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

[Dave T]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

So we drop the Wigan,Warrington ,ST Helens , Hull , Leeds , and just go with the Warriors,Wolves saints,FC and Rhinos , problem solved 

We're going to change Warrington to Orford Villa.  Works for other sports. 

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

We're going to change Warrington to Orford Villa.  Works for other sports. 

Pennington Albion 

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So we drop the Wigan,Warrington ,ST Helens , Hull , Leeds , and just go with the Warriors,Wolves saints,FC and Rhinos , problem solved 

That's the approach that Elstone was taking with the new direction of SL. Town names not being dropped as such but monikers being brought to the fore and used instead. It's not an approach I liked to be honest.

[Big Picture]

23 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

I didn't mention Melbourne specifically - beyond it being in Victoria. My comparison was between the British RL system and the difficulties a theoretical RL competition across Victoria would have.

As far as Melbourne Storm are concerned, British rugby league is nowhere near having the resources that would be required to facilitate such a club away from its heartlands and having P&R or not would have very little impact on that. I'm sure that you can appreciate points on resourcing with your involvement in spreading the international game.

In Australia RL is the primary sport in a significant area of the country, which contains about half of the population, 11 of the 16 largest built up areas by population (including 2 of the top 3) and the most significant cultural centre.

In the UK it is primarily a regional sport, it isn't ingrained in the cultural and political capital. Even in the heartlands it is the 2nd sport to association football by a large margin - hence my comparison to the theoretical RL competition in Victoria.

Of course we would love RL here to compete with football (or even NRL). But we are in a completely different scenario to you blokes - British RL resources give you Leigh and Featherstone*,  Aus RL resources give you Melbourne Storm.

On P&R, you cite competitions outside of Britain (and indeed Europe). To the best of my knowledge those places don't have a traditon/culture of P&R in their sports.

There is a difference between culture and nostalgia here - nobody seems to be advocing P&R because of "the good old days", but there is a different sporting culture here, with different expectations.

Nobody expects SL to 'replicate soccer'. But both are part of a sporting culture that values the positive attributes of P&R - significant reward for success and penalty for failure, sporting fairness and equality of opportunity amongst all the full member clubs of the RFL - not just the fortunate ones who are at the peak when a trapdoor is shut.

I could look at the NRL and suggest that they have a finals system and no P&R for nostalgic reasons and that the comp could be as strong as Premier League football if only they had promotion and relegation.

The bottom line is that despite our similarities, the are differences in the sporting cultures and P&R is something that is valued by many British sports fans. While I can see the advantages to a closed system in UK RL, I think we would drive away more fans than we'd gain by abandoning P&R and end in a worse position than we are now.

*No offence to fans of these clubs - they're two fantastic clubs.

You've summarized the reasons why no solution to the game's problems can be found within its current setup in the UK well there.

[Pulga]

15 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

You are arguing from the other side of the planet , with no understanding of the UK sporting culture 

Different horses for different courses 

Carry on rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic by all means.

[Dave T]

I really enjoy the posts from people who constantly snipe about the UK game,  make vague points about other league being big,  yet offer not a single decent idea on how to develop the game. 

Being a league in major cities in big grounds with big crowds and loads of money isn't an idea. 

Edited September 4, 2022 by Dave T

[Barley Mow]

2 hours ago, Pulga said:

The P&R "if you're good enough on the field then you're in" mentality is quite outdated. The whole English perspective of sport is really. Soccer is lucky to have been big enough before professional sport became purely a business and spread to big enough markets that it has been able to keep things like P&R. Rugby league in the Northern Hemisphere certainly hasn't. Keeping P&R means you won't see new teams pop up because they need the chance to fail without punishment so they can later succeed. 

I think as @GUBRATS eluded to, you are coming at this from outside of British sporting culture and thinking the same solutions will work despite the differences.

The British sports market is so saturated (primarily with the Premier League) that large 'statement' expansion clubs like Melbourne Storm will not work, even if we had the resources and were to abandon P&R to give them the best chance.

In the UK context (not being able to compete with association football) RL needs to build on and from its strengths. This is surely something you can relate to with your advocacy of promoting Latin American international teams through the strength of heritage communities in Australia.

Primary UK strength is the game in the heartlands and I think we need to ensure this is not lost to other forms of entertainment and grow incrementally from there. This has to be largely a bottom up exercise in the British context

The bottom up approach and sporting integrity of P&R valued in UK sporting culture work with keeping P&R.

You may consider such integrity outdated, viewing it from the other side of the world, but if professional sport is now purely a business as you say, then we would drive away a lot of British sports fans.

As I have said, I can see the advantages to a closed shop approach. But in the British context I think that P&R has greater advantages for our sport.

