Ian Lenighan has just been interviewed on radio Manchester claiming he has at least a 10-2 majority for his masterplan of one up one down with no middle 8's,and is blaming Leeds together with a West Yorkshire mafia for stirring up a media backlash against this blueprint (I assume this to mean Fax, Fev.etc.). His rationale for this is that the current structure means SUperleague clubs cannot plan a full fixture list for the season, and means that a third of superleague are in danger of being relegated. Furthermore, he believes fans want to see soperleague games throughout the season rather than some having to play championship sides at the end of the season. This conveniently ignores the fact that some of the middle 8?games have provided some of the most exciting games of the last 3 seasons.

he's a money grabbing selfish bstard who's only interested in his club and doesn't give a toss about lower league clubs.perhaps if his own club made a profit occasionally he may be happier

Whatever he thinks is irrellevant whilst the current legally binding agreement exsists. An agreement he & the majority of SL agreed.

This is the most galling thing of all. Lenagan spouting off about other clubs when his own club, which probably has the best brand in a market which is very pro-RL loses money hand over fist, seems to have a terrible off-field culture and has trouble keeping hold of fans, players and sponsors. It's a case study in poor management but you can see why he wants to get his hands on that Championship money.

The problem is clubs do not know their fixtures for the S8's (three or four home games) so they can't start selling hospitality until they do which is a commercial disaster and fans can't plan holidays given when they are so gates drop and the rationale for having a season ticket is less so another revenue hit . The middle 8 might generate interest for championship teams but the crowds for the S8's are rubbish and the revenue is nothing like it would be if the fixture list was nailed down at the start of the season. S8's mean you can also end up playing the same team I think it's five times in the season if you play your magic weekend opponent and get them in the cup. Stupid. I think the relegation issue is red herring and unless a SL side is decimated by injury it's only going to be the bottom side who has an issue. That said if a SL side is decimated by injury and gets relegated as a result that proves nothing and IMO you can bet your house on the promoted side going right back down again.

Talking of red herrings, this is going to be exactly the same under Lenagan's plan.

Is that the lower league clubs who are fielding 14 and 15 men in games, at a time when they’re getting a bigger slice of the games income then clubs at that level have ever been given?! Is it any wonder he along with at least 9 other club owners/chairmen are unhappy.

The game in this country isn’t big enough to spread it’s income around a whole mass of clubs. If the new plans push a few clubs with park field facilities and sub 1,000 average attendances in to the amateur ranks then so be it. It’s time for clubs with ambition to be rewarded and for the game to make some tough calls before we’re all watching a semi pro sport at the top level.

I'm with Nicky on this. The points made about fixture list uncertainty etc are completely valid, however much you might like them not to be.

If the sport starts letting Championship clubs make decisions on the best way forward at the top end, the only outcome will be a semi pro sport down the track. Again, like it or not but not all clubs, even within SL, are equal. Whilst quite a few fans seemingly found the demise of the Bulls funny, its been a huge commercial negative for the sport as a whole. What we need is to find ways to grow the revenues to the sport at the top end.

Like most people I'm open to a change in the structure (although Hetherington is very wed to the current one, a replacement which still included P&R would be fine). But the money side is pathetic. The money given to Championship clubs is a drop in the ocean for SL clubs. People like Lenagan shouldn't be trying to grab a bit of that back, they should actually try and grow their own clubs and their own revenues. Wigan are the most egregious example of a loss-making club with declining attendances and falling revenues that the bile coming from their chairman lecturing the RFL and other clubs about how to run the game properly is embarrassing.

The fact that is all you seemingly took from my post is a bit bizarre but given I am not sure he's proposed how many fixtures there will be without the S8's I am not sure what you are saying anyway.

He's not suggested removing the funding from Championship clubs. He is saying the current structure (S8's) is detrimental to SL clubs revenues. Other chairmen agree with him and so do I. I am no Lenagan apologist by the way and am regularly slagged off for questioning his approach on various issues and I don't think moving away from the S8's is going to magically change Wigan's financial fortunes on it's own. It is a step in the right direction though and not just for Wigan.

Agreed. You're trying to sell corporate boxes and with almost no notice you might change from playing Wigan and Sts home to Featherstone and Batley. Even if you're guaranteed a place in the Super 8s you won't know your fixtures until the final games are played, affecting how many home games you have, and who they are against.

Who has appointed Leneghan as the 'leader of the pack'?. Why are the clubs allowing one individual to dictate the future of the sport. A chairman that has seen his club go backwards during his ownership tenure. Just seems odd.
The RFL needs step up and appoint a CEO and start giving the sport some direction top to bottom.

Do you really think IL has taken Wigan backwards . The first team has been going through a rough spell in the last 18 months for varrious reasons but overall the club is in better shape than most .

Wigan run a full range of age grade teams thru to under 19's . Field a reserve team (which most dont and should be mandatory IMO). Wigan have had several u19 and reserve games cancelled recently because other clubs cant raise a team that is a sad situation. Sevelal Superleague teams recently have had to loan in championship players just to make up their first team squad.

Wigans academy structure is second to none in the UK and the envy of most if not all

Run 2 womens teams

About to spend £5m on a training facility adjacent to the DW which if i am correct will involve and include comunity access.

Wigan loose money some years and make a profit others (Rogues is the man to confirm / rubish this) but all in all we are in a reasonably healthy state compared to most.

As NK says below Wigan also do a massive amount of unheralded work in several communities (not just Wigan Bourgh). Not being a native i know about some but only a small proportion of what actually goes on.
That mostly is down to the stability IL gives the club

Regards EW

Backwards? You on about Wigan?!

We were in a mess when Lenagan purchased the club, with a lob sided playing group where some were paid fortunes and others peanuts, we had loads of overseas has beens, hardly any youth development, the crowds were about on a par with their current levels (but in his time we’ve averaged a couple of thousand more at times) and we hadn’t won anything for 6 or 7 seasons and hadn’t won a Grand Final for nearly