NEW TIMES NEED NEW RECIPES
League structure, expansion, time of the year, loan scheme and dual-registration.
These and many other Rugby League matters have been discussed on these Mailbag pages, with each writer offering different opinions, Which guarantees that not everybody will agree with the proposals IMG announce, and that this Mailbag will be full of letters covering sections not liked by readers.
‘Reimagining of Rugby League’ can be translated as rebranding our game to encourage more people to attend matches.
And at this point I bring your attention to cricket.
The one-day game took many forms, each one identified by the name of its sponsor (not good when the Government banned tobacco advertising in sport).
Then, a few years ago, the ‘after-work game (of 20 overs) was brought into the professional game as 20/20, (now T20), and crowds started to flock to the grounds.
It proved so popular that a second game was introduced called ‘The Hundred’.
Neither of the two new forms has been liked by traditionalists, but they have saved the professional game of cricket.
And the rebranding has been so successful that, if you mention ‘T20’ or ‘The Hundred’ in a pub, everyone will immediately know you are talking about one-day cricket.
Can IMG do a similar rebrand on Rugby League?
Or more to the point, will the fans give it a chance?
Colin Harris, Warwick
POSTIVE FUTURE
I believe the IMG proposals published so far have almost achieved the impossible.
They seem to offer positive incentives for all clubs as well as addressing the central issue of player welfare.
As such, I hope the recommendations will be unanimously accepted and that clubs will relish the various challenges presented to them for the greater good of the game.
If so, Rugby League may at long last have a future to look forward to that ‘the greatest game’ so thoroughly deserves.
Steven Maxwell, Atherton
IMG WILL FAIL THE GAME
The IMG proposals will not expand our game, they will restrict it and reduce audiences further.
They should have made everything simple and fair, but instead they have done the absolute opposite.
There are pros and cons for franchises or promotion and relegation. Maybe the team looking for promotion should have to not only win the league below, but fulfil certain criteria – funding, attendances, stadium, youth policy and so on.
But having a half-and-half approach each year just leads to unfairness and uncertainty. Maybe IMG should consider what has just been done to the UK economy because of uncertainty – it never leads to investment or growth!
Having category A and B clubs will just ensure that the big teams, who are only self-centred in their opinions and don’t care about the game as a whole, are protected.
This will make the big teams even stronger – they can plan long term and sign players with guaranteed Super League status.
Do IMG not realise that the Super League has only ever been won by four teams? This structure won’t help this. Fans want to see their team in with a chance, otherwise interest and attendances will reduce.
Their proposals will just ensure that Rugby League is confined to a handful of category A teams along the M62 corridor. Why not go the whole way and just have a Super League with the six big teams in it?
Why is driving up attendances for the Challenge Cup a key objective? It’s a one-off game that is attended well.
Why get rid of the Magic Weekend? The fans love it, and the attendance across two days is good. Why make the sixth round of the Challenge Cup being two legs decided on aggregate? Who wants to see a Super League team run up a cricket score against a non-Super League team twice?
IMG should have concentrated on a proper long-term strategy rather than a few shallow glitzy marketing ideas.
Richard Speight, Sheffield
PLEA FOR A NO VOTE
I thought IMG were supposed to make proposals to improve the game.
The categories don’t necessarily benefit good teams. Warrington have been poor this season but will almost certainly be category A. Salford have been good but will almost certainly be category B.
Batley have been good this season, but under this new system they haven’t a chance of ever getting into Super League.
Other great clubs such as: Barrow, Oldham, Swinton, Keighley, Hunslet and Dewsbury are consigned to playing in a lower league for many years, without any hope of playing Super League.
I plead with all the club Chairmen at Championship, League 1 and some Super League clubs to vote against these proposals. This is not the way forward.
Brian Shaw, Salford
THE ROAD TO FRANCHISES
After reading IMG’s initial proposals for the future of Rugby League, it has only confirmed my belief that these suits are not the saviours of Rugby League in the heartlands, but instead they are a Trojan Horse for mergers and licensing.
They dangle a carrot with a very long stick. But the only clubs in the current set up that have a future in the top tier with IMG’s proposals are Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Hull, London and Newcastle.
Saints may even be merged with Warrington and Widnes to form a Merseyside club.
During the next twelve years I should imagine these clubs will have been joined by franchises in Manchester, Dublin, Swansea or Cardiff, Edinburgh or Glasgow and maybe a team from the Midlands. The heartland clubs will be the feeder clubs for the big-city clubs.
It will be implemented stealthily over the twelve-year period so supporters will be fooled into believing their small-town club steeped in the history of Rugby League has a chance. But with licensing they have no chance.
