deep array;

 

[Barley Mow]

33 minutes ago, JohnM said:

It seems we all know the answer as to what IMG or anyone else might, could, would, will do.

In the "Lays of Ancient Rome" by Thomas Macaulay, Horatius and the bridge....

But those behind cried ‘Forward!’

    And those before cried ‘Back!’

And backward now and forward

    Wavers the deep array;

 

Typical rugby league, there's always someone crying 'forward' at the top of their lungs!

[Oxford]

I don't think we know the answers at all and certainly nothing public skool poetry could help us with.

If it means downsizing it's not a way forward it's the way to less.

If it means producing a game that's vibrant, sells events and increases crowds, market value and sponsorship that's one thing but I can't see what place or value 2x10 gives or creates except for those who benefit and we all know who that will be in the main.

Not so much what I think IMG will do as what I hope they don't try.

[JohnM]

Public skool? It's ederkation, sunshine. Some of us have it, some of us don't.

I'd rather let IMG find out what is actually going on,  not on what the mix of onlookers think.  After all, they can't even agree with the ref most times.

[Tommygilf]

I think IMG will ultimately come to a conclusion to build on 2 principles - strength and potential. 

[Oxford]

56 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Public skool? It's ederkation, sunshine. Some of us have it, some of us don't.

I'd rather let IMG find out what is actually going on,  not on what the mix of onlookers think.  After all, they can't even agree with the ref most times.

“Is it hard?'
Not if you have the right attitudes. Its having the right attitudes thats hard.”
― Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values

[steve oates]

18 hours ago, Big Picture said:

We might indeed see the parting of the ways, especially if they decide that RL isn't worth having on their channels any more. How do you know that he can't do that?  Maybe he can but he also understands how the game's limited footprint limits the prospects for success.

So why do some of us almost insist this IMG deal is a sure fire winner, and if one does not see it as such then we need our heads examining??

I first watched RL in the mid sixties when Leeds, Saints and Wigan dominated a northern game and the hottest tickets in town was when the Australians came. Now we are in 2022 the only difference is the Australians only rarely come here, and only a fraction of the numbers who played RL then play it now. Along that road a great number of attempts have been made all over England and Wales to open new professional clubs and none were any sort of a success. Lets also not forget the extent to which we tried it i.e. Transatlantic expansion.

Many would say what saved the game from it's decline was the mass televising of sport for which Superleague was designed for to maximise the opportunities for TV contracts.  The value of our contracts grew into 2000's an on, and peaked when SKY/RFL ensured BT would not get Rugby League. Since then SKY have cut down the contract values significantly in the face on no opposition from anywhere else, with an almost "take it or leave it" approach.

This is why I think it is fair to be pessimistic, because of actual facts and events, so why are people lecturing me and booking me in for a session with a shrink?  It seems to me the two polar views are that IMG don't need any upfront fees as they can take them out of the £Millions they will assuredly make make from RL, the other view being any up front cash from the game to IMG will not be paid, and remuneration will only come if any results come......

We will only find out which way it is with time, that's for sure. Certainly we will not know it's a success because optomistic people on here think it will be....and there is for me nothing wrong with optimism, so I won't be lecturing anybody (who sees riches ahead)......just don't do it to me until you have the proof the £Millions have come

Do however set out how you feel IMG will successfully engineer very much bigger paying contracts from the Media etc than the RFL and SL have managed??  

[gingerjon]

7 minutes ago, steve oates said:

I first watched RL in the mid sixties when Leeds, Saints and Wigan dominated a northern game and the hottest tickets in town was when the Australians came. Now we are in 2022 the only difference is the Australians only rarely come here

Australia toured in 1959, 1963 and 1967.

The three Tests in 1967 drew a cumulative attendance of 53,353.

They didn't tour again until 1973.

[Damien]

55 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Australia toured in 1959, 1963 and 1967.

The three Tests in 1967 drew a cumulative attendance of 53,353.

They didn't tour again until 1973.

