Derek Beaumont: Leigh will win SL or Challenge Cup in 3-5 years

[steve oates]

On 05/10/2022 at 00:48, The Daddy said:

I don't doubt that Leigh with Derek's backing has the resources to win silverware.

Here's where I have a problem though, RL in the UK already has several issues around geographical diversity and lack of clubs within large catchment areas. This leads to the major issue with perception the sport has with sponsors and the casual sports and entertainment customer. Leigh being in SL in itself compounds this image and makes the competition look even more small time than what it already is.

In my view IMG made some very good proposals but they didn't go far enough. It tells me that despite IMG'S well thought through proposals the lunatics are still in charge of the asylum. 

 Grading clubs and abandoning Promotion and Relegation has already been tried, you may not be old enough to remember it. It didn't work last time and there is nothing to say it will work this time. It's clear the game does not want to pay IMG unless they come up with something that really will.

The geography of the sport is entirely historical, but it works, that is why we are still here. That is why we have attracted good TV deals for years. What doesn't work is putting clubs in Rugby Union land. That game is too big and powerful to take on. Something like 40 failed attempts over the years is the concrete proof. 

I'd like to see you face to face with Mr. Beaumont, because clearly you won't engage in debate here and acknowledge reality. All the interest in RL and all the money is in M62 land tell me how you would change that 

[Toby Chopra]

51 minutes ago, steve oates said:

 Grading clubs and abandoning Promotion and Relegation has already been tried, you may not be old enough to remember it. It didn't work last time and there is nothing to say it will work this time. It's clear the game does not want to pay IMG unless they come up with something that really will.

The geography of the sport is entirely historical, but it works, that is why we are still here. That is why we have attracted good TV deals for years. What doesn't work is putting clubs in Rugby Union land. That game is too big and powerful to take on. Something like 40 failed attempts over the years is the concrete proof. 

I'd like to see you face to face with Mr. Beaumont, because clearly you won't engage in debate here and acknowledge reality. All the interest in RL and all the money is in M62 land tell me how you would change that 

You're so consumed with your anti expansion view that you've completely failed to understand what IMG are proposing. 

If you had, you'd realise their plan is largely about PROTECTING the best of the traditional heartland, and choosing which OTHER heartland clubs can build the strongest sporting businesses without being crushed by yo-yo P&R. None of it is about sticking pins in maps in "Rugby union land". We'll only see non-heartland Superleague teams going forward if the business case is overwhelming, which we're nowhere near - anywhere. 

(p.s. anyone who thinks rugby union is the main competitor for rugby league these days has missed the last 30 years of economic, social, technological and sporting developments. Union is almost irrelevant now to league's fortunes.) 

[Roughyed Rats]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

You're so consumed with your anti expansion view that you've completely failed to understand what IMG are proposing. 

If you had, you'd realise their plan is largely about PROTECTING the best of the traditional heartland, and choosing which OTHER heartland clubs can build the strongest sporting businesses without being crushed by yo-yo P&R. None of it is about sticking pins in maps in "Rugby union land". We'll only see non-heartland Superleague teams going forward if the business case is overwhelming, which we're nowhere near - anywhere. 

(p.s. anyone who thinks rugby union is the main competitor for rugby league these days has missed the last 30 years of economic, social, technological and sporting developments. Union is almost irrelevant now to league's fortunes.) 

I agree that it solves the P&R yo-yo issue as there is likely to be little or no movement between SL and the Championship. Whoever starts in SL as a Cat B club are highly unlikely to get shifted; effectively creating the same closed shop as per licensing which saw crowds and interest diminish. 

Unless they force SL clubs to distribute central funds more equitably, nothing changes. Most, if not all, of the big Cat A clubs are running operating losses and would not be solvent without their SL TV revenue. Therefore, if we assume that they will fight for distribution to continues as is, you have now got an annual minimum of a £1.3m funding differential between Cat B clubs in SL (£1.6m) and the Championship (£300k down to £180k) which is greater than most clubs turnover in the Championship. 

With this massive commercial advantage, all Cat B SL clubs have to do is to make sure they invest to be graded higher than their only competition which is now Cat B Championship clubs. With that massive head start, it seems unlikely that there will be much, if any movement. 