Whether IMG can create enough interest for franchised clubs outside the heartlands remains to be seen, but with their expertise, experience and, I should imagine, a very healthy advertising budget, I expect they will do a lot better than previous attempts. I imagine IMG may implement the same model in France, hence the proposal for a cap on two French teams.
IMG have taken this project on to make a large profit. They are hard-headed business people, not Rugby League sentimentalists.
I can see their vision and although I have grave concerns for the heartland clubs, maybe it is the only way to move forward for the game to survive. After all Manchester v Edinburgh, Wigan v Dublin, London v Cardiff offer more appeal to TV companies than Featherstone v Dewsbury. Only time will tell.
As for me, I will probably have moved on to that big Rugby League club in the sky (no pun intended) during this twelve-year period, but I will be looking down with interest.
Graham Unsworth, Oldham
NO INEQUALITY, PLEASE
How is it right that some Super League clubs cannot be relegated?
Why protect the bigger clubs? How does this help the smaller clubs grow?
No promotion and relegation means meaningless matches.
How will we attract people to a sport that doesn’t reward skill, talent and effort?
There is enough inequality in this country without Rugby League adding to it
Kathy Stacey, Worsley
KEEP THE MAGIC WEEKEND
It looks like the Magic Weekend will be axed in 2024.
But why, when it’s one of the best ideas the RFL has ever had?
It’s time for a great weekend when it comes around and Newcastle sure is the best place for it.
We also travel to Kingston Park to watch Newcastle Thunder on the Friday night, which is a great start to the Magic Weekend.
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot! Well the RFL surely have done again. But I am only an OAP in his 70s who pays good money to watch our great game. Maybe we do not count as true supporters.
Richard Hine, Workington
SHOUT FROM THE ROOFTOPS
I agree with the sentiments in John Walker’s Mailbag letter in League Express on Monday 19th September.
What are the RFL doing to boost attendances at Rugby League games? Nothing obvious that is increasing the fan base!
Gates are falling year on year and the governing body don’t seem to be doing anything to stop the rot. The RFL needs to provide marketing support to Rugby League clubs both at a local level (specifically in the heartland of Rugby League) and to promote the sport nationally. Once people start watching the game, they love it. It is really entertaining but people don’t know about it.
Here in York, the Knights have had successive good seasons both in the men’s and women’s games. But where have we heard about it? Just In the local press and the Rugby League papers, with nothing in the national media to speak of. The only promotion of the local team, apart from the local paper, is on one bus, which is highly visible, but in one area of the city only.
Why not have more? No doubt this is down to the cost, but the small local clubs don’t have the income from gates or sponsorship to afford it.
Why can’t the RFL do more to promote the sport?
After the fantastic Grand Final last weekend, where was the result on the national news at 10.00pm? Nowhere! Extraordinary! Our organisation should be protesting about this.
Now the World Cup is coming up and it’s a great opportunity to work with local clubs to encourage their fans to go to the games. So come on RFL, wake up and do something loud and visible to promote this great game.
Helen Burrows, York
HIGH PRICES
Having read that the opening game of the World Cup is at Newcastle against Samoa, I thought I would look at the pricing structure with a view to going along.
I do like some comfort these days, so I looked for the best tickets.
But to say I was taken aback at the prices for these tickets was an understatement. £200 for a padded seat with access to the executive lounge I thought was rather steep until I read on and realised that not only do you get a free programme but also a free pie and pint before the match and at half time.
I can see a top London show for £80; I can fly to Majorca and back for less than £200; I have booked to go to the Dublin Festival at Leopardstown with amazing food and hospitality for £140.
The next ticket down is £150, but I’m not sure if you receive a pie and a pint.
I hope it’s a great occasion and all the best seats are full, but I fear not.
Anthony Kelvin, Leeds
RULES ARE MADE TO BE BROKEN?
Roll on the Rugby League World Cup!
Having been treated to two excellent Grand Finals at home and then in Australia, we can all now look forward to the very best entertainment at the top of international Rugby League.
It will be fascinating to see how the match officials interpret the play-the-ball rule throughout the tournament, having witnessed in the two Grand Finals a stark contrast between the Antipodeans and the home nations when playing the ball.
Australia and New Zealand have cleaned up their act and predominantly the players propel the ball backwards with the foot as is the rule, or they are rightly penalised.
Will we see this fundamental rule properly adjudicated in this country after the World Cup and an end to a lazy and unprofessional practice which discredits our sport?
Alternatively, as one Sky Sports pundit remarked recently, it is not an issue, so let’s just go with the flow.
