SL clubs look to reinstate Nigel Wood.

[LeytherRob]

9 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Yes. I suspect they have two completely different destinations in mind and both believe they can string the other along until they get there.

An embarrassing day for rugby league, this. Still, at least the dinosaurs got their game back.

Based on what though? Everyone’s just placing whatever narrative suits their agenda on this whole situation. It’s been widely reported that clubs are fully on board with removing and the only point of contention seems to be Wood coming back for Wire and Wigan. 
 

Simon Johnson wasn’t even in a full time role - one of the main criticisms weeks ago was that the governing body should have a head who is full time committed to driving the sport forward. 

[northamptoncougar]

Wood reviewing the RFL is akin to Shipman reviewing your local GP Surgery.

[RigbyLuger]

4 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

Simon Johnson wasn’t even in a full time role - one of the main criticisms weeks ago was that the governing body should have a head who is full time committed to driving the sport forward. 

Isn't the CEO the head?

[The Daddy]

3 minutes ago, northamptoncougar said:

Wood reviewing the RFL is akin to Shipman reviewing your local GP Surgery.

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

Based on what though? Everyone’s just placing whatever narrative suits their agenda on this whole situation. It’s been widely reported that clubs are fully on board with removing and the only point of contention seems to be Wood coming back for Wire and Wigan. 
 

Simon Johnson wasn’t even in a full time role - one of the main criticisms weeks ago was that the governing body should have a head who is full time committed to driving the sport forward. 

Based on what I would perceive both clubs would want as an outcome. You're right that it is just conjecture.

I stand by it being a thoroughly embarrassing situation for the sport and all involved on the clubs side need their balls punted.

[LeytherRob]

5 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said:

Isn't the CEO the head?

I don’t know enough about the structures of the governing body to say either way, but if he wasn’t the head then wouldn’t it make his removal even less of a big deal?

[Worzel]

49 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

When it comes to an unthinking narrative, then I'm afraid you emulate the club you support in terms of your position on the league table.

I'm actually quite staggered that someone like you who claims substantial business experience can so naively support IMG's failing consultancy.

Their lack of transparency and lack of any significant achievement since they entered Rugby League almost three years ago is clear to anyone who cares to look.

Instead of making yourself look silly by gratuitously insulting me, I would welcome you pointing out precisely what IMG have done for the game that has improved it in any way, either on or off the field.

I don’t need to do that, I have two clear pieces of evidence:

1. The current leading indicators, in terms of both audience development and club investment activity driven by security of tenure. You think that came out of thin air?

2. The total failure of the previous models, over 2 decades.

I’m not an unthinking advocate, I’m a skeptical one. However you and the rest of the counter-revolutionaries are demonstrably unthinking opponents, and have been since the very start.

The fact that some clubs saw IMG as a silver bullet, of they type they’ve always ridiculously looked for, rather than a platform FOR THEM to do what they needed to do is precisely the problem here. Then, like you, they blame the outsider for not having a silver bullet after all. News just in: There is not silver bullet. All there is is a need for consistent effort at a succession of small things, things that IMG clearly laid out for them.

I will not enjoy later saying “I told you so”, but I promise I will later come back here to this discussion and do so. See you then. 

[Dave T]

I'm looking forward to Callum Walker's top 5 RL breakaways/oustings:

1. SLE's coup to banish Wood.

2. The original SLE breakaway in the 90s

3. NFP clubs breaking away from the SL deal

4. Elstone's humiliation

5. My favourite - Wood's revenge as he makes his heroic return as McManus, Elstone and Moran look on. 

Superb stuff.

[sweaty craiq]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

They voted for it. If they didn’t know about the costs don’t you think one of them might have mentioned it?

You have just asked my question!

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, RigbyLuger said:

Isn't the CEO the head?

He was Chairman. 

https://www.rugby-league.com/governance/about-the-rfl/board

Edited March 12 by JohnM

[sweaty craiq]

1 hour ago, RigbyLuger said:

For one, IMG have incentivised clubs to improve their output on social media, which has been awful for years. Creating content that may result in more eyes on the sport.

Aka #### Adams 

[LeytherRob]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I'm looking forward to Callum Walker's top 5 RL breakaways/oustings:

1. SLE's coup to banish Wood.

2. The original SLE breakaway in the 90s

3. NFP clubs breaking away from the SL deal

4. Elstone's humiliation

5. My favourite - Wood's revenge as he makes his heroic return as McManus, Elstone and Moran look on. 

Superb stuff.

[sweaty craiq]

30 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Touché on the Spelling point.

I’m calling it tin pot because it’s coming across as that, it’s not a sleight on either Batley or Leigh specifically.

You missed out in your opinion - to others it’s not, and others don’t know

[Chrispmartha]

7 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

You missed out in your opinion - to others it’s not, and others don’t know

Who else's opinion would I be posting?

 

Its kind of how a forum works.

[Exiled Wiganer]

The RFL failed to carry the members with them, and so the members are taking over. The clubs are the ones who see first hand who does what at the RFL and IMG. I am not sure there is much more to be said. It is an abject failure of a members’ organisation to reach this point.
 

