Jump to content

IMG - Vote on Wednesday


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Hemi4561 said:

How do you convince some of your stakeholders that they should go out onto the pack ice and freeze to death because you think it is in the best interests of you and three of your mates? It  certainly isn't in theirs. 

That's life. But if we want to use melodrama then maybe the decision should be pitches as freeze to death or stay inside and burn to death. 

We can all play that game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

I don't understand this view at all.  

They're a potentially decent championship side & club that should continue investing in the team & club infrastructure as well as the community. If they have aspirations for the elite league, then they can build solid foundations for that. If they don't then crack on as you are. Win-Win.

 

It's not hard to understand, Keighley did all you suggest, succeeded at it, but then had it all destroyed by others. Once bitten twice shy

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tubby said:

Nor was it based on competion on the field, so a bit of an anomaly in this particular discussion.  It was more akin to licencing thatn P&R, wouldn't you agree?

The 6 bottom teams were relegated, the only handpicking was London and Paris. 

P&R was still in place, with some minimum standards. 

Clubs are not complaining about being graded, they are complaining about P&R going, yet that stayed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hemi4561 said:

It's not hard to understand, Keighley did all you suggest, succeeded at it, but then had it all destroyed by others. Once bitten twice shy

 

I can't agree with this logic. So why bother at all then? Why not go into proper amateur rugby?

We can't bang on about the past all the time, it just isn't productive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

It really is. As you can't answer the question, that's it done.

 

It’s not. If your argument is “they don’t do it in football or cricket or whatever sport” it’s not really applicable or relevant to rugby league, is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hemi4561 said:

It's not hard to understand, Keighley did all you suggest, succeeded at it, but then had it all destroyed by others. Once bitten twice shy

 

I have every sympathy with what happened nigh on 30 years ago. However, it has little relevance to the process now and everyone involved at that time is now gone. Moaning about that is not going to get Keighley anywhere.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

That's life. But if we want to use melodrama then maybe the decision should be pitches as freeze to death or stay inside and burn to death. 

We can all play that game. 

Perhaps those that those that you wish to nobly sacrifice themselves for the good of you and your three mates stand sniggering on the shore decide to stick a harpoon through your guts and persuade the huskies to eat you alive. That's life.

Your issue is that you don't want all to play the game, only those that won't threaten your cosy little hegemony 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jughead said:

It’s not. If your argument is “they don’t do it in football or cricket or whatever sport” it’s not really applicable or relevant to rugby league, is it?

Well it is. If we are an outlier, it either means we're ace or ######. I think we're ###### at structuring the basics.

I can't imagine the super powerful Roosters telling FOX that they're only playing their home games on a Friday because they earn more money. Forget the TV contract and QLD teams playing 1st etc, we want that slot.

Champions League clubs are not able to dictate to the Prem when they play on a weekend as tey have TV obligations.

RL folk are so small minded. We want to play on a Friday because we earn x grand more than a Sunday. Clubs should play when they're told* for the betterment of what the strategy of the sport is and then upskill themselves** to pivot to a more flexible approach. This stuff isn't hard.

*Clubs should be absolutely engaged with the powers that be in making these decisions and common sense should prevail ie. Hull away to Saints on a Friday night doesn't work for fans, but the decision should not be owned by self serving clubs 

**IMG should be able to help here, through centralised approaches, even direct consultancy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hemi4561 said:

Perhaps those that those that you wish to nobly sacrifice themselves for the good of you and your three mates stand sniggering on the shore decide to stick a harpoon through your guts and persuade the huskies to eat you alive. That's life.

Your issue is that you don't want all to play the game, only those that won't threaten your cosy little hegemony 

 

Are you drunk; in a library?

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MattSantos said:

Well it is. If we are an outlier, it either means we're ace or ######. I think we're ###### at structuring the basics.

I can't imagine the super powerful Roosters telling FOX that they're only playing their home games on a Friday because they earn more money. Forget the TV contract and QLD teams playing 1st etc, we want that slot.

Champions League clubs are not able to dictate to the Prem when they play on a weekend as tey have TV obligations.