Simon Foster, Beverley
TIME TO DISCARD EDDIE WARING LEGACY
It should come as no surprise that, overall, the St Helens’ Super League Grand Final victory received a low media profile.
Sky Sports TV did not help, by providing experts with Wigan and Leeds connections. BBC Sport is Salford media focused, so ‘Mancs’ get top profile. And ITV’s coverage of the sport is non-existent, apart from Channel 4 making some effort to produce a balanced view.
Not being an establishment sport like Rugby Union or Cricket, Rugby League has never, to any great degree, attracted the attention of the national media, which is obsessed with the Premier League.
We must hope that the BBC’s coverage of our World Cup will deliver an opportunity to lift the game’s profile.
Eddie Waring laid down the poison that led Southerners to deride Rugby League. This needs to change.
Roger Green, Liverpool
SAY NO TO CENSORSHIP
I think you were justified in printing the letter from Mick Calvert (Mailbag, 19 September) and some of the responses have been verging on the hysterical, targeting both Mr Calvert and the paper itself.
Rugby League is not an island and politics comes into virtually everything in this country, including the role of the monarchy. Many people at the time seemed to think having Prince Harry involved in the sport was a good thing, but now many think he and his wife are pariahs. Nonsense, I believe, but surely can be discussed.
Mr Calvert pointed out that in the 70 years Queen Elizabeth reigned there had been little progress in certain areas.
If you look at many Rugby League communities there will be greater demand for food banks and disgracefully, in one of the world’s richest countries, rising child poverty.
Are we as a Rugby League community not supposed to discuss such issues in a Rugby League paper?
Consistently we talk of the Rugby League community and how they help their local areas in many ways, including helping those struggling, and I applaud this. It is also correct to point out the huge discrepancies in this country between those at the top and those less well off, many of whom live in strong Rugby League areas.
I trust this paper will continue to print letters from all perspectives and not be put off by attempts of censorship in all but name.
David Wilkinson, Delamere, Cheshire
RUGBY LEAGUE AND POLITICS
I thank everyone for their support for my letter on the monarchy, published in the Mailbag of 19th September letters page.
However, I feel the need to remind everyone that League Express is a paper for Rugby League supporters, so please do try and keep politics out of it in future.
Mick Calvert, Holmfirth
THE GREATEST
Although I am a huge Saints fan, I was amazed that Morgan Knowles escaped a two-match ban.
Whether his action warranted two matches Is another matter. It is interesting that several other coaches thought it wasn’t a dangerous tackle at all.
That is open to debate, but Knowles is certainly not a dirty player.
So was this the greatest Saints side I have seen? Having watched Murphy, Van Vollenhoven, Karalius et al, I have to say no.
It is, however, the greatest side today in the true sense of the word.
It is far greater than the great Wigan sides of the 90s, with no salary cap and fully professional players paid extortionate amounts of money, which eventually cost them their Central Park ground.
Mr J Compton, Bolton
LUCKY LAD
There was I, a Rhinos supporter for seventy years, looking forward to the Grand Final.
Then what happened? The panel, the jury … need I proceed?
What could have been a humdinger of a game was more likely to descend into a spiteful bear-pit of ill-feeling.
I don’t need to spell it out. Morgan Knowles is a very lucky lad and the Rugby League disciplinary system is way past credibility.
Good luck to the World Cup.
Kay Blowes, Leeds
NO DANGER
Did Morgan Knowles really make a chicken-wing tackle?
I think players who have been victims of chicken-wing tackles in the past would disagree.
As Martyn Sadler put it in his column last week, “supporters of other clubs are envious of Saints’ success” and it’s probably because of this they see what they want to see.
Rhyse Martin’s tip tackle on Jonny Lomax, on the other hand, was reckless and dangerous. Fortunately for Lomax, he didn’t end up seriously hurt.
Comparing the two tackles, the Martin one could have had far worse consequences.
Finally, what a heart-warming letter from Caroline Mitchell in last week’s Mailbag. I wish the world was full of more people like her husband David. A man always willing to go the extra mile to help anyone.
Darren Bridge, Wigan
DEVILISH DEVILS
Good to see League Express keeping alive that byword of the British press: ‘Never let the truth get in the way of a story’.
I refer to the Saints v Salford semi-final.
Your pages were full of letters saying Salford were denied a penalty try, with the inference being that Saints cheated their way to victory.
How convenient that no one mentioned Marc Sneyd’s foul on Batchelor, which prevented him scoring.
