What needs to be done differently?

[Derwent]

In a nutshell we need to spend the limited income we have better. What that looks like is open to debate as it’ll be different things to different people. But ultimately the return on investment we currently get is absolutely awful by whatever metrics you use to measure it - financial, social, active engagement, communication etc. 

[RP London]

4 hours ago, Archie Gordon said:

Three women suggested. AI still has a lot to learn.

what do you mean?

[Click]

17 hours ago, sheddingswasus said:

The obsession with expansion at all cost yo the detriment of the heart of the game is the biggest issue in my opinion. 
Growth if done correctly becomes organic. Midlands Hurricanes is a good example. 

However as a sport we have continued to ignore the heart of the sport. The heart beat. Even the heartlands clubs have seemingly disenfranchised the community clubs. My club did sadly for over 20 years before the new owners got a grip of it.

i believe every pro club needs to be actively engaged with the community clubs and not just lip service. Provide coaching support, pro clubs training with the community players. This should be compulsory.

if we strengthen the game from the core, from its heart, the game will strengthen organically. If community players & clubs connect with the parent club, the game will build. Make clubs gave reserve teams to give players who missed cosies a more nature second chance. There are some really good players in the community game who with professional coaching and conditioning would make excellent pro players .

Surely it’s time to give ours lads a chance rather second rate overseas players.

To my original point strengthen the game at its core and hopefully the game can expand properly and not artificially 

 

The game has never had an obsession with expansion, I wish it did.

[Adelaide Tiger]

6 hours ago, Eddie said:

Isn’t that what they brought IMG in to do? 

Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough.  As I understand it IMG have been brought on board as consultants to the RFL.  Therefore they are not an Independent Board to govern the game.

I was referring to the Chairs of each club agreeing to bring in a totally Independent Board - with no club affiliations - to govern the game.  Therefore, the clubs WILL NOT have any power in deciding whether or not to accept some/all of the vision/strategy/actions put forward which appears to be happening with IMG proposals.

[Eddie]

2 hours ago, Click said:

The game has never had an obsession with expansion, I wish it did.

Am obsession with contraction would be more apt. The number of open goals missed by RL is extraordinary (south wales (Ebbw Vale etc), Toronto, Sheffield/Gateshead to name just four). 

Edited September 11 by Eddie

[17 stone giant]

8 hours ago, Eddie said:

If there was a better geographic spread of clubs it would help, as few people in Norwich for example, or Bristol or Plymouth or wherever are going to think to watch Leeds v Wigan, despite the quality of it, as they have no link with either of those places.

I agree, but how can it be changed? How are you going to make rugby league relevant to people in places where it currently is not?

[Derwent]

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

Am obsession with contraction would be more apt. The number of open goals missed by RL is extraordinary (south wales (Ebbw Vale etc), Toronto, Sheffield/Gateshead to name just four). 

The game has only once ever had the money available to fund a proper expansion strategy, and that was from the first Sky contract in 1995. We got £87m which was worth around £200m at today's money values. But the game just squandered it, with a lot of it going to pay "loyalty payments" to players to stop them joining the ARL and then of course player's wages multiplying by several factors. There were extremely average players pocketing large 6 figure sums simply for agreeing to stay in the British game. That was the game's one and only opportunity, to take a slice of that income and invest it in the future and they failed to do so. The opportunity has never presented itself again.

[Eddie]

43 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

I agree, but how can it be changed? How are you going to make rugby league relevant to people in places where it currently is not?

I’d say it’s nigh on impossible without a meaningful international game. 

[gingerjon]

16 minutes ago, Derwent said:

The game has only once ever had the money available to fund a proper expansion strategy, and that was from the first Sky contract in 1995. We got £87m which was worth around £200m at today's money values. But the game just squandered it, with a lot of it going to pay "loyalty payments" to players to stop them joining the ARL and then of course player's wages multiplying by several factors. There were extremely average players pocketing large 6 figure sums simply for agreeing to stay in the British game. That was the game's one and only opportunity, to take a slice of that income and invest it in the future and they failed to do so. The opportunity has never presented itself again.

