Odsal Sports City

[GUBRATS]

3 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

He did great to get that tv deal but the money was wasted and gave us no infrastructure outside sl to show for it.  

Also he cant say "ask the rfl" to questions about his tenure at the RFL.  Thats incredibly evasive.  When Bulls are dwindling, fans not wanting to renew and the club is maybe one season away from being done as a future force, taking questions would be a minimum. 

Taking questions about the Bulls yes , but what does his tenure at the RFL have to do with Bradford fans now ? , Ultimately Odsal is still available for them to use , you would have to say that is a good thing , better than it no longer being available 

[Martyn Sadler]

1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

He did great to get that tv deal but the money was wasted and gave us no infrastructure outside sl to show for it.  

Also he cant say "ask the rfl" to questions about his tenure at the RFL.  Thats incredibly evasive.  When Bulls are dwindling, fans not wanting to renew and the club is maybe one season away from being done as a future force, taking questions would be a minimum. 

Fans very often need to have their egos massaged and Nigel doesn't know how to do that, instead rubbing them up the wrong way instead with an abrasive manner.

In some ways I can understand that, because he does take a lot of abuse, but ultimately you have to learn to defuse that sort of stuff.

[Martyn Sadler]

57 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said:

If there had been an inquiry into the running of the Bulls, the sale of Odsal and the RFLs say in both, we may have had answers.

Odsal was sold to avoid it falling into the hands of the NatWest Bank, who wanted to foreclose on the Bulls' overdraft and grab the asset for peanuts.

The Bank had set up its Global Restructuring Group and GRG took advantage of many businesses and overcharged them and took unfair control over their assets.

It is currently facing hundreds of legal actions from companies that it took advantage of.

The Bulls selling Odsal to the RFL kept Odsal out of its grasp.

[Mumby Magic]

19 hours ago, The Future is League said:

Didn't he say that he wasn't taking any questions from the floor on a recent fans forum?

But didn't.....

[Dallas Mead]

1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:

If you look back at his time at the RFL and his achievements while he was there, which of the following do you think were embarrassing?

1. His creation of the Magic Weekend, which was opposed by many at the time, but which has now been copied by the NRL.

2. His decision to do away with licensing for Super League, bringing back the chance for non-Super League clubs to win promotion on the field.

3. His role as tournament director of the World Cup in 2013 with a record number of teams, which was far more successful than the 2017 tournament that was run by the Australians.

4. His decision to share out the £200 million from the Sky deal among all the clubs in the RFL, not just the Super League clubs, which was ultimately the decision that led to his downfall as many Super League clubs thought they should get all the money. That's when they began to edge him out. I assume you agree with them.

5. His deal with the government that resulted in £25 million support for the World Cup tournament that was originally set for 2021.

6. The allocation out of that £25 million of £10 million to invest in the community game and that has led to the improvement of facilities at many of those clubs.

Wowza, you really are sticking up for your mate, fair play

 

Utterly surprising therefore if he was doing such a brilliant job that he was “asked to leave” with 300,000 precious £ in his very big trouser pocket.  As I said, you’re in a minority of not very many extolling his values and successes so maybe that says something?

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I think it was impossible to deny that Wood was a man who could get things done.

Yes.

The current state of rugby league in this country owes a lot to him.

[Damien]

18 hours ago, Scubby said:

Troy Grant on replacing Nigel Wood as head of the IRL

“When I went in as chairman, our finances were done on Excel spreadsheets, I’ve seen school tuck shops’ finances run more professionally.

“We now have proper strategies and committees in place. I’ve tried to professionalise the organisation so we’re in a better position to have a professional conversation with professional leagues.

“They’ve got to have trust in us and we’ve missed that opportunity to do that in the past.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/18981478/rugby-league-world-cup-tests/

Pretty much what every IRL/RLIF chairman has said when they have taken over. It's pretty standard practice to talk down the position of the organisation that you are appointed to.

[Dave T]

Just now, gingerjon said:

Yes.