If people are angry they should direct their ire on the RFL and IMG for not carrying people with them. 

I have no particular views on what should happen next, but, as the clubs are the ones who write the cheques which get the teams on the field, I would expect them to be laser focussed on increasing revenues.

[Exiled Wiganer]

36 minutes ago, Worzel said:

I don’t need to do that, I have two clear pieces of evidence:

1. The current leading indicators, in terms of both audience development and club investment activity driven by security of tenure. You think that came out of thin air?

2. The total failure of the previous models, over 2 decades.

I’m not an unthinking advocate, I’m a skeptical one. However you and the rest of the counter-revolutionaries are demonstrably unthinking opponents, and have been since the very start.

The fact that some clubs saw IMG as a silver bullet, of they type they’ve always ridiculously looked for, rather than a platform FOR THEM to do what they needed to do is precisely the problem here. Then, like you, they blame the outsider for not having a silver bullet after all. News just in: There is not silver bullet. All there is is a need for consistent effort at a succession of small things, things that IMG clearly laid out for them.

I will not enjoy later saying “I told you so”, but I promise I will later come back here to this discussion and do so. See you then. 

Maybe. It could be argued that the legend that is Alan Bates is by far the biggest reason behind HKR’s growth. 

[Josef K]

Who are the clubs/Directors in favour of Mr Wood returning back as the RFL CEO (or whatever his position is), and who are against it ?. 

[Archie Gordon]

7 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

The RFL failed to carry the members with them, and so the members are taking over. The clubs are the ones who see first hand who does what at the RFL and IMG. I am not sure there is much more to be said. It is an abject failure of a members’ organisation to reach this point.
 

If people are angry they should direct their ire on the RFL and IMG for not carrying people with them. 

I have no particular views on what should happen next, but, as the clubs are the ones who write the cheques which get the teams on the field, I would expect them to be laser focussed on increasing revenues.

Ok. But these same laser-focused folks voted all this through. And it's not the first time these laser-focused lads and lasses have set something up and then pulled it down. At this stage, I'm wondering if they are the problem.

[Exiled Wiganer]

2 minutes ago, Josef K said:

Who are the clubs/Directors in favour of Mr Wood returning back as the RFL CEO (or whatever his position is), and who are against it ?. 

I have no idea, but:

- we know that today’s meeting was cancelled and the resolutions (principally the new committee and Nigel becoming interim chairman) were passed by virtue of suffficient proxy votes; 

- I don’t know what majority is required, but if it is a simple majority then it could be achieved by all non SL clubs plus one SL club or all SL clubs plus one non SL club voting in favour (from what I have read of the weighting voting process); and 

- Beaumont’s statement suggested that ALL SL clubs were in favour of a root and branch review at the end of last year…

I know that isn’t an answer but hope it’s helpful. 

[RigbyLuger]

Just now, Exiled Wiganer said:

- Beaumont’s statement suggested that ALL SL clubs were in favour of a root and branch review at the end of last year…

And they haven't clearly spelled out why that's needed either, have they? Shocking communications.

[Exiled Wiganer]

4 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Ok. But these same laser-focused folks voted all this through. And it's not the first time these laser-focused lads and lasses have set something up and then pulled it down. At this stage, I'm wondering if they are the problem.

Indeed. I am neither optimistic nor pessimistic at this point. I look at the RFL/IMG Salford debacle and the club driven Vegas triumph and am not despondent about the prospect of people like Danson seizing the wheel. 

Edited March 12 by Exiled Wiganer

[Exiled Wiganer]

2 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said:

And they haven't clearly spelled out why that's needed either, have they? Shocking communications.

I am not particularly shocked that they haven’t made a case, beyond we can and want to take control. It’s par for the course. We seem to under perform when the clubs take control and we seem to under perform when they cede control. 

[Archie Gordon]

3 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

Indeed. I am neither optimistic nor pessimistic at this point. I look at the RFL/IMG Salford debacle and the club driven Vegas triumph and am not despondent about the prospect of people like Danson seizing the wheel. 

Fair.

I would just add that running a club and governing a sport are worlds apart.

Edited March 12 by Archie Gordon

[Treizistance]

Up until a time that RL here isn't run as a tinpot, luddite chumocracy, with their sycophantic cheerleaders in the press not holding the blazerati to account, I'll continue spending my leisure money and time on WatchNRL instead, a serious competition which has a feel good factor about it as it grows from strength to strength.

Rugby League. The greatest game. The worst administrators (in the northern hemisphere anyway).

[RayCee]

I read about the return of Nigel Wood at the BBC and came here for some understanding of its significance. I have read through posts (quickly) but still don't understand what it's going to achieve. Perhaps I'm not sufficiently au fait with the politics of RL in the UK. 

It seems this is about some clubs wanting a return to the way things were prior to IMG's involvement and they have now got the power to achieve that through Nigel Wood's temporary appointment. Is that what I'm reading?