IMG - Thought's, suggestions and comments to move the game forward

[gingerjon]

3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Less so , but yes , but Sale , Bath , Northampton , I've been to them all didn't see many skyscrapers 

Where do ' Wasps ' play these days ? 

The team who were called London Wasps whilst playing in High Wycombe now play in Coventry.

[GUBRATS]

6 hours ago, Dave T said:

I do understand the dislike of loop fixtures, but I do also think it's a good illustration of how some RL fans get themselves so worked up about relatively minor things. The loop fixtures make up only 3 of your 14 home games. IMHO loop fixtures get a disproportionate amount of focus from some fans,  and I think this is a little like what happened with the disciplinary this year.  Things get some traction from a few noisy people,  it grows arms and legs and it suddenly becomes a big issue. And then we make decisions that are scratching around the edges and not the actual real decisions that will make a difference. 

I pretty much guarantee that if we scrap loop fixtures and replace them with teams 13 and 14,  it won't make a material difference, and if we scrap Magic,  the game will be worse off. 

We also need to just allow some fans to move on.  It's a natural cycle,  a part of life,  not everyone will be fans from the age of 6 until the day that they die.  Life gets in the way,  people dip in and out,  it happens in all sports,  and forms of entertainment. We won't please everyone,  if somebody is prepared to stay at home because of vague things like 'lack of stability'  then we move on and keep working hard to build our audience. But that can't happen at a micro-level. 

I missed a whole decade of watching virtually any ' Live ' sport ( United and Leyth ) because of Kids , work , house , business , I just didn't have any money , a house , a car , food were the priorities , I used to have one night out , took 2 quid which bought me 3 pints , if we won the quiz night I'd get a few beer tokens for the following week 

It's called Life 

Edited September 3, 2022 by GUBRATS

[GUBRATS]

11 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Oh come on, get real.  Doesn't everyone in Britain know that Everton's in Liverpool, Aston Villa's in Birmingham and the others you mentioned are in London?

Re @GUBRATS' question about RU, though their Premiership includes some small places it also has a decent coverage of cities, it covers most of the regions of England, and its establishment connections help it too.  That seal of approval gives RU a big advantage which RL lacks.

And won't get by setting up clubs where nobody cares 

[Big Picture]

20 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

And won't get by setting up clubs where nobody cares 

If you mean setting up clubs in the current regionally stunted structure, I agree with you that won't work.  It can only work if it's done in a way which can break through the lack of awareness and negative stereotypes and give the public in those places a good reason why they ought to care, or at least come check it out so the great time they have when they do makes them want to come back for more.

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

If you mean setting up clubs in the current regionally stunted structure, I agree with you that won't work.  It can only work if it's done in a way which can break through the lack of awareness and negative stereotypes and give the public in those places a good reason why they ought to care, or at least come check it out so the great time they have when they do makes them want to come back for more.

In any structure where they don't care , it won't work 

[David Shepherd]

29 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

If you mean setting up clubs in the current regionally stunted structure, I agree with you that won't work.  It can only work if it's done in a way which can break through the lack of awareness and negative stereotypes and give the public in those places a good reason why they ought to care, or at least come check it out so the great time they have when they do makes them want to come back for more.

 

[rlno1]

Could they be working off Shane Richardson's plan for the British game?

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/dissecting-shane-richardsons-plan-for-british-rugby-league/

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I expect IMG's recommendation will be taken up. 

Phewww, sharp intake of breath Dave, can I please add a proviso........... If it suits and by that I mean a select few SL owners.

[sweaty craiq]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Interesting that you suspect those who presently run the sport i.e. SL are pushing the 2 x 10's?  Who else could you be suggesting it is if you think that a portion of IMG's survey of the fans is to source their opinion of the 2 x 10's and loop fixtures to kill it. 

And if SL really wanted to bring it in would you expect them to follow IMG's advice?

Two tens is being pushed and financed by Sky who see the promotion race as marketable, as they did with the mid 8’s it was the top 8’s that broke it.