The current state of rugby league in this country owes a lot to him.

To challenge that view slightly, where we are now is not where he left us. He was overthrown and his changes backed out. 

He left us with a huge TV deal and expansion clubs. 

Now I think a lot of what he delivered was poor, but I think it's unfair to put much of what we see now on him. That coup from the SL clubs is a far bigger factor imho. 

[Scubby]

3 minutes ago, Damien said:

Pretty much what every IRL/RLIF chairman has said when they have taken over. It's pretty standard practice to talk down the position of the organisation that you are appointed to.

But the Chairman of the RLIF interviewing himself for the CEO job of the RLIF is not normal. It was and still is a toothless basket case. Wood arguably milked it when it didn't have any funds to milk.

Edited July 22, 2022 by Scubby

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

Pretty much what every IRL/RLIF chairman has said when they have taken over. It's pretty standard practice to talk down the position of the organisation that you are appointed to.

Yup, its a nonsense. Again, I don't want to defend Wood too much, but he's been a big part of 4N, World Cups and the thwarted 8N.

When Grant delivers something (anything) maybe his comments can be accepted. 

[Dave T]

Just now, Scubby said:

But the Chairman of the RLIF interviewing himself for the CEO job of the RLIF is not normal. It was and still is a toothless basket case. Wood arguable milked it when it didn't have any funds to milk.

That didn't happen though did it? 

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

To challenge that view slightly, where we are now is not where he left us. He was overthrown and his changes backed out. 

He left us with a huge TV deal and expansion clubs. 

Now I think a lot of what he delivered was poor, but I think it's unfair to put much of what we see now on him. That coup from the SL clubs is a far bigger factor imho. 

He laid no foundations for growth or sustainability. Preferring his meat raffle approach that saw RL tournaments and events branded and sold like a budget night out at the bingo.

And what we have now is probably worse.

RL now is very much in his image. It's pretty much why he's still able to be part of it.

[Martyn Sadler]

10 minutes ago, Dallas Mead said:

Wowza, you really are sticking up for your mate, fair play

 

Utterly surprising therefore if he was doing such a brilliant job that he was “asked to leave” with 300,000 precious £ in his very big trouser pocket.  As I said, you’re in a minority of not very many extolling his values and successes so maybe that says something?

Nigel isn't my mate and I'm not sticking up for him - just pointing out a few facts that you don't seem to want to address.

He was asked to leave principally because the Super League clubs, led by Ian Lenagan, wanted to set up a separate organisation with its own administration.

Nigel refused to agree to it, so they had to move him on. They bombarded the media with anti-Nigel material and many of us, both within and beyond the Rugby League media, were too ready to accept what they claimed.

But who was proved right on that one?

[Martyn Sadler]

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

He laid no foundations for growth or sustainability.

Apart from putting £10 million into community clubs with World Cup funding.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

He laid no foundations for growth or sustainability. Preferring his meat raffle approach that saw RL tournaments and events branded and sold like a budget night out at the bingo.

And what we have now is probably worse.

RL now is very much in his image. It's pretty much why he's still able to be part of it.

I'm not sure that's true. I think the game has gone down the sustainability route maybe even too far during his tenure. I think that held us back on some more exciting initiatives maybe, but under his rein, there has been a big focus on sustainability. 

In terms of investment, he attracted record investment from Sky, and I particularly liked the ring fenced youth coaching money (Sky Try) , which hasn't been replaced since that deal once Lebegan, McManus and Morgan took over. He was the boss of the 2013 WC and got huge investment for the 2021 version. Again money was ringfenced for grassroots game. 

Now all the criticisms that we discuss regularly still apply, but we shouldn't ignore some of the positives that happened on his watch. 

I'm not too sure what you mean about the cheap comps and sponsors. His Stobart approach was probably the right one, terribly executed, and absolutely battered by fans and media just telling it like it is, like they hounded out sponsors like Papa John's too. 