1967 Kangaroo tour, really packing them in. Leeds got all of 5,522:

1	30 September	Australia def.  Warrington 17–6	Wilderspool Stadium, Warrington	11,642
2	4 October	Yorkshire def.  Australia 15–14	Belle Vue, Wakefield	19,370
3	7 October	Hull Kingston Rovers def.  Australia 27–15	Craven Park, Hull	11,252
4	11 October	Australia def.  Lancashire 14–2	The Willows, Salford	9,369
5	13 October	Wigan def.  Australia 12–6	Central Park, Wigan	22,770
6	16 October	Australia def.  Rochdale Hornets 25–2	Athletic Grounds, Rochdale	2,676
7	21 October	Great Britain def.  Australia 16–11	Headingley, Leeds	22,293
8	24 October	St Helens def.  Australia 8–4	Knowsley Road, St Helens	17,275
9	28 October	Australia def.  Wakefield Trinity 33–7	Belle Vue, Wakefield	10,056
10	3 November	Australia def.  Great Britain 17–11	White City Stadium, London	17,445
11	9 November	Castleford def.  Australia 22–3	Wheldon Road, Castleford	17,275
12	11 November	Australia def.  Oldham 18–8	The Watersheddings, Oldham	3,174
13	13 November	Australia def.  Widnes 33–11	Naughton Park, Widnes	9,828
14	16 November	Barrow drew with  Australia 10–10	Craven Park, Barrow-in-Furness	8,418
15	18 November	Cumberland def.  Australia 17–15	Derwent Park, Workington	7,545
16	22 November	Australia def.  Swinton 12–9	Station Road, Swinton	5,640
17	25 November	Australia def.  Leeds 7–4	Headingley, Leeds	5,522
18	29 November	Australia def.  Halifax 22–2	Thrum Hall, Halifax	5,285
19	2 December	Australia def.  Bradford Northern 7–3	Odsal Stadium, Bradford	14,173
20	9 December	Australia def.  Great Britain 11–3	Station Road, Swinton	13,615

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, steve oates said:

So why do some of us almost insist this IMG deal is a sure fire winner, and if one does not see it as such then we need our heads examining??

I first watched RL in the mid sixties when Leeds, Saints and Wigan dominated a northern game and the hottest tickets in town was when the Australians came. Now we are in 2022 the only difference is the Australians only rarely come here, and only a fraction of the numbers who played RL then play it now. Along that road a great number of attempts have been made all over England and Wales to open new professional clubs and none were any sort of a success. Lets also not forget the extent to which we tried it i.e. Transatlantic expansion.

Many would say what saved the game from it's decline was the mass televising of sport for which Superleague was designed for to maximise the opportunities for TV contracts.  The value of our contracts grew into 2000's an on, and peaked when SKY/RFL ensured BT would not get Rugby League. Since then SKY have cut down the contract values significantly in the face on no opposition from anywhere else, with an almost "take it or leave it" approach.

This is why I think it is fair to be pessimistic, because of actual facts and events, so why are people lecturing me and booking me in for a session with a shrink?  It seems to me the two polar views are that IMG don't need any upfront fees as they can take them out of the £Millions they will assuredly make make from RL, the other view being any up front cash from the game to IMG will not be paid, and remuneration will only come if any results come......

We will only find out which way it is with time, that's for sure. Certainly we will not know it's a success because optomistic people on here think it will be....and there is for me nothing wrong with optimism, so I won't be lecturing anybody (who sees riches ahead)......just don't do it to me until you have the proof the £Millions have come

Do however set out how you feel IMG will successfully engineer very much bigger paying contracts from the Media etc than the RFL and SL have managed??  

The problem is Steve is that you are making points that nobody is claiming, therefore making much of your argument nonsense, as you are basically arguing with yourself. 

Nobody thinks the IMG deal is a banker - we have all been involved in the game for far too long to know that we are more than capable of missing opportunities. 

But, and this is the point I make time and time again, unless you are of the opinion that RL in this country is at its absolute peak (and the evidence is that it isn't) then we must accept that there is potential for growth. 

There is a general feeling that we are not governed well, are not set up for success, lack strategy, vision and most importantly funding. All of our initiatives suffer because of the above. People don't have faith in either the RFL or SLE being able to turn that around in any real way - so what you are maybe witnessing is some hope and enthusiasm that IMG who have real expertise and market leading people can make a real positive difference. 

I'm not sure why you are so challenging of people believing this could be a real positive development. 

 

[RP London]

7 hours ago, Dave T said:

The problem is Steve is that you are making points that nobody is claiming, therefore making much of your argument nonsense, as you are basically arguing with yourself. 

Nobody thinks the IMG deal is a banker - we have all been involved in the game for far too long to know that we are more than capable of missing opportunities. 

But, and this is the point I make time and time again, unless you are of the opinion that RL in this country is at its absolute peak (and the evidence is that it isn't) then we must accept that there is potential for growth. 