 

[Saint Toppy]

27 minutes ago, Roughyed Rats said:

I agree that it solves the P&R yo-yo issue as there is likely to be little or no movement between SL and the Championship. Whoever starts in SL as a Cat B club are highly unlikely to get shifted; effectively creating the same closed shop as per licensing which saw crowds and interest diminish. 

Unless they force SL clubs to distribute central funds more equitably, nothing changes. Most, if not all, of the big Cat A clubs are running operating losses and would not be solvent without their SL TV revenue. Therefore, if we assume that they will fight for distribution to continues as is, you have now got an annual minimum of a £1.3m funding differential between Cat B clubs in SL (£1.6m) and the Championship (£300k down to £180k) which is greater than most clubs turnover in the Championship. 

With this massive commercial advantage, all Cat B SL clubs have to do is to make sure they invest to be graded higher than their only competition which is now Cat B Championship clubs. With that massive head start, it seems unlikely that there will be much, if any movement. 

 

If you read between the lines of what IMG have said their focus isn't on any sort of creation of equality between leagues, its firstly to get to a point where we have 12-14 strong, viable Cat A clubs in SL, and 12-14 strong, viable Cat B clubs in the Championship and to use this as the basis for promotion & growth of the sport (better TV deals, increased sponsorship, increased media attention etc.)

They don't appear to have any interest in making it 'fair' amongst all Cat B clubs, they're focussed on the bigger, long-term picture and growth of the sport at the professional / semi-professional level.

Initially there will be some Cat B clubs in SL getting vastly more income from TV than the Cat B clubs in the Championship, that won't change from what we have now. The focus will be on the Cat B SL clubs to use that money to get themselves up to a Cat A licence, and if they don't manage that over a certain time period then they'll likely find themselves being overtaken by some other clubs and pushed out of SL further down the track.

I get that you think this is 'unfair' and that all clubs should get a more equal split of the TV money, but that's not IMG's vision of how they see the best way for the sport to grow itself. They see more of a 'top down' approach by starting with a strong stable SL first full of Cat A clubs and then a trickle down to having a strong, stable Championship with Cat B clubs.

It wont be a completely closed shop, but ultimately if/when they reach this point it will be incredibly difficult for a Cat B club to gain entry into SL to join the Cat A clubs. That Cat B club is going to have to have a fairly wealthy backer in order for them to take that next step, and to essentially be a Cat A club in all but name, but I guess that what IMG want, a SL full of financially strong clubs.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

If you read between the lines of what IMG have said their focus isn't on any sort of creation of equality between leagues, its firstly to get to a point where we have 12-14 strong, viable Cat A clubs in SL, and 12-14 strong, viable Cat B clubs in the Championship and to use this as the basis for promotion & growth of the sport (better TV deals, increased sponsorship, increased media attention etc.)

They don't appear to have any interest in making it 'fair' amongst all Cat B clubs, they're focussed on the bigger, long-term picture and growth of the sport at the professional / semi-professional level.

Initially there will be some Cat B clubs in SL getting vastly more income from TV than the Cat B clubs in the Championship, that won't change from what we have now. The focus will be on the Cat B SL clubs to use that money to get themselves up to a Cat A licence, and if they don't manage that over a certain time period then they'll likely find themselves being overtaken by some other clubs and pushed out of SL further down the track.

I get that you think this is 'unfair' and that all clubs should get a more equal split of the TV money, but that's not IMG's vision of how they see the best way for the sport to grow itself. They see more of a 'top down' approach by starting with a strong stable SL first full of Cat A clubs and then a trickle down to having a strong, stable Championship with Cat B clubs.

It wont be a completely closed shop, but ultimately if/when they reach this point it will be incredibly difficult for a Cat B club to gain entry into SL to join the Cat A clubs. That Cat B club is going to have to have a fairly wealthy backer in order for them to take that next step, and to essentially be a Cat A club in all but name, but I guess that what IMG want, a SL full of financially strong clubs.

I think that's right. They seem to be focusing on the top tier, and the other tiers can crack on as they are. I suggest the belief is that they should still be focused on improving and they will benefit from clubs trying to be good enough to be top tier, but if they get 14 Grade A clubs, I think it becomes a closed shop broadly speaking. 

[Roughyed Rats]

1 minute ago, Saint Toppy said:

If you read between the lines of what IMG have said their focus isn't on any sort of creation of equality between leagues, its firstly to get to a point where we have 12-14 strong, viable Cat A clubs in SL, and 12-14 strong, viable Cat B clubs in the Championship and to use this as the basis for promotion & growth of the sport (better TV deals, increased sponsorship, increased media attention etc.)

