Can IMG make Rugby League into a more successful sport?

[idrewthehaggis]

31 minutes ago, Oxford said:

All of RL's efforts to grow have had limited effect, mostly.

The link between this and investment in the game is tenuous to say the least.

The link between investment in any sport and it's media acceptance and coverage is written in cement.

The legacy media in London is'nt recognising market forces by ignoring RL it's been writing the rule book on who can and who won't be included and defines the limits of their inclusion.

Media defines and promotes sports it finds acceptable and their coverage is not simply related to popularity.

Their attitudes are about them so they're happy to keep RL sidelined. Comparing RL to sports with less coverage does not help.

 

 

 

All this is true.

My prefer is to see the positives as much as the obvious weaknesses in the Game.

It is blatant that IMG will look at expanding the international game. Its an obvious. Think of cricket and its England playing India, not Warwickshire (the current champions) at Hampshire.

I also think they will look to broaden RL's cyber presence. I would argue that in the modern era, the variety of what the media is and its direct immediacy allows scores of "entities" room to express and publicize itself.

We need the Big Mass Media like Sky, Beeb and C4, the papers, but we also can create our own media space as well, which I think is one of the reasons why IMG have been signed up.

I am not sure we need the full on validation of London centric media anymore ifwe create our own space and rely it to our own market/fans.

The game does not need to be huge, just coherence within itself.

Any expansion has to be structured from the grassroots upwards and then aspire for Salford size clubs in Newcastle, London, Avignon and maybe Birmingham or Marseille.  

 

[RP London]

1 minute ago, idrewthehaggis said:

All this is true.

My prefer is to see the positives as much as the obvious weaknesses in the Game.

It is blatant that IMG will look at expanding the international game. Its an obvious. Think of cricket and its England playing India, not Warwickshire (the current champions) at Hampshire.

I also think they will look to broaden RL's cyber presence. I would argue that in the modern era, the variety of what the media is and its direct immediacy allows scores of "entities" room to express and publicize itself.

We need the Big Mass Media like Sky, Beeb and C4, the papers, but we also can create our own media space as well, which I think is one of the reasons why IMG have been signed up.

I am not sure we need the full on validation of London centric media anymore ifwe create our own space and rely it to our own market/fans.

The game does not need to be huge, just coherence within itself.

Any expansion has to be structured from the grassroots upwards and then aspire for Salford size clubs in Newcastle, London, Avignon and maybe Birmingham or Marseille.  

 

for me thats one of the big early wins the IMG can have with their experience and this can then drive a lot more. Be that because we have more money or just because we have more eyes on us but it can be the catalyst to further growth and further developments down the line. I'm glad they have already announced it to so that we can already see the initial impact they could have and while they are looking at everything else they can develop something that allows us push the newer developments to a new audience (as well as our existing one) but in a way that we can, to a large extent, control rather than relying on others. 

[Dallas Mead]

4 hours ago, Dave T said:

I mean that doesn't even mean anything. 

Things can and do grow all the time. 

If people are saying the root cause of being small is that we are small, then they are literally saying there is no hope for growth. 

We THINK small too, and also it seems a fair % of the fan base are happy with that.  They are two massive problems IMHO. 

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't disagree on your first line, but that's not really a root cause. You can't fix being small by just becoming bigger. You have to look at the root cause which is that we have poor leadership and strategy to be able to become bigger. 

If you want to identify the root cause so you can make changes to it, highlighting an outcome isn't necessarily helpful. 

Other sports are small and don't have some of the challenges we have. Or alternatively, have different aims than us. 

And one thing that should be challenged is the constant narrative that we have no money. We are a sport that is playing around with investment worth hundreds of millions of quid - we do have money, maybe we aren't spending it as well as we can. 

All a good leader would do is spend the money to grow so that more money could come in. Once you get to a critical mass, leadership becomes less influential on the success of the sport, particularly in the negative sense.

[Oxford]

2 hours ago, idrewthehaggis said:

I am not sure we need the full on validation of London centric media anymore ifwe create our own space and rely it to our own market/fans.

We don't need their anything, we need to act at such a level that we can't be ignored.