There is a general feeling that we are not governed well, are not set up for success, lack strategy, vision and most importantly funding. All of our initiatives suffer because of the above. People don't have faith in either the RFL or SLE being able to turn that around in any real way - so what you are maybe witnessing is some hope and enthusiasm that IMG who have real expertise and market leading people can make a real positive difference. 

I'm not sure why you are so challenging of people believing this could be a real positive development. 

 

This

[idrewthehaggis]

10 hours ago, Damien said:

1967 Kangaroo tour, really packing them in. Leeds got all of 5,522:

1	30 September	Australia def.  Warrington 17–6	Wilderspool Stadium, Warrington	11,642
2	4 October	Yorkshire def.  Australia 15–14	Belle Vue, Wakefield	19,370
3	7 October	Hull Kingston Rovers def.  Australia 27–15	Craven Park, Hull	11,252
4	11 October	Australia def.  Lancashire 14–2	The Willows, Salford	9,369
5	13 October	Wigan def.  Australia 12–6	Central Park, Wigan	22,770
6	16 October	Australia def.  Rochdale Hornets 25–2	Athletic Grounds, Rochdale	2,676
7	21 October	Great Britain def.  Australia 16–11	Headingley, Leeds	22,293
8	24 October	St Helens def.  Australia 8–4	Knowsley Road, St Helens	17,275
9	28 October	Australia def.  Wakefield Trinity 33–7	Belle Vue, Wakefield	10,056
10	3 November	Australia def.  Great Britain 17–11	White City Stadium, London	17,445
11	9 November	Castleford def.  Australia 22–3	Wheldon Road, Castleford	17,275
12	11 November	Australia def.  Oldham 18–8	The Watersheddings, Oldham	3,174
13	13 November	Australia def.  Widnes 33–11	Naughton Park, Widnes	9,828
14	16 November	Barrow drew with  Australia 10–10	Craven Park, Barrow-in-Furness	8,418
15	18 November	Cumberland def.  Australia 17–15	Derwent Park, Workington	7,545
16	22 November	Australia def.  Swinton 12–9	Station Road, Swinton	5,640
17	25 November	Australia def.  Leeds 7–4	Headingley, Leeds	5,522
18	29 November	Australia def.  Halifax 22–2	Thrum Hall, Halifax	5,285
19	2 December	Australia def.  Bradford Northern 7–3	Odsal Stadium, Bradford	14,173
20	9 December	Australia def.  Great Britain 11–3	Station Road, Swinton	13,615

Jeepers.

Most of them grounds have gone

As has the idea of such an extended tour

What hey ho of County sides

And the saddest is the whole ideal of Swinton playing Australia at Station Road.

[steve oates]

21 hours ago, RP London said:

This

No this

"IMG will be looking to invest as little to gain as much as they can, so the low hanging fruit first.. then they will re invest what they have made into making much more.. that is how companies like IMG work on the "take a % of increased revenue" basis. Quick uptick followed by a much larger drive for much larger growth.

This is what you said because you said you knew how these businesses work.

I don't believe this will end in "Much larger growth" at all because the RFL/SL are not prepared to pay the consultants until and if it does.  If they are not prepared to pay up front then surely IMG will not be wasting too much of their time on us. Please do give us some detail on the exact substance of this large "Much larger growth" you predict or.........

We can see if your right as the years pass. I must give a nod to the historians who corrected me on the abysmal  1960's Aussie attendances against us - fair play. The only game I recall in detail was when (I had better say corrections welcome)  Clive Sullivan scored a try to beat them in the World cup final, and the crowd was really appalling for that??

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, steve oates said:

No this

"IMG will be looking to invest as little to gain as much as they can, so the low hanging fruit first.. then they will re invest what they have made into making much more.. that is how companies like IMG work on the "take a % of increased revenue" basis. Quick uptick followed by a much larger drive for much larger growth.

This is what you said because you said you knew how these businesses work.

I don't believe this will end in "Much larger growth" at all because the RFL/SL are not prepared to pay the consultants until and if it does.  If they are not prepared to pay up front then surely IMG will not be wasting too much of their time on us. Please do give us some detail on the exact substance of this large "Much larger growth" you predict or.........

We can see if your right as the years pass. I must give a nod to the historians who corrected me on the abysmal  1960's Aussie attendances against us - fair play. The only game I recall in detail was when (I had better say corrections welcome)  Clive Sullivan scored a try to beat them in the World cup final, and the crowd was really appalling for that??