[Big Picture]

32 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

Two tens is being pushed and financed by Sky who see the promotion race as marketable, as they did with the mid 8’s it was the top 8’s that broke it.

You mean the same Sky which put the game on two years' notice to prove its value or else?  Yeah right!

[Harry Stottle]

21 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

Two tens is being pushed and financed by Sky who see the promotion race as marketable, as they did with the mid 8’s it was the top 8’s that broke it.

Totally agree that if was the moaning SL top 8 that got it quashed, but if Sky really wanted it considering they pay for it we would still have it.

I am not convinced that 2 x 10's is the way to go, firstly who is going to finance 20 clubs at whatever level is deemed nessacary, and where would the player's of the required quality come from unless of course overseas numbers are not goverened and the SC is increased considerably, considering it will be 2 divisions they will both be under the same rules not only allowing 7 overseas in division 1 and open school in division 2. 

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Phewww, sharp intake of breath Dave, can I please add a proviso........... If it suits and by that I mean a select few SL owners.

That's lazy analysis with respect Harry. 

I've made the point before,  and will keep repeating myself,  we have tried a wide range of weird and wonderful structures,  tbh,  many of them contradictory,  which sort of disproves that it is all done by a small group of leaders with too much power. 

That may have been the aim of the Elstone era,  but then they realised that it wasn't as simple as they thought they soon backed out. 

We've had the extreme of licensing creating a closed shop,  to the S8 structure which saw funding at huge % outside of the 12 SL clubs. Those two things are not consistent with each other. 

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

That's lazy analysis with respect Harry. 

I've made the point before,  and will keep repeating myself,  we have tried a wide range of weird and wonderful structures,  tbh,  many of them contradictory,  which sort of disproves that it is all done by a small group of leaders with too much power. 

That may have been the aim of the Elstone era,  but then they realised that it wasn't as simple as they thought they soon backed out. 

We've had the extreme of licensing creating a closed shop,  to the S8 structure which saw funding at huge % outside of the 12 SL clubs. Those two things are not consistent with each other. 

I think that the unveiling of Mr Elstone and at the same press conference the push to abolish the M8's chaired by the "Fun Boy Three" of McManus, Leneghan and Moran kind of shows where theI influence sits, also I have said it before Mr Elstone was no more than the marionette to the string pullers of the SL hierarchy.

[Dave T]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

I think that the unveiling of Mr Elstone and at the same press conference the push to abolish the M8's chaired by the "Fun Boy Three" of McManus, Leneghan and Moran kind of shows where theI influence sits, also I have said it before Mr Elstone was no more than the marionette to the string pullers of the SL hierarchy.

The problem is that 3 votes isn't enough.  Its the reason we get conflicting views and ultimately contractory decisions being made. 

[DI Keith Fowler]

37 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Totally agree that if was the moaning SL top 8 that got it quashed, but if Sky really wanted it considering they pay for it we would still have it.

I am not convinced that 2 x 10's is the way to go, firstly who is going to finance 20 clubs at whatever level is deemed nessacary, and where would the player's of the required quality come from unless of course overseas numbers are not goverened and the SC is increased considerably, considering it will be 2 divisions they will both be under the same rules not only allowing 7 overseas in division 1 and open school in division 2. 

To be honest I tend to see this as a bit of a moot point. If they think they can sell 10+10 to Sky/C4 then it's Sky and C4 they plan to pay for it. 

You'd definitely have to loosen the quota in the short term. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing as you're increasing the number of professional clubs and therefore increasing the number of professional English players in absolute terms even if it drops as a percentage. 

[Griff]

5 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Oh come on, get real.  Doesn't everyone in Britain know that Everton's in Liverpool, Aston Villa's in Birmingham and the others you mentioned are in London?

 

Bit like saying Salford's in Manchester, I suppose.

It isn't, though.

[GUBRATS]

10 minutes ago, Griff said:

Bit like saying Salford's in Manchester, I suppose.

It isn't, though.