The press is largely on the way out and mostly read by the aging end of the population and their downfall is completely due to their inability to commuicate with anyone outside a certain box.

The Beeb is still the go to & most trusted news outlet but is so much in the world of London centric journalism that they act, for the most part, like the televisual equivalent of the Observer.

Expansion though is something else entirely, which ever way we've done it, it has failed.

Fans thinking small is hardly the biggest surprise in the universe, the problem with stupid ideas is that they can take hold of everyone and  come to be believed as if the stupidity was the least significant thing about it.

 

 

 

 

[Big Picture]

4 hours ago, Dave T said:

The problem is that AFL has a small geographic footprint but does well for itself within its boundaries. 

Similar to GAA sports although I don't know much about them, so open to challenge. 

Things can be small and successful (which I think was part of Honor's point). 

The other problem is that 'small' is not a measurable term. 

You're comparing apples to oranges there.

The AFL is the VFL rebranded and expanded nationally, and the VFL was formed when 8 leading clubs split from the VFA in 1897.  The key thing to know is that unlike in the case of the rugby split, the VFL became the dominant Aussie Rules competition in Victoria and thereby acquired a position of strength while the VFA was gradually marginalized.  That's how the VFL was able to do so well in a small geographic footprint, and its transition into the AFL was enabled by having a strong base in Victoria where it dominated the sporting scene.

The GAA benefits from hurling and Gaelic football being Ireland's national sports, embedded in Irish culture to a far greater extent than RL in its "heartlands".  The GAA's strength comes as a result of that strong cultural base.

Aussie Rules and Gaelic games are only small in relation to sports played in other, bigger countries.  Within their respective countries both are big, not small.

4 hours ago, idrewthehaggis said:

Small? Yes or no.

UK Handball. hockey; both ice and field; basketball, lacrosse, speedway and swimming would love to have the publicity, attendances and money that RL has.

But in comparison to football, that other code and maybe cricket, it is smaller.

There are plenty of examples of sports which have an internal coherence and confidence that are successful and do not need to big to be so.

I think GAA, German handball, Czech ice hockey and so on.

In the case of Gaelic games, German handball and Czech ice hockey you're probably talking the biggest sport(s) in Ireland and the second biggest sports in Germany and Czechia so they're not really small at all.  And none suffer from comparisons to a another similar sport either.

[Big Picture]

14 minutes ago, Oxford said:

We don't need their anything, we need to act at such a level that we can't be ignored.

The press is largely on the way out and mostly read by the aging end of the population and their downfall is completely due to their inability to commuicate with anyone outside a certain box.

The Beeb is still the go to & most trusted news outlet but is so much in the world of London centric journalism that they act, for the most part, like the televisual equivalent of the Observer.

Expansion though is something else entirely, which ever way we've done it, it has failed.

Fans thinking small is hardly the biggest surprise in the universe, the problem with stupid ideas is that they can take hold of everyone and  come to be believed as if the stupidity was the least significant thing about it.

The bolded part hits the nail right on the head.  It's also completely beyond the ability of the game's current organization in Britain either with or without IMG's involvement.

[Dallas Mead]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

The bolded part hits the nail right on the head.  It's also completely beyond the ability of the game's current organization in Britain either with or without IMG's involvement.

You cannot logically say that about IMG….yet.

[Big Picture]

5 minutes ago, Dallas Mead said:

You cannot logically say that about IMG….yet.

IMG can only work with what there is for them to work with, and what there is isn't enough for them to change things materially.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Dallas Mead said:

We THINK small too, and also it seems a fair % of the fan base are happy with that.  They are two massive problems IMHO. 

I think as RL fans it is easy to get in this mindset at times, and I have certainly made posts like the above, but I don't think it really holds up to much scrutiny.

Ideas, bold projects, crazy initiatives have never been a problem for us in terms of the ideas - implementing them, having a good plan, having leaders that can influence people to get the support needed, having weak governance that undermines them etc. is the problem.