RL folk are so small minded. We want to play on a Friday because we earn x grand more than a Sunday. Clubs should play when they're told* for the betterment of what the strategy of the sport is and then upskill themselves** to pivot to a more flexible approach. This stuff isn't hard.

*Clubs should be absolutely engaged with the powers that be in making these decisions and common sense should prevail ie. Hull away to Saints on a Friday night doesn't work for fans, but the decision should not be owned by self serving clubs 

**IMG should be able to help here, through centralised approaches, even direct consultancy.

You’re just ranting here. It’s not relevant what other sports do and is an odd argument about Sydney Roosters, when their TV contract is significantly different to ours and most, if not all, NRL games are televised. 

If a club has the evidence that their non-televised home games produce more revenue on a certain day than others, we can’t force them to play on other days to suit, well nobody at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jughead said:

You’re just ranting here. It’s not relevant what other sports do and is an odd argument about Sydney Roosters, when their TV contract is significantly different to ours and most, if not all, NRL games are televised. 

If a club has the evidence that their non-televised home games produce more revenue on a certain day than others, we can’t force them to play on other days to suit, well nobody at all. 

Other sports are absolutely relevant. If we don't look to other sports for best/worst practices, then what are we doing? All NRL games are televised. All Prem League games are televised (outside of the UK*) All NFL games are televsised. We should be looking to these leagues as best in practice and if you're saying that this isn't relevant, then you're a poo poo brain.

The original post by the fella was to suggest all of our 'Superleague' games should be televised. I agree. I also think that a strong, fixed structure enables this. This should/ would increase a TV deal and therefore mitigate against any losses.

2 more things that are wider points other than this specific one.

1. Clubs should never be able to dictate anything

2. I worry about the folk in charge if we are so fixed in how we approach things. 

*The football clubs in the UK would love to get away from the Saturday 3pm rule. But they can't dictate anything of these things, so they don't

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Damien said:

I have every sympathy with what happened nigh on 30 years ago. However, it has little relevance to the process now and everyone involved at that time is now gone. Moaning about that is not going to get Keighley anywhere.

I am not moaning about it as you say that was then

However to respond to MattSantos and you about the "past", it is man's greatest teaching aid. 

Burning of huge amounts of fossil fuel to advance,  creating nuclear weapons, wonder drugs like Thalidomide, all were striving for a better future and seemed like a good idea at the time. History, the past tells us that they may not have been a good idea

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

Other sports are absolutely relevant. If we don't look to other sports for best/worst practices, then what are we doing? All NRL games are televised. All Prem League games are televised (outside of the UK*) All NFL games are televsised. We should be looking to these leagues as best in practice and if you're saying that this isn't relevant, then you're a poo poo brain.

The original post by the fella was to suggest all of our 'Superleague' games should be televised. I agree. I also think that a strong, fixed structure enables this. This should/ would increase a TV deal and therefore mitigate against any losses.

2 more things that are wider points other than this specific one.

1. Clubs should never be able to dictate anything

2. I worry about the folk in charge if we are so fixed in how we approach things. 

*The football clubs in the UK would love to get away from the Saturday 3pm rule. But they can't dictate anything of these things, so they don't

Insults amongst rants too. 

Televising all games sounds nice in principle, I’m not sure it’s even remotely close to being a thing in Rugby League in the UK. 

Forcing clubs to abandon the day they play non-televised home games to play on another day to suit someone (I’m not sure who here) is daft. I would imagine most clubs investigate what days are the most financially lucrative for such games and they play on those days to maximise those revenue streams (Saints certainly do). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jughead said:

Insults amongst rants too. 

Televising all games sounds nice in principle, I’m not sure it’s even remotely close to being a thing in Rugby League in the UK. 

Forcing clubs to abandon the day they play non-televised home games to play on another day to suit someone (I’m not sure who here) is daft. I would imagine most clubs investigate what days are the most financially lucrative for such games and they play on those days to maximise those revenue streams (Saints certainly do). 

Poo poo brain too strong?

No one is advocating a non-televised game to be shifted / forced into a structure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

I don't understand this view at all.  