They don't appear to have any interest in making it 'fair' amongst all Cat B clubs, they're focussed on the bigger, long-term picture and growth of the sport at the professional / semi-professional level.

Initially there will be some Cat B clubs in SL getting vastly more income from TV than the Cat B clubs in the Championship, that won't change from what we have now. The focus will be on the Cat B SL clubs to use that money to get themselves up to a Cat A licence, and if they don't manage that over a certain time period then they'll likely find themselves being overtaken by some other clubs and pushed out of SL further down the track.

I get that you think this is 'unfair' and that all clubs should get a more equal split of the TV money, but that's not IMG's vision of how they see the best way for the sport to grow itself. They see more of a 'top down' approach by starting with a strong stable SL first full of Cat A clubs and then a trickle down to having a strong, stable Championship with Cat B clubs.

It wont be a completely closed shop, but ultimately if/when they reach this point it will be incredibly difficult for a Cat B club to gain entry into SL to join the Cat A clubs. That Cat B club is going to have to have a fairly wealthy backer in order for them to take that next step, and to essentially be a Cat A club in all but name, but I guess that what IMG want, a SL full of financially strong clubs.

Agree completely - to all intents and purposes a closed shop. 

[Toby Chopra]

44 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

If you read between the lines of what IMG have said their focus isn't on any sort of creation of equality between leagues, its firstly to get to a point where we have 12-14 strong, viable Cat A clubs in SL, and 12-14 strong, viable Cat B clubs in the Championship and to use this as the basis for promotion & growth of the sport (better TV deals, increased sponsorship, increased media attention etc.)

They don't appear to have any interest in making it 'fair' amongst all Cat B clubs, they're focussed on the bigger, long-term picture and growth of the sport at the professional / semi-professional level.

Initially there will be some Cat B clubs in SL getting vastly more income from TV than the Cat B clubs in the Championship, that won't change from what we have now. The focus will be on the Cat B SL clubs to use that money to get themselves up to a Cat A licence, and if they don't manage that over a certain time period then they'll likely find themselves being overtaken by some other clubs and pushed out of SL further down the track.

I get that you think this is 'unfair' and that all clubs should get a more equal split of the TV money, but that's not IMG's vision of how they see the best way for the sport to grow itself. They see more of a 'top down' approach by starting with a strong stable SL first full of Cat A clubs and then a trickle down to having a strong, stable Championship with Cat B clubs.

It wont be a completely closed shop, but ultimately if/when they reach this point it will be incredibly difficult for a Cat B club to gain entry into SL to join the Cat A clubs. That Cat B club is going to have to have a fairly wealthy backer in order for them to take that next step, and to essentially be a Cat A club in all but name, but I guess that what IMG want, a SL full of financially strong clubs.

I think that's a fair assessment. And I get why some fans feel this would be an unfair way forward.

And I think it would be dishonest not to acknowledge that breaking the (perceived) continuum between all the historic clubs is a major step. It's a huge one which offends many people's sense of fair play.

But it also reflects reality, and the reality of where our sport finds itself here in the 2020s is that we can't afford to keep this charade going on any longer if we're to survive in the modern sporting market. We probably should have had the courage to confront this years ago, rather than pretending that all clubs are somehow still in the same boat.            

[Saint Toppy]

43 minutes ago, Roughyed Rats said:

Agree completely - to all intents and purposes a closed shop. 

Not a closed shop, entry to a future SL will still be there, but only for those Cat B clubs with the infrastructure & financial strength & stability to be able to fully compete with all the Cat A clubs.

The devil will be in the detail of exactly what that criteria is, and only then will clubs know just how easy or difficult it will be to gain a guaranteed place in a future SL. 

[Toby Chopra]

57 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think that's right. They seem to be focusing on the top tier, and the other tiers can crack on as they are. I suggest the belief is that they should still be focused on improving and they will benefit from clubs trying to be good enough to be top tier, but if they get 14 Grade A clubs, I think it becomes a closed shop broadly speaking. 

Yes, that sound about right. Beyond 14, it'll have to be a slam dunk expansion case, like maybe Warriors or Dolphins in the NRL. What we must hope though, is that they don't water down the criteria for Cat A, in order to get to 14 too quickly, as that would come back to haunt them. Protecting clubs that still have fundamental weaknesses always ends badly.  