IMG have already indicated where they see future growth coming from. They want more internationals and want to keep both French clubs in the SL. Saying the quiet part out loud for the purists there. 

Overhaul the YouTube channel so they actually show scores. A dedicated TV rights deal for France. A weekly round on Channel 4 and the GF needs to be free to air as well.

As for internationals, a Five Nations tournment held mid cycle and regular international tours would be a good start.

[JohnM]

13 hours ago, NW10LDN said:

IMG have already indicated where they see future growth coming from. They want more internationals and want to keep both French clubs in the SL. Saying the quiet part out loud for the purists there. 

Overhaul the YouTube channel so they actually show scores. A dedicated TV rights deal for France. A weekly round on Channel 4 and the GF needs to be free to air as well.

As for internationals, a Five Nations tournment held mid cycle and regular international tours would be a good start.

If that is all they are going to come up with, I'd be hugely disappointed. I still like the idea of them asking questions first, getting the true picture here and in Australia, exploring and understanding  the differences, proposing, modelling then driving solutions. Whilst your suggestions are worthy of consideration by OMG!,  Aim not sure they are the entire answer by a long way. 

 

[RP London]

14 hours ago, steve oates said:

No this

"IMG will be looking to invest as little to gain as much as they can, so the low hanging fruit first.. then they will re invest what they have made into making much more.. that is how companies like IMG work on the "take a % of increased revenue" basis. Quick uptick followed by a much larger drive for much larger growth.

This is what you said because you said you knew how these businesses work.

I don't believe this will end in "Much larger growth" at all because the RFL/SL are not prepared to pay the consultants until and if it does.  If they are not prepared to pay up front then surely IMG will not be wasting too much of their time on us. Please do give us some detail on the exact substance of this large "Much larger growth" you predict or.........

We can see if your right as the years pass. I must give a nod to the historians who corrected me on the abysmal  1960's Aussie attendances against us - fair play. The only game I recall in detail was when (I had better say corrections welcome)  Clive Sullivan scored a try to beat them in the World cup final, and the crowd was really appalling for that??

Right, one last time because I keep repeating myself and I cant understand how this isn't quite obvious TBH. Especially as it has ALL been said before and you seem to be wilfully ignoring things that IMG have already said they will do. 

There is nothing contradictory between what I said and me agreeing with @Dave T. My initial response was in relation to your (and don't take this as a jibe) ludicrous assertion that a large multinational corporation with expertise in media development and a history of developing sports leagues would take on ANY project just to "manage decline" especially when they only get paid on growth! I also am firmly in the camp of not believing this is a banker as history shows (and general working in business shows) that what you think is a fabulous idea, with all the market research in the world, can turn out to be a disaster and that can be due to any number of reasons (the last 2 years show us that as well, plenty of good businesses [small and large] with perfectly good business plans were not global pandemic proof). However, this is the best chance we have had in a long time because these are experts in this and they have areas they can do "quick wins" as they already have business arms doing that (they have already announced some of these). 

It is not rare for businesses, especially cash strapped ones like the RFL, to enter into agreements where you pay the consulting business a percentage of the growth they bring. It is actually very common. Some consulting firms, depending on the business they are dealing with, would prefer it as their return is much bigger than the fee they would have charged, they just have to wait for the money a little longer. A fee could be seen as taking the risk away as they gain no more if it works and lose nothing if it doesn't. IMG ONLY gain if this works. That is where I have confidence, IMG see this as a very good investment in long term profit.. even if that is the case, like any business we will need a good following wind to help us. 

I have already given you outlines of where the larger growth could, in my opinion, come from.. any more exact information you will need to pay me a consultancy fee as I have a business to run and I don't work for either the RFL or IMG that will have all the global market research and trends... I'm pretty sure that is obvious from the fact this is a discussion forum, and we are discussing ideas rather than trying to put together a business plan and development plan (otherwise the RFL wouldn't need to be talking to IMG). 

There have been 16 pages of people discussing where the wins are and not only that, IMG are telling you where they are already starting to develop areas for growth. They are literally telling you where there is growth because it is not even touching the surface of the media platforms etc They are telling you where they are starting to invest their time and money and expertise. They are also telling you that they are investigating other things, and highlighting what those other things are (they are on this thread, they are also in the public domain). Yet your main assertion is that there is no growth to be had, they will not invest time and money and they will simply "manage decline" yet ALL the evidence that is out there shows that that is utter garbage. 

There are only so many times that you can state the evidence and someone says "No! I just don't believe that" before you have to realise that the fault is theirs and they just do not want to see the evidence put in front of them and I feel that is where I am at with you here. Therefore, I wish you all the luck in the future and hope you enjoy your RL, with luck and with IMG's help I hope you see it becoming bigger and better, but this is my last comment in this manner and in this depth to you.

Edited July 5, 2022 by RP London

[RP London]

Just now, JohnM said:

If that is all they are going to come up with, I'd be hugely disappointed. I still like the idea of them asking questions first, getting the true picture here and in Australia, exploring and understanding  the differences, proposing, modelling then driving solutions. Whilst your suggestions are worthy of consideration by OMG!,  Aim not sure they are the entire answer by a long way. 

 

they're not.. they have only just started the relationship. These are simply the first steps in the 12 year long road. More to follow and more investigating but with their media arms already in place thats something they can work on now. They are going to talk about internationals but nothing has been announced (that was just the posters own view). They will need to talk to the NRL and the IRL and we all know how long that can take... a successful world cup will do their case no harm either. 

There is a long long way to go but IMHO those first announcements and the first steps show they understand a lot of what is lacking and see some good wins which will then help drive other wins (a good media presence will help make the international game more profitable too for example). 

[JohnM]

Exactly. The poster was implying that just a few point solutions would cure all known diseases. I understand the need for IMG to keep the project in the public eye but as a successful and professional organisation, I expect an iceberg approach...10 % of its thinking being public, but 90% of it under the waterline. I'm sure this is the case.

[RP London]

2 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Exactly. The poster was implying that just a few point solutions would cure all known diseases. I understand the need for IMG to keep the project in the public eye but as a successful and professional organisation, I expect an iceberg approach...10 % of its thinking being public, but 90% of it under the waterline. I'm sure this is the case.

totally agree.. to take another analogy there will be a lot of paddling under the surface while looking calm and serene.. for example I would think there will be all manner of discussions with clubs about how they can improve themselves, things they may not actually understand or grasp properly that IMG will help with and help them build but wont have direct influence on. I really hope one is about the game day itself.. but not holding my breath.

[Big Picture]

5 hours ago, JohnM said:

If that is all they are going to come up with, I'd be hugely disappointed. I still like the idea of them asking questions first, getting the true picture here and in Australia, exploring and understanding  the differences, proposing, modelling then driving solutions. Whilst your suggestions are worthy of consideration by OMG!,  Aim not sure they are the entire answer by a long way.

Realistically though, what else do you think is even possible the way things are structured and set up now in the game?

[MattSantos]

4 hours ago, RP London said:

totally agree.. to take another analogy there will be a lot of paddling under the surface while looking calm and serene.. for example I would think there will be all manner of discussions with clubs about how they can improve themselves, things they may not actually understand or grasp properly that IMG will help with and help them build but wont have direct influence on. I really hope one is about the game day itself.. but not holding my breath.

A fear is that the incumbent may not value IMGs input...

[RP London]

2 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

A fear is that the incumbent may not value IMGs input...

Of course. You would hope everyone has bought into this though, but this is Rugby League!

[Guest]

8 hours ago, JohnM said:

If that is all they are going to come up with, I'd be hugely disappointed. I still like the idea of them asking questions first, getting the true picture here and in Australia, exploring and understanding  the differences, proposing, modelling then driving solutions. Whilst your suggestions are worthy of consideration by OMG!,  Aim not sure they are the entire answer by a long way. 

 

It's a 12 year deal and you can't expect them to have all the answers straight away. The picture in Australia isn't all that complicated. No relegation and no small town teams in the Premiership.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, JohnM said:

Exactly. The poster was implying that just a few point solutions would cure all known diseases. I understand the need for IMG to keep the project in the public eye but as a successful and professional organisation, I expect an iceberg approach...10 % of its thinking being public, but 90% of it under the waterline. I'm sure this is the case.

I wasn't implying that at all. Those solution would certainly help though.

[Oxford]

On LoveRL, though like alot of RL social media they spend too much time talking yoonion, they said the restructure will mean a real dogfight to finish as near the top as possible. What that means to me is less games that are good to watch, they might be dramatic and edge of seat but more for the outcome than the rugby.

A season of million pound games sounds like a turn off.