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

To challenge that view slightly, where we are now is not where he left us. He was overthrown and his changes backed out. 

He left us with a huge TV deal and expansion clubs. 

Now I think a lot of what he delivered was poor, but I think it's unfair to put much of what we see now on him. That coup from the SL clubs is a far bigger factor imho. 

I think how you view his tenure is firmly rooted with if you think the decisions he made was correct in the first place and whether it created the conditions for what has followed.

I certainly think buying off lower league clubs to cement his position and diverting money away from SL, and diminishing it through things like the middle 8s, led to the reduced TV deal that was to follow. The game did not reap why the sun shone and a lot of that was because of things Wood implemented and did not do. 

[Scubby]

10 minutes ago, Dave T said:

That didn't happen though did it? 

We don't know what happened. All we know is that the Chairman of the RLIF became the CEO of the RLIF and since his departure there has been no CEO of the RLIF (just a chairman). It's not great mate and although I have been direct and provocative with my language it pretty much adds up to the same thing.

The RLIF has currently decided that they don't want a CEO on a big salary. Wood created the CEO at the RLIF and appointed Collier. Then when Collier left he took the job himself in a segue from the RFL job and pay off. Dress it up however you want.

Edited July 22, 2022 by Scubby

[Dave T]

Just now, Damien said:

I think how you view his tenure is firmly rooted with if you think the decisions he made was correct in the first place and whether it created the conditions for what has followed.

I certainly think buying off lower league clubs to cement his position and diverting money away from SL, and diminishing it through things like the middle 8s, led to the reduced TV deal that was to follow. The game did not reap why the sun shone and a lot of that was because of things Wood implemented and did not do. 

I think that is a cynical positioning of it, I do think he is slightly more traditional in his thinking and genuinely believes that the lower parts of the pyramid should get a share. 

My personal view is of he was purely playing politics, he could have offered them less, SL clubs more and he would probably have kept more happier. 

There were many things I didn't like about Wood, not least the fact he was too quick to back out of things and failed to inspire, but I dont think he was anywhere near as bad as is made out. 

[gingerjon]

3 minutes ago, Damien said:

I certainly think buying off lower league clubs to cement his position and diverting money away from SL, and diminishing it through things like the middle 8s, led to the reduced TV deal that was to follow. 

Yup.

[Dave T]

15 minutes ago, Scubby said:

But the Chairman of the RLIF interviewing himself for the CEO job of the RLIF is not normal.

 

14 minutes ago, Dave T said:

That didn't happen though did it? 

 

4 minutes ago, Scubby said:

We don't know what happened.

[gingerjon]

6 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

Apart from putting £10 million into community clubs with World Cup funding.

Assuming you mean the 2013 money ... then I'm more than happy to repeat my earlier statement that the state of rugby league in this country right now owes a lot to him and his actions.

And if you mean the 2021 money ... then, see above.

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, Damien said:

I think how you view his tenure is firmly rooted with if you think the decisions he made was correct in the first place and whether it created the conditions for what has followed.

I certainly think buying off lower league clubs to cement his position and diverting money away from SL, and diminishing it through things like the middle 8s, led to the reduced TV deal that was to follow. The game did not reap why the sun shone and a lot of that was because of things Wood implemented and did not do. 

 

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

Yup.

Sky invested I creased funds knowing about the Super 8s.

They covered more games than ever and embraced it. 

The clubs and fans trashed it, a coup followed and it was scrapped. 

I know which turn of events I believe was the bigger impact there. And that's not to say the S8s was the answer, but it was better than what followed which was a lack of vision and us going into our shell. 

[gingerjon]

Just now, Dave T said:

The clubs and fans trashed it, a coup followed and it was scrapped. 

They were entirely right to do so.

[Dave T]

Just now, gingerjon said:

They were entirely right to do so.

Yes, the current state of play confirms that. 

[Scubby]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Bloody typical   I bet your firm is one of those pushing for a 4-day working week with you as chief protagonist!