[Saint Toppy]

47 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

Yes, that sound about right. Beyond 14, it'll have to be a slam dunk expansion case, like maybe Warriors or Dolphins in the NRL. What we must hope though, is that they don't water down the criteria for Cat A, in order to get to 14 too quickly, as that would come back to haunt them. Protecting clubs that still have fundamental weaknesses always ends badly.  

Thats the fundamental cause of the failure of the licencing system last time. They set out with the best intentions, published all kinds of criteria in the 'framing the future' document & others, and then as soon a club looked like they wouldn't meet the criteria they moved the goalposts so they could stay in SL. They did this time & time again until in the end the requirements for a licence were practically meaningless. Clubs could stay in their decrepit old stadia and lurch from one financial disaster to another living hand to mouth year after year & languishing at or near the bottom of the league every year. In short, the RFL were utterly useless at administering the system, so my only hope this time round is that whatever gets agreed is fully adhered to and the RFL aren't allowed to move the goalposts at will again.

[Roughyed Rats]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

I think that's a fair assessment. And I get why some fans feel this would be an unfair way forward.

And I think it would be dishonest not to acknowledge that breaking the (perceived) continuum between all the historic clubs is a major step. It's a huge one which offends many people's sense of fair play.

But it also reflects reality, and the reality of where our sport finds itself here in the 2020s is that we can't afford to keep this charade going on any longer if we're to survive in the modern sporting market. We probably should have had the courage to confront this years ago, rather than pretending that all clubs are somehow still in the same boat.            

It would be dishonest because it's what's going to happen. Is it a stretch to consider that many of these historic clubs may wish to break away and return to part-time RL in the winter. It would at least give them the potential to negotiate a reasonable TV deal and attract some additional supporters from the summer game who fancy watching a game during their off season. I can only see the game 'growing' with additional regional franchises; perhaps becoming a summer league of City / Regional representative clubs with traditional winter feeder clubs at local level.  

[meast]

On 04/10/2022 at 12:11, Gaz Martin said:

He bought the Championship so he might as well try and buy the SL or CC.

He just needs to now invest in half a team as the other half isn't eligible to play in SL.

He'll probably pack the side full of their academy graduates who couldn't get a game this last season  

[GUBRATS]

On 04/10/2022 at 12:31, ShropshireBull said:

Because it´s a massive oversight and noone thought a champ club would have 1.2 million to smash onto the wage bill. Hope we get that loophole closed pronto. Same rules across all divisions on foreign players and a salary cap suited to what is a part time league. 

Ending any hope of any club making a successful jump into SL 

[Davo5]

14 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Ending any hope of any club making a successful jump into SL 

Or under the IMG proposal’s teams won’t have to fill their teams with NRL castoffs & can divert that money to building a sustainable club suitable for entry into Superleague in a competitive Championship.

[Harry Stottle]

On 07/10/2022 at 12:05, Saint Toppy said:

If you read between the lines of what IMG have said their focus isn't on any sort of creation of equality between leagues, its firstly to get to a point where we have 12-14 strong, viable Cat A clubs in SL, and 12-14 strong, viable Cat B clubs in the Championship and to use this as the basis for promotion & growth of the sport (better TV deals, increased sponsorship, increased media attention etc.)

They don't appear to have any interest in making it 'fair' amongst all Cat B clubs, they're focussed on the bigger, long-term picture and growth of the sport at the professional / semi-professional level.

Initially there will be some Cat B clubs in SL getting vastly more income from TV than the Cat B clubs in the Championship, that won't change from what we have now. The focus will be on the Cat B SL clubs to use that money to get themselves up to a Cat A licence, and if they don't manage that over a certain time period then they'll likely find themselves being overtaken by some other clubs and pushed out of SL further down the track.

I get that you think this is 'unfair' and that all clubs should get a more equal split of the TV money, but that's not IMG's vision of how they see the best way for the sport to grow itself. They see more of a 'top down' approach by starting with a strong stable SL first full of Cat A clubs and then a trickle down to having a strong, stable Championship with Cat B clubs.

It wont be a completely closed shop, but ultimately if/when they reach this point it will be incredibly difficult for a Cat B club to gain entry into SL to join the Cat A clubs. That Cat B club is going to have to have a fairly wealthy backer in order for them to take that next step, and to essentially be a Cat A club in all but name, but I guess that what IMG want, a SL full of financially strong clubs.