Edited September 4, 2022 by Barley Mow

[Barley Mow]

17 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

You've summarized the reasons why no solution to the game's problems can be found within its current setup in the UK well there.

I don't think that there is no solution. We just have to have realistic objectives.

I know you have a dream of an all singing and all dancing shiny new franchised wonder league for UK RL. And if that were the objective then franchising would make more sense than P&R. But the resources and interest for that competition of big city clubs don't exist and there seems v little prospect of them appearing in a very mature and saturated UK sports market.

Instead, as I said above in response to Pulga, our objectives need to be proportionate to our current situation and resources.

Edited September 4, 2022 by Barley Mow

[Angelic Cynic]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

This is an important point,  and is why I think some may be disappointed.  Some things may sound nice,  or exciting,  but unless there is a decent level of confidence that it will lead to increased income,  it will (and should)  get thrown by the wayside. 

It's really where sports like Union are smart.  They ruthlessly focus on the commercial side of things,  over almost everything else,  and this can then support some of the other areas of the game,  whereas we spend so much time playing around making tweaks that do little. 

It's like two families living in houses next to each other,  one has focused on the value adding developments,  an extension,  new windows,  loft conversion,  garage,  garden renovation,  stole some of their neighbours land out back etc.  The other has moved the furniture around and spent the rest of the time arguing over what colours the walls should be. 

I have just read an article in the Guardian,earlier today,where it mentions the other code....and in that article the repayments to the Private Equity lot,the government Covid loans,the financial mess of Wasps and Worcester,and nervousness of other Premiership clubs finishing the season,are all mentioned.

I don't know much about IMG - but if it is true they are in it for 12 years,if it is true they are to replace Rimmer and other figures currently in place at The RFL,our future may not be so bad, after all:and after a potentially successful World Cup on home soil.

[Pulga]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I really enjoy the posts from people who constantly snipe about the UK game,  make vague points about other league being big,  yet offer not a single decent idea on how to develop the game. 

Being a league in major cities in big grounds with big crowds and loads of money isn't an idea. 

Scrap P&R.

Make STRICT minimum requirements for grounds/player pathways/population size/geographical spread.

Actually market your product. Look at the difference between the NRL and SL in this regard.

If you have to start at 10 teams then do so but leave the door open for applications from new franchises that make a compelling business argument.

Make sure it's accessible to everyone if they want to find it. All games MUST be televised. Don't schedule games to be on at the same time. 

Focus certain media on personalities within the game. 

 

There's so much more but it's not rocket science.

 

 

[Pulga]

11 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

I think as @GUBRATS eluded to, you are coming at this from outside of British sporting culture and thinking the same solutions will work despite the differences.

The British sports market is so saturated (primarily with the Premier League) that large 'statement' expansion clubs like Melbourne Storm will not work, even if we had the resources and were to abandon P&R to give them the best chance.

It the UK context (not being able to compete with association football) RL needs to build on and from its strengths. This is surely something you can relate to with your advocacy of promoting Latin American international teams through the strength of heritage communities in Australia.

Primary UK strength is the game in the heartlands and I think we need to ensure this is not lost to other forms of entertainment and grow incrementally from there. This has to be largely a bottom up exercise in the British context

The bottom up approach and sporting integrity of P&R valued in UK sporting culture are advantage to keeping P&R.

You may consider such integrity outdated,  viewing it from the other side of the world, but if professional sport is now purely a business as you say, then we would drive away a lot of British sports fans.

As I have said, I can see the advantages to a closed shop approach. But in the British context I think that P&R has greater advantages for our sport.

What other sports does P&R work in?

I know the union Premiership is having similar problems with yo-yoing teams and were considering scrapping it.

 

[Damien]

43 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

I didn't mention Melbourne specifically - beyond it being in Victoria. My comparison was between the British RL system and the difficulties a theoretical RL competition across Victoria would have.

As far as Melbourne Storm are concerned, British rugby league is nowhere near having the resources that would be required to facilitate such a club away from its heartlands and having P&R or not would have very little impact on that. I'm sure that you can appreciate points on resourcing with your involvement in spreading the international game.

In Australia RL is the primary sport in a significant area of the country, which contains about half of the population, 11 of the 16 largest built up areas by population (including 2 of the top 3) and the most significant cultural centre.

In the UK it is primarily a regional sport, it isn't ingrained in the cultural and political capital. Even in the heartlands it is the 2nd sport to association football by a large margin - hence my comparison to the theoretical RL competition in Victoria.

Of course we would love RL here to compete with football (or even NRL). But we are in a completely different scenario to you blokes - British RL resources give you Leigh and Featherstone*,  Aus RL resources give you Melbourne Storm.