The immediate decision to not support the South Wales club …

Others still get angry about Keighley. I still get angry about that.

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

23 hours ago, Eddie said:

You could have some good mergers, I’d start with Huddersfield and Sheffield, and probably Newcastle and Hull. 

Barrow and Carlisle would make more sense - only 2hrs travelling between them !

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

Just for fun, I also asked Chat GP about the RFL - response below:

why are the RFL so badly organised?

ChatGPT said:

The Rugby Football League (RFL), which governs rugby league in the UK, has faced criticism for being poorly organized for several reasons:

1. Financial Challenges: The RFL has struggled with securing consistent and significant revenue streams, especially in comparison to sports like football and rugby union. This financial instability has often led to issues with funding for grassroots development, club sustainability, and overall league promotion.

2. Poor Strategic Planning: Critics often point out that the RFL has lacked a clear, long-term strategic vision. This includes inconsistent policies, such as league restructuring and playoff systems, which confuse fans and destabilize the sport.

3. Marketing and Promotion: The RFL has been criticized for not effectively promoting rugby league. This includes not attracting major sponsors, failing to grow the fanbase, and not adequately leveraging media rights. The sport has often been overshadowed by rugby union and football, partly due to these marketing deficiencies.

4. Leadership and Governance Issues: There have been recurring complaints about leadership within the RFL, including a lack of transparency, poor communication with clubs and stakeholders, and a tendency to react rather than plan proactively. This has sometimes led to mistrust and tension between the RFL and the clubs it governs.

5. Geographical Limitations: Rugby league is predominantly a northern sport in England, and the RFL has struggled to expand its appeal beyond this traditional heartland. Efforts to grow the sport in other regions or internationally have often been met with limited success.

6. Disparity Between Clubs: The financial and structural disparity between top clubs and smaller clubs within the league has led to an uneven playing field. This has made it difficult to maintain competitive balance, which is crucial for keeping fans engaged.

These factors contribute to the perception that the RFL is poorly organized and struggling to keep up with the demands of modern professional sports.

[Click]

Just now, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

 

These factors contribute to the perception that the RFL is poorly organized and struggling to keep up with the demands of modern professional sports.

The perception that the RFL is poorly organised? 

[gingerjon]

45 minutes ago, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

Barrow and Carlisle would make more sense - only 2hrs travelling between them !

Oh, yes. Another great one there.

[Harry Stottle]

19 hours ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

Not enough people with money like rugby league.

 

And therein lies the crux of the problem, look at the majority of the owners of our clubs, in the main it's the "Local Lad done Good" who in his former years was one of the kids who stood on the terraces and has an intrinsic connection with the club. 

Rugby League is an organic product, it needs to be rooted in areas where people have grown up with it for it to be appreciated in enough numbers for it to grow and prosper, there have been enough examples in the UK over the years to justify this as being a fact, it has been taken to cities like Nottingham, Cardiff, Coventry, Carlisle all no more and can we really say it's working in London (albeit it has existed for 40odd years) and Newcastle after a couple of reincarnations including Gateshead?

You would really think that after 129 years of Rugby League's existence that the message would get through, that we are what we are, a regional sport and that if all the efforts to increase it are channelled into where it is best appreciated it can be built up to be bigger and better.

If we were ever going to expand it should have happened years ago, today there are just to many other attractions and distractions competing with our sport for punters time and money, and in those big cities that some insisting on targeting there is usually the behemoth that is football that grabs most people's attention, look at Leeds which houses one of our premier most successful Rugby League clubs and a founder member of the Rugby League, it can't hold a candle in popularity to the average Association Football club that the city also has.

Now I realise that I am going to be called a flat cap whippet walker for even thinking and suggesting as such, but it is my opinion and in that I would concentrate on making Rugby League the best it can be right here in the heartlands before another 'expansion' project goes belly up.