As Joe was running to the ball, Sneyd deliberately grabbed his arm, and, although Joe did manage to break free, it slowed his momentum and he was fractionally late touching the ball, which had just touched the line.
Without that interference from Sneyd, Joe would have got to the ball and scored, so Saints were clearly robbed.
The result? No card for Sneyd, no penalty-try for Saints, but of course, no mention of that.
So let’s have both sides of the coin.
All the talk was of Salford missing Croft, while we were without Dodd, Grace and Walmsley, and Percival was back from a four-month injury.
Saints’ detractors should pipe down, and come back when they have won the Super League title four times in a row.
Norman Brignall, Prescott
ALWAYS HALF EMPTY FOR SOME
Why are League Express readers so negative?
They seem to keep the chips on their shoulders ready to offload at any moment in some petulant rant or childlike tantrum.
Last week we had Saints supporters whinging that commentators are biased against them, and Leeds fans saying the disciplinary process was unfair to their team. Such unnecessary denigrating of our game encourages a victim mentality.
It must also make John Dutton’s efforts to make the World Cup a success even harder.
Adrian Barber, Sheffield
WHO ARE THE CHAMPIONS?
Congratulations of Ian Gourlay of Hamilton from last week’s Mailbag as the winner of the hotly contested perennial prize for the first letter in questioning the legitimacy of the winners of the Grand Final being crowned champions (maybe he is a St Helens fan, getting his excuses in early last week, just in case).
For the benefit of Mr Gourlay and many others, let’s look at some basic facts based on Rugby League’s forerunner to the Grand Final, the Championship Finals contested between 1906-07 and 1972-73 seasons, as the way the champions have been crowned in Rugby League, with the data coming from the excellent ‘Grand Final’ book written by Graham Morris and released a few years ago.
Excluding replays and wartime league competitions, there were 55 Championship Finals contested during that period.
During that time, less than half of those Championship Finals (26 in total) were won by the team that finished top of the regular league that season. Second-placed Hunslet became the first team to be crowned Champions, in only the second Championship Final of 1908, who had not topped the league table that season.
One-fifth of all those 55 finals (eleven in total) weren’t even contested by the teams finishing first or second in their respective leagues that season.
There have been many different formats used to decide the two teams in the Championship Final, but it was usually a top-four play-off in the early days. Hull KR were the first team to win a Championship Final at the end of the 1922 – 23 season, who had finished a mere 4th in the League.
Halifax were the lowest ranked team to appear in a Championship Final in 1966, after finishing the season tenth in the regular league table and of course, who can forget eighth placed Dewsbury’s title in 1973, beating a Leeds side whom themselves had only finished third in the League that season.
Finally, it might be worth looking at the record of St Helens in Championship Finals.
They contested six finals in the period between 1907 to 1973. On three occasions: 1953, 1959 and 1966, they won the Championship Final after finishing top of the regular league in those seasons.
But what about 1932 (their first Championship) along with 1970 and 1971? In those seasons, Saints merely finished second in the league twice and in 1970 they had the temerity to win the Championship Final after finishing a lowly third in the league that season.
Given Mr Gourlay’s stance on the legitimacy of Rugby League Champions, I’m sure the St Helens club (who have a long history of doing the right thing for the general benefit of the game) will do the decent thing, strike those wins from their Honours Board and hand them back to the Rugby Football League for redistribution to the teams that finished top of the respective leagues in those seasons.
As for his assertion about other sports using Leagues to decide champions, then I suggest he looks a little further than Association Football.
The NRL, Aussie Rules, most of the big American sports and event T-20 Cricket here uses a system other than a league table to decide its winners.
Perhaps the biggest endorsement of all is that Rugby Union has, in recent years, adopted a play-off system very similar to that of Rugby League to decide its Champions, so we must be on the right lines if they are copying us again.
With all the predictability of an unloved season, letters like Mr Gourlay’s come flooding in at the end of the season whenever the play-offs come around, but never in January or February as the new season is about to start.
Everyone knows the format at the beginning of the season, before a ball is kicked, as to how the Champions will be decided, so perhaps can we once-and-for-all drop the letters complaining about the Grand Final and how Rugby League’s Champions are decided. Our game’s history is on the side of the current format.
Iain Sharp, Driffield
WINLESS CHAMPS
Ian Gourlay is not unique in thinking that Rugby League is the only sport that selects its champions from outside of the top one.
Is he aware that a Premiership football team can not only win the European Championship from fourth position, but can achieve this without winning a game.
But we don’t see too many self-deprecating football fans queuing up to criticise their choice of sport.
As he says, “utterly ludicrous”.
Malcolm Bastow, Leeds