On P&R, you cite competitions outside of Britain (and indeed Europe). To the best of my knowledge those places don't have a traditon/culture of P&R in their sports.

There is a difference between culture and nostalgia here - nobody seems to be advocing P&R because of "the good old days", but there is a different sporting culture here, with different expectations.

Nobody expects SL to 'replicate soccer'. But both are part of a sporting culture that values the positive attributes of P&R - significant reward for success and penalty for failure, sporting fairness and equality of opportunity amongst all the full member clubs of the RFL - not just the fortunate ones who are at the peak when a trapdoor is shut.

I could look at the NRL and suggest that they have a finals system and no P&R for nostalgic reasons and that the comp could be as strong as Premier League football if only they had promotion and relegation.

The bottom line is that despite our similarities, the are differences in the sporting cultures and P&R is something that is valued by many British sports fans. While I can see the advantages to a closed system in UK RL, I think we would drive away more fans than we'd gain by abandoning P&R and end in a worse position than we are now.

*No offence to fans of these clubs - they're two fantastic clubs.

A great well thought out and well reasoned post. Posts like this are why I like this forum. I think you have nailed why simplistic arguments that revolve around just copying other sports or the NRL are shallow and poor.

I don't necessarily agree with your last paragraph, as I think it depends on how well it is done and and on a heap of other things.

[Dave T]

30 minutes ago, Damien said:

That's the approach that Elstone was taking with the new direction of SL. Town names not being dropped as such but monikers being brought to the fore and used instead. It's not an approach I liked to be honest.

I think we have the balance OK on this tbh,  and I know at times we have pushed the nicknames a little more,  but I think they are nicely embedded now.  

I think we cater for new and existing,  young and old with the club names. I really don't like the Hundred branding for example,  although some are fine.  Those without place names are weird. 

[Big Picture]

8 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

I don't think that there is no solution. We just have to have realistic objectives.

I know you have a dream of an all singing and all dancing shiny new franchised wonder league for UK RL. And if that were the objective then franchising would make more sense than P&R. But the resources and interest for that competition of big city clubs don't exist and there seems v little prospect of them appearing in a very mature and saturated UK sports market.

Instead, as I said above in response to Pulga, our objectives need to be proportionate to our current situation and resources.

You mistake my view, I'd never suggest a new franchised league in the UK alone, I know that would never work.  My concept is a lot bigger than that.

Re solving the game's problems in other ways, just what "realistic objectives" do you have in mind considering that the traditional clubs have no access to the sort of money needed to turn the game's decline around because that sort of money simply doesn't exist in the smallish, unfashionable, economically disadvantaged towns where they are based?  Bear in mind too that the financial growth of soccer and RU during the last 25-30 years means that a lot more money is needed to compete with them now than back then.

[Dave T]

10 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

I have just read an article in the Guardian,earlier today,where it mentions the other code....and in that article the repayments to the Private Equity lot,the government Covid loans,the financial mess of Wasps and Worcester,and nervousness of other Premiership clubs finishing the season,are all mentioned.

I don't know much about IMG - but if it is true they are in it for 12 years,if it is true they are to replace Rimmer and other figures currently in place at The RFL,our future may not be so bad, after all:and after a potentially successful World Cup on home soil.

Yep,  I don't want to go too cross code,  but sometimes you need to be careful what you wish for. They have some challenging times (as do we all to be fair),  but our approach to sustainability,  whilst boring at times and seemingly unambitious,  does rather reduce some of the risk. 

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, Damien said:

A great well thought out and well reasoned post. Posts like this are why I like this forum. I think you have nailed why simplistic arguments that revolve around just copying other sports or the NRL are shallow and poor.

I don't necessarily agree with your last paragraph, as I think it depends on how well it is done and and on a heap of other things.

Agreed,  I don't necessarily come to the same conclusion as @Barley Mow,  but I think the rationale and context explanations are welcome in this thread. 

[Tommygilf]

49 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I suppose that is to be seen,  but a conflicting viewpoint is that people are worried that IMG won't have much power. 

I suspect the reality will be somewhere in the middle -  which is where it needs to be! 

I think IMG will come out with their recommendations privately to the RFL and the Clubs at the end of September, if they aren't accepted they'll walk away from their involvement in the sport.

[redjonn]

On 03/09/2022 at 11:27, Live after death said:

But the product on the field has declined over the last 10 years or so and most will agree, and all my points have contributed to that.  I have found fans want straight hone away whether thats 12-or 14 teams and want to know who they are playing and when. I scrapped my season tickets after the middle 8’s i have hobbies and i always fitted these around games, not knowing what half the fixtures were going to be until mid June just ended up missing too many games as they then clashed with other commitments, and now with loop fixtures you just think nah i’l pick and choose games. Thats my experience and many have similar stories. Its just stopped being the “not to be missed” event for me anymore. 