[JM2010]

51 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

And therein lies the crux of the problem, look at the majority of the owners of our clubs, in the main it's the "Local Lad done Good" who in his former years was one of the kids who stood on the terraces and has an intrinsic connection with the club. 

Rugby League is an organic product, it needs to be rooted in areas where people have grown up with it for it to be appreciated in enough numbers for it to grow and prosper, there have been enough examples in the UK over the years to justify this as being a fact, it has been taken to cities like Nottingham, Cardiff, Coventry, Carlisle all no more and can we really say it's working in London (albeit it has existed for 40odd years) and Newcastle after a couple of reincarnations including Gateshead?

You would really think that after 129 years of Rugby League's existence that the message would get through, that we are what we are, a regional sport and that if all the efforts to increase it are channelled into where it is best appreciated it can be built up to be bigger and better.

If we were ever going to expand it should have happened years ago, today there are just to many other attractions and distractions competing with our sport for punters time and money, and in those big cities that some insisting on targeting there is usually the behemoth that is football that grabs most people's attention, look at Leeds which houses one of our premier most successful Rugby League clubs and a founder member of the Rugby League, it can't hold a candle in popularity to the average Association Football club that the city also has.

Now I realise that I am going to be called a flat cap whippet walker for even thinking and suggesting as such, but it is my opinion and in that I would concentrate on making Rugby League the best it can be right here in the heartlands before another 'expansion' project goes belly up.

I kind of agree with you. We shouldn’t run before we can walk. Let’s increase spectators, players and media coverage as much as possible in the towns, cities and surrounding areas where we are already quite strong. (Including Sheffield and Manchester) That’s still a big population to aim at. Add in a strong international game and that gives a strong base to attract sponsors and TV. Maybe then we can have a proper go at expansion 

[Click]

16 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

And therein lies the crux of the problem, look at the majority of the owners of our clubs, in the main it's the "Local Lad done Good" who in his former years was one of the kids who stood on the terraces and has an intrinsic connection with the club. 

Rugby League is an organic product, it needs to be rooted in areas where people have grown up with it for it to be appreciated in enough numbers for it to grow and prosper, there have been enough examples in the UK over the years to justify this as being a fact, it has been taken to cities like Nottingham, Cardiff, Coventry, Carlisle all no more and can we really say it's working in London (albeit it has existed for 40odd years) and Newcastle after a couple of reincarnations including Gateshead?

You would really think that after 129 years of Rugby League's existence that the message would get through, that we are what we are, a regional sport and that if all the efforts to increase it are channelled into where it is best appreciated it can be built up to be bigger and better.

If we were ever going to expand it should have happened years ago, today there are just to many other attractions and distractions competing with our sport for punters time and money, and in those big cities that some insisting on targeting there is usually the behemoth that is football that grabs most people's attention, look at Leeds which houses one of our premier most successful Rugby League clubs and a founder member of the Rugby League, it can't hold a candle in popularity to the average Association Football club that the city also has.

Now I realise that I am going to be called a flat cap whippet walker for even thinking and suggesting as such, but it is my opinion and in that I would concentrate on making Rugby League the best it can be right here in the heartlands before another 'expansion' project goes belly up.

Glad we have got back to the whole "if you aren't born in it, then you just won't get it" attitude.

I don't understand how you can enjoy/love our sport but at the same time say that other people just won't get it/like it. 

"The Greatest Game" - But only if you're born into it. 

[Click]

15 hours ago, JM2010 said:

I kind of agree with you. We shouldn’t run before we can walk. Let’s increase spectators, players and media coverage as much as possible in the towns, cities and surrounding areas where we are already quite strong. (Including Sheffield and Manchester) That’s still a big population to aim at. Add in a strong international game and that gives a strong base to attract sponsors and TV. Maybe then we can have a proper go at expansion 

What are you suggesting we do differently to what we have done for the last 120 + years ? 