Greater 

[Big Picture]

22 minutes ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

To be honest I tend to see this as a bit of a moot point. If they think they can sell 10+10 to Sky/C4 then it's Sky and C4 they plan to pay for it. 

You'd definitely have to loosen the quota in the short term. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing as you're increasing the number of professional clubs and therefore increasing the number of professional English players in absolute terms even if it drops as a percentage. 

You mean it's Sky they plan to pay for it, not Sky and C4.

C4 depends on advertising for their revenue, so what they can afford to pay for the rights is a function of how many ad minutes they have to sell in their broadcasts and how much they can sell them for.  As we know, like soccer and RU, RL doesn't provide a multitude of ad minutes for its broadcast partners, so C4 won't be able pay a lot.

[Big Picture]

28 minutes ago, Griff said:

Bit like saying Salford's in Manchester, I suppose.

It isn't, though.

Which one isn't?

Wikipedia says that Everton is "a district in Liverpool", Aston is "an area of inner Birmingham", Tottenham is "a town in north London" which is "the northern part of London", Chelsea is "an area of London", Fulham is "an area of the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham", Brentford is "a suburban town in West London", which is "the western part of London", and West Ham is "a district in East London", which is "the part of London, England, east of the ancient City of London and north of the River Thames".

So yes Everton is in Liverpool, Aston is in Birmingham and the others are all in London.  QED

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Which one isn't?

Wikipedia says that Everton is "a district in Liverpool", Aston is "an area of inner Birmingham", Tottenham is "a town in north London" which is "the northern part of London", Chelsea is "an area of London", Fulham is "an area of the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham", Brentford is "a suburban town in West London", which is "the western part of London", and West Ham is "a district in East London", which is "the part of London, England, east of the ancient City of London and north of the River Thames".

So yes Everton is in Liverpool, Aston is in Birmingham and the others are all in London.  QED

Sale , wasps ,Harlequins,Saracens 

[GUBRATS]

Worcester pop 102 K 

Gloucester pop 166 K 

Cities yes because they've got a big church , but not massive population centres 

 

[Big Picture]

16 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Worcester pop 102 K 

Gloucester pop 166 K 

Cities yes because they've got a big church , but not massive population centres

Not big population centres, that's true, but that's not the whole story either re a league which isn't geographically constrained, has big clubs in London and has ties to the socioeconomic elite.  As a result they won't suffer from the smallish size of Worcester and Gloucester.

[Griff]

4 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Which one isn't?

Wikipedia says that Everton is "a district in Liverpool", Aston is "an area of inner Birmingham", Tottenham is "a town in north London" which is "the northern part of London", Chelsea is "an area of London", Fulham is "an area of the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham", Brentford is "a suburban town in West London", which is "the western part of London", and West Ham is "a district in East London", which is "the part of London, England, east of the ancient City of London and north of the River Thames".

So yes Everton is in Liverpool, Aston is in Birmingham and the others are all in London.  QED

Wiki is always definitive.

[Tommygilf]

RU can get away with a Gloucester or Worcester because not only does it have a national amateur presence, but its fans, in general, are perceived to be wealthier than your average punter.

Saying "but RU does this" is utterly pointless.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

RU can get away with a Gloucester or Worcester because not only does it have a national amateur presence, but its fans, in general, are perceived to be wealthier than your average punter.

Saying "but RU does this" is utterly pointless.

To add to this, our no1 competitor/comparison is association football. Pre 1990s a predominantly working class game supported by predominantly working class people.

What did it do?

1. It partially gentrified. It diversified its audience. Part of that is its audience gentrifying itself, take Arsenal for example and a north London fanbase. 

2. It adapted to the modern world, looking beyond the visible spectators in the grounds every weekend.

3. In due course with the above, it saw that it was a business, and worked to secure business aims as much as possible.

Fundamentally, Soccer realised that a game rooted in an Anglo-Welsh working class that itself was rapidly disappearing wasn't sustainable. It has transformed Itself. IMG will at its heart have the same aim for Rugby League.