I agree with regard to the product, the game on the pitch as well as the stadium experience.

Their are probably a number of reasons we could debate as to why we think the product has declined.  Irrespective of what aspects we could identify the problem starts with the overall philosophy or culture which leads RL to always trying to level out clubs to the lowest denominator.

Edited September 4, 2022 by redjonn

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

You mistake my view, I'd never suggest a new franchised league in the UK alone, I know that would never work.  My concept is a lot bigger than that.

Re solving the game's problems in other ways, just what "realistic objectives" do you have in mind considering that the traditional clubs have no access to the sort of money needed to turn the game's decline around because that sort of money simply doesn't exist in the smallish, unfashionable, economically disadvantaged towns where they are based?  Bear in mind too that the financial growth of soccer and RU during the last 25-30 years means that a lot more money is needed to compete with them now than back then.

The biggest issue I have with your posts on this is you never come close to explaining how it can happen without unicorn billionaires paying a fortune for franchises.

I think we would all like teams called Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, London etc in Super League. However unless you have a serious post on how it can happen its just a needless diversion.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, redjonn said:

I agree with regard to the product, the game on the pitch as well as the stadium experience.

Their are probably a number of reasons we could debate as to why we think the product has decline.  Irrespective of what aspects we could identify the problem starts with the overall philosophy or culture which leads RL to always trying to level out clubs to the lowest dominator.

That wouldn't be an issue if the lowest common denominator was still at a good level!

[Dave T]

13 minutes ago, Pulga said:

Scrap P&R.

Make STRICT minimum requirements for grounds/player pathways/population size/geographical spread.

Actually market your product. Look at the difference between the NRL and SL in this regard.

If you have to start at 10 teams then do so but leave the door open for applications from new franchises that make a compelling business argument.

Make sure it's accessible to everyone if they want to find it. All games MUST be televised. Don't schedule games to be on at the same time. 

Focus certain media on personalities within the game. 

 

There's so much more but it's not rocket science.

 

 

I don't disagree with too much of the above,  but let's challenge some of them to play devil's advocate. 

1. Scrap P&R -  the risk is you turn off much of the game below the closed shop,  lose some of your grassroots and take a real short term hit.  The benefits are not necessarily realised when you still ultimately have some weak teams bumblibg along at the bottom. 

2. Minimum reqts.  I agree,  but in reality,  facilities are very good across the majority of SL,  the level of player development is good -  not many sports sustain themselves from such a modest pool. Populations aren't an issue really,  we are in densely populated areas and have tiny % of that. 

3. Market. Sure,  agreed. But its a bit basic really. 

4. All games televised -  meh.  UK sports fans don't seem to interested in this.  It's not gonna grow the game.  But I would push for it in some form. Its an Aussie/American thing tho. 

5.  Personalities.  Its a nice soundbite,  but we have a very unhelpful media.  The way to grow these players is to play major games on terrestrial,  put players in front of people-  which we do. 

So,  nothing controversial in your views,  decent enough stuff,  but nothing game changing imho.  The game would still look similar with the above in place. But thanks for adding context to your posts. 

[redjonn]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

That wouldn't be an issue if the lowest common denominator was still at a good level!

Of course but it ain't the reality and so to bridge the gap we set out to lessen the best rather than how to improve the worst.

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think IMG will come out with their recommendations privately to the RFL and the Clubs at the end of September, if they aren't accepted they'll walk away from their involvement in the sport.

I think this is very true and now you mention it is a reason why it seems hard to see the RFL and clubs going against IMG.

If what IMG recommend is not implemented then I think it's fair to assume IMG will think they are banging their heads against a wall and there is no point them being involved. I have no idea where the sport goes from that point, considering the reasons why we have got to this stage in the first place. Consequently I do think the sport is probably more bought in to IMG's recommendations then is being let on.

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think IMG will come out with their recommendations privately to the RFL and the Clubs at the end of September, if they aren't accepted they'll walk away from their involvement in the sport.

There is nothing that supports that view.

This partnership has been months and months in the making, plenty will have been ironed out on governance. 

There are likely to be some break clauses etc,  but the game can't be in a position where the recommendation is terrible,  the existing sport says as much and IMG just walk away and give up. 

It won't happen imho. 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, redjonn said:

Of course but it ain't the reality and so to bridge the gap we set out to lessen the best rather than how to improve the worst.

Yes, and we fundamentally cripple the lower teams too by not allowing investors to spend to overcome the disparities, and by constantly threatening them with relegation in a 12 team league (too small for it imo).