[gingerjon]

15 hours ago, JM2010 said:

I kind of agree with you. We shouldn’t run before we can walk. Let’s increase spectators, players and media coverage as much as possible in the towns, cities and surrounding areas where we are already quite strong. (Including Sheffield and Manchester) That’s still a big population to aim at. Add in a strong international game and that gives a strong base to attract sponsors and TV. Maybe then we can have a proper go at expansion 

It's not an either/or.

And, even if it were, we slashed support for development outside the heartlands to prioritise development inside them about 10 or so years ago.

If things are going backwards or not developing, it's not because money/resources/time/focus is going elsewhere. It's because those things either don't exist or are being applied incorrectly.

[Archie Gordon]

21 hours ago, RP London said:

what do you mean?

RL in England is a Northern man's game. We appointed an outsider to the top job once but won't repeat that mistake again. Women certainly need not apply. The I bit of AI might have known that these are the constraints when suggesting candidates.

[bobbruce]

26 minutes ago, Click said:

Glad we have got back to the whole "if you aren't born in it, then you just won't get it" attitude.

I don't understand how you can enjoy/love our sport but at the same time say that other people just won't get it/like it. 

"The Greatest Game" - But only if you're born into it. 

Also when you think that the answer isn’t to just give up surely it’s to expose more people at a younger age to the game. 

[RP London]

28 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

RL in England is a Northern man's game. We appointed an outsider to the top job once but won't repeat that mistake again. Women certainly need not apply. The I bit of AI might have known that these are the constraints when suggesting candidates.

I am going to and assume that is your view of the RFL and its procedures rather than your personal view.. but correct me if I am wrong.

The outsider was arguably one of the most successful we have had and if we could get half the success that Liz Nichols, Sue Campbell and Fran Connelly have had in their respective sports then we would be in a much better place than we are now. We need the best person for the job no matter their sex, race, colour, creed, nationality or whether they are southern or northern..

AI was suggesting who was best to do it not who is likely to be hired by the insular RFL who only look at their own navels when looking at who to appoint. 

 

 

[JonM]

2 hours ago, Archie Gordon said:

RL in England is a Northern man's game. We appointed an outsider to the top job once but won't repeat that mistake again. 

Twice I reckon (Richard Lewis and David Oxley). Arguably Bill Fallowfield was an outsider as an ex- England RU international, ex- RAF Officer and Cambridge Graduate, even if he was a Northern man. We have had a privately educated, former president of the Cambridge Union lesbian from Hampshire as RFL president too. 

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Click said:

Glad we have got back to the whole "if you aren't born in it, then you just won't get it" attitude.

I don't understand how you can enjoy/love our sport but at the same time say that other people just won't get it/like it. 

"The Greatest Game" - But only if you're born into it. 

Those are your words not mine Click, yes people like yourself do enjoy the sport but not in the numbers that are enough to support a club away from the heartlands, please contradict what I say with facts not just an opinion.

[Human Punk]

Other than a massive injection of cash from TV, there's no easy answer. SL was a much easier sell when the money was there to attract top players from the NRL. The product was just so much better. It's difficult to attract new viewers when the standard of entertainment on display is as low as it currently is.

Without any extra money the only way to improve the quality, and thus attract more viewers, is to try to expand and develop the home-grown player pool, but with less interest in the game as a whole from the public in general that's a very difficult ask. It's a vicious circle we find ourselves in.

Maybe we could go back to Sky and say "give is loads of cash again, and we promise we'll use it better this time". It's in their interest that RL is a sport that's worth broadcasting after all.

[JonM]

4 minutes ago, Human Punk said:

Other than a massive injection of cash from TV, there's no easy answer. SL was a much easier sell when the money was there to attract top players from the NRL. The product was just so much better. It's difficult to attract new viewers when the standard of entertainment on display is as low as it currently is.

Crowds in sixth and seventh tier football seem to hold up pretty well, with sport at a standard considerably lower than what people can watch on a screen. That suggests to me that the problem is largely not related to what happens on the pitch.