They're a potentially decent championship side & club that should continue investing in the team & club infrastructure as well as the community. If they have aspirations for the elite league, then they can build solid foundations for that. If they don't then crack on as you are. Win-Win.

 

But they clearly dont believe if they do all those things they will be let in. Will they be allowed an academy? Will their geographical position be held against them? Does IMG want people to vote on accepting categories without seeing the criteria on which they are based and who gets to judge?

The immediate announcement of we want to grow CC but then here’s two legs for SL teams but only four teams outside will get to play them and it guarantees there will be no upsets , just to benefit the chosen 12 is a classic example of say one thing,do another.

Keighley clearly dont believe this will be fair and why should they?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hemi4561 said:

I am not moaning about it as you say that was then

However to respond to MattSantos and you about the "past", it is man's greatest teaching aid. 

Burning of huge amounts of fossil fuel to advance,  creating nuclear weapons, wonder drugs like Thalidomide, all were striving for a better future and seemed like a good idea at the time. History, the past tells us that they may not have been a good idea

"The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there."

Anyway, fire, the wheel, immunisation, the printed word, the AED and myriad things are all good ideas 

Keighley or any one else for that matter is free to agree or disagree with , and speak out for or against, the outcome of IMGs work.

One has to assume, though, that those in disagreement are expressing their views publicly to keep fans informed not to sway opinion, having discussed their issues  through the proper channels.

"Stay away from negative people. They have a problem for every solution."

Albert Einstein   (Fat chance on THIS forum)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

But they clearly dont believe if they do all those things they will be let in. Will they be allowed an academy? Will their geographical position be held against them? Does IMG want people to vote on accepting categories without seeing the criteria on which they are based and who gets to judge?

The immediate announcement of we want to grow CC but then here’s two legs for SL teams but only four teams outside will get to play them and it guarantees there will be no upsets , just to benefit the chosen 12 is a classic example of say one thing,do another.

Keighley clearly dont believe this will be fair and why should they?

here’s two legs for SL teams 

Is that a fact?

 

 

 

"Stay away from negative people. They have a problem for every solution."

Albert Einstein   (Fat chance on THIS forum)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

But they clearly dont believe if they do all those things they will be let in. Will they be allowed an academy? Will their geographical position be held against them? Does IMG want people to vote on accepting categories without seeing the criteria on which they are based and who gets to judge?

The immediate announcement of we want to grow CC but then here’s two legs for SL teams but only four teams outside will get to play them and it guarantees there will be no upsets , just to benefit the chosen 12 is a classic example of say one thing,do another.

Keighley clearly dont believe this will be fair and why should they?

And that is their prerogative and to follow on, we don't know the answer to those questions, yet.

I don't believe IMG do want people to vote without the detail as that would be silly. They aren't silly.

On the CC announcement, i think it's testing the waters and i'd be surprised to see it confirmed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

The immediate announcement of we want to grow CC but then here’s two legs for SL teams

There's been an announcement about that, has there?

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

Champions League clubs are not able to dictate to the Prem when they play on a weekend as tey have TV obligations.

They literally are. It's in the rules.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MattSantos said:

Interesting. I've tried looking, can you show me?

I've just read an article that suggests that BT Sport can still select a club to play at 12:30 even though they played Wednesday night. Common sense and a clear partnership in play suggests that they don't, but they can

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

And that is their prerogative and to follow on, we don't know the answer to those questions, yet.

I don't believe IMG do want people to vote without the detail as that would be silly. They aren't silly.

On the CC announcement, i think it's testing the waters and i'd be surprised to see it confirmed. 

Telling me keighley have the right to disagree is a meaningless statement . We were obviously talking about Keighley thinking this is rigged and you saying you don’t think so.

The rfl get to decide who gets academies using geographic considerations but academy will go towards criteria (don’t be so dense to pretend it won’t)

So theres no reason for Keighley to trust this process then is there?

Edited by ShropshireBull
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MattSantos said:

I've just read an article that suggests that BT Sport can still select a club to play at 12:30 even though they played Wednesday night. Common sense and a clear partnership in play suggests that they don't, but they can

Which is the kind of relationships RL’s leading clubs should have with the independent governance hopefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...