Let's suspend reality for a moment and imagine what RL in this country would look like if all UK-driven recent initiatives that had been tried had been a success:

- We'd have a 14 team licensed league consisting of Wigan, Leeds, Saints, Wire, Hull, Catalans, Toulouse, Paris, Gateshead/Newcastle, South Wales, London, Cumbria, Toronto, Huddersfield.

- We'd have a World Club Championship where the above teams played games against the likes of Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, NZ Warriors.

- We'd have development officers spread across the country working in the communities.

- We'd see England playing in an eight-team regular tournament in between World Cups, plus tours (in and out).

- We'd see teams play games on the road around the UK, in places like Cardiff, Leicester, Edinburgh etc. 

- We'd have a Challenge Cup with teams from across Europe. 

- We'd feed into the European Championship at international level.

None of the above suggests small thinking or lack of ambition - we just haven't had the expertise to deliver it well in the main, or leaders who are prepared to stick with it.

Compare to the likes of England's RU Premiership and they don't even have to think about most of the things above. They don't need to think about playing their biggest games of the year well away from their club heartlands. They have just cracked on with broadly speaking, what they have and have grow that. Something that would see RL chastised.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

All a good leader would do is spend the money to grow so that more money could come in. Once you get to a critical mass, leadership becomes less influential on the success of the sport, particularly in the negative sense.

I have never disagreed with one of your posts more Tommy. 

[Guest]

8 hours ago, steve oates said:

No there won't? Why would they be happy with failure??

Maybe you got excited when RP London, self proclaimed as an expert business consultant himself, said IMG would grow and grow revenues (he then disappeared). Just what some people want to hear so it get's them going and anyone rightly sceptical, based on the payment by results only IMG deal, gets this "Your Insular" stuff thrown at them. 

You talk about the "Best run clubs with the biggest growth potential" yourself, but perhaps you can explain what "growth" any of these clubs can achieve and exactly how, when SKY decide to drop the TV money and when playing numbers also drop, a situation Soccer and RU are in - so this is social change not mismanagement from the SL/RFL. You can't make people play Rugby or Soccer. You can't make wealthy people choose to back RL clubs.

So the plan is 2x10 and when you look at the clubs who are currently "top twenty" on the league tables they include all of the Superleague clubs plus the bigger clubs with superleague experience like Widnes and Bradford, and clubs like Leigh and York who have in recent years built towards Superleague.

This is all down to that massive TV deal we got when large amounts of money were paid to us by SKY and shared game wide, when BT were looking for content themselves and became a threat to SKY. SKY are no longer threatened by this.

So with respect, in your mind it's down to "insular people in Rugby League" whom I have never met in all my time following the game. We all want to see the game spread and grow, and we have over the years backed such projects from Wales to Kent, and Cornwall to Newcastle, with hope and excitement. Where we go wrong is we tend to get overexcited on each new initiative, in which many are just pie in the sky vanity projects.....

Supporting a project would amount to investing in the community game or schools. The RFL and Super League sit back and lets others spend their money on propping up a club. That's not support.

The sport still has a declining player base and limited appeal beyond it's heartlands and that is ultimately the result of the insular nature of rugby league. Union will be fine despite all the disaster threads on here. Same with soccer. A wide appeal across the whole country will help offset a decline in playing numbers or revenue.

[RP London]

10 minutes ago, NW10LDN said:

Supporting a project would amount to investing in the community game or schools. The RFL and Super League sit back and lets others spend their money on propping up a club. That's not support.

 

and when they have it has shown to work (slowly but work)... 

. 

[GUBRATS]

8 hours ago, steve oates said:

No there won't? Why would they be happy with failure??

Maybe you got excited when RP London, self proclaimed as an expert business consultant himself, said IMG would grow and grow revenues (he then disappeared). Just what some people want to hear so it get's them going and anyone rightly sceptical, based on the payment by results only IMG deal, gets this "Your Insular" stuff thrown at them. 

You talk about the "Best run clubs with the biggest growth potential" yourself, but perhaps you can explain what "growth" any of these clubs can achieve and exactly how, when SKY decide to drop the TV money and when playing numbers also drop, a situation Soccer and RU are in - so this is social change not mismanagement from the SL/RFL. You can't make people play Rugby or Soccer. You can't make wealthy people choose to back RL clubs.