 

On 07/10/2022 at 12:11, Roughyed Rats said:

Agree completely - to all intents and purposes a closed shop. 

Yes that sums it up Roughyed, can't help but feel that with Toppy's post that the "Carrot is going to dangled that far away from the Donkey" that they will just bend down and eat the grass instead, we all know what happened to the Championship in the licensed years, I will predict that the Championship will hit new lows if these proposals go through.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Davo5 said:

Or under the IMG proposal’s teams won’t have to fill their teams with NRL castoffs & can divert that money to building a sustainable club suitable for entry into Superleague in a competitive Championship.

Surely you don't mean like Wigan Warriors this season gone with Bevan French, Jai Field, Willie Isa, Cade Cust, Abbas Miski, Kaide Ellis, and Patrick Mago, Oh and nearly forgot Tommy Leulia excempt from the quota's this year making 8 NRL cast offs in total

[Davo5]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Surely you don't mean like Wigan Warriors this season gone with Bevan French, Jai Field, Willie Isa, Cade Cust, Abbas Miski, Kaide Ellis, and Patrick Mago, Oh and nearly forgot Tommy Leulia excempt from the quota's this year making 8 NRL cast offs in total

Yeah the ones on multi year contracts that augment the large number of club produced  English players.

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, Davo5 said:

Yeah the ones on multi year contracts that augment the large number of club produced  English players.

Double standards Dav, as usual

[Davo5]

10 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Double standards Dav, as usual

Oh that’s ironic coming from you.

[GUBRATS]

30 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Yeah the ones on multi year contracts that augment the large number of club produced Leigh community club players.

Edited for your benefit 

[Davo5]

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Edited for your benefit 

You mean edited incorrectly for your own benefit.

[Saint Toppy]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

 

Yes that sums it up Roughyed, can't help but feel that with Toppy's post that the "Carrot is going to dangled that far away from the Donkey" that they will just bend down and eat the grass instead, we all know what happened to the Championship in the licensed years, I will predict that the Championship will hit new lows if these proposals go through.

Herin lies the crux of so many peoples argument. To stick with your analogy - do they place the carrot in a place that large numbers of clubs can get at and in which case we see little or no improvements and we just continue as we are now with poor levels of sponsorships, TV deal etc. and clubs in a perilous position. Or do they move the carrot far enough away that the number of clubs able to reach it is relatively low, but those clubs are much stronger & stable and thus a more sellable proposition to sponsors & TV companies  ?

Ultimately the improvements have to come from the clubs themselves if the game as a whole is to grow and improve but the levels set for the improvement need to be realistic and achievable such that it doesn't completely destroy the lower tier clubs. Some clubs are just never going to be anywhere a Cat A licence or even a strong Cat B with a chance at being in SL, thats just a fact. While fans and even directors of these clubs probably still dream of seeing their club in SL one day moving to a licensing system will be a harsh dose of reality.

This then brings us all the way back to this original thread and Beaumont's statement about winning trophies. They may get lucky in the cup one year and find themselves getting easy draws all the way to a final and may even turn a team over in the final and win the CC - unlikely but entirely possible. But as for winning SL in the next 5 years - come on Derek even you must realize how far-fetched that one is !!

[GUBRATS]

On 04/10/2022 at 13:48, JohnM said:

Grrrrrrrrrreat to have him speaking up like this. Fans will love it. All good.

Please remember, though, that Beaumont used to sell double glazing.

Where do you think Gary Hetherington made his money ?

[JohnM]

7 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Where do you think Gary Hetherington made his money ?

Same ethical business. Does that help you?

[Roughyed Rats]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

 

Yes that sums it up Roughyed, can't help but feel that with Toppy's post that the "Carrot is going to dangled that far away from the Donkey" that they will just bend down and eat the grass instead, we all know what happened to the Championship in the licensed years, I will predict that the Championship will hit new lows if these proposals go through.

SL crowds also reduced during the licensing years; mainly due to the amount of meaningless dead rubber games. I think there's a real danger of it being even worse this time because if I'm a Cat A club lower down the league, I've got nothing to gain by playing my strongest team in games that are meaningless. Does that enhance or deteriorate the product? Personally, I think it's a slippery slope.