So the plan is 2x10 and when you look at the clubs who are currently "top twenty" on the league tables they include all of the Superleague clubs plus the bigger clubs with superleague experience like Widnes and Bradford, and clubs like Leigh and York who have in recent years built towards Superleague.

This is all down to that massive TV deal we got when large amounts of money were paid to us by SKY and shared game wide, when BT were looking for content themselves and became a threat to SKY. SKY are no longer threatened by this.

So with respect, in your mind it's down to "insular people in Rugby League" whom I have never met in all my time following the game. We all want to see the game spread and grow, and we have over the years backed such projects from Wales to Kent, and Cornwall to Newcastle, with hope and excitement. Where we go wrong is we tend to get overexcited on each new initiative, in which many are just pie in the sky vanity projects.....

Correct 

[GUBRATS]

3 hours ago, Dallas Mead said:

We THINK small too, and also it seems a fair % of the fan base are happy with that.  They are two massive problems IMHO. 

Tell me , what do you want the ' fan base ' to do differently to change things ? 

Come on Dallas , don't let me down by ignoring a simple question 

Edited July 13, 2022 by GUBRATS

[Guest]

51 minutes ago, RP London said:

and when they have it has shown to work (slowly but work)... 

. 

Just shooting themselves in the foot. Union gets most of their talent from the private school pipeline. Setting up lots of junior clubs in London would be too expensive so the next best thing would be to get the sport into schools. The Super League clubs will benefit from that as well. There are London schools which take part in Champions Schools but what is being done to bring some of the young boys and girls to next level?

[Jughead]

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/img-super-league-digital-audits-24477785.amp

“The Game Caller” is claiming that clubs met with IMG today, which is at odds to what is in the above attachment. 

[Tommygilf]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I have never disagreed with one of your posts more Tommy. 

What, even one about sports entertainment?

Fair enough. Happy to agree to disagree on that one

[Dave T]

15 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

What, even one about sports entertainment?

Fair enough. Happy to agree to disagree on that one

Nah, that one was a semantics, silly pub type debate. 

I am surprised you under-value the impact quality leadership brings. IMHO, it literally underpins everything we do, and is the one thing we have constantly lacked, with some notable exceptions. 

As you say, happy to disagree tho. 

 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Dave T said:

Nah, that one was a semantics, silly pub type debate. 

I am surprised you under-value the impact quality leadership brings. IMHO, it literally underpins everything we do, and is the one thing we have constantly lacked, with some notable exceptions. 

As you say, happy to disagree tho. 

I suppose I see that more as a consequence of the small nature of the sport. A sport with larger interest and by extension a larger talent pool is more likely to have more good leaders and leadership decisions. We're currently an old boys club because there isn't the competition from outside parties as they aren't interested/aware and the sport isn't in the position to renumerate them enough to make it worth their while (because it is small).

I appreciate you probably see it the other way around - in some ways the argument is chicken and egg. It isn't that I don't value good leadership, I just rather think that at a certain size leaders begin to only affect very few things directly and the organisation starts to run itself. I do therefore agree that as a small sport, leadership is a vitally important aspect as it does have real impact. 

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

A sport with larger interest and by extension a larger talent pool is more likely to have more good leaders and leadership decisions.

This would make perfect sense if chancers, scallywags and ne'erdowells  didn't turn up in droves for managerial and decision making position interviews! And far more often than not get appointed. Talkin' the talk will take you most places.

 

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, Oxford said:

This would make perfect sense if chancers, scallywags and ne'erdowells  didn't turn up in droves for managerial and decision making position interviews! And far more often than not get appointed. Talkin' the talk will take you most places.

 

As we are currently seeing in the Tory leadership pantomime

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

As we are currently seeing in the Tory leadership pantomime

Would be nice if people didn't inject politics into every conversation.

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, NW10LDN said:

Would be nice if people didn't inject politics into every conversation.

Unfortunately it's life

[Guest]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

Unfortunately it's life

It's not. There's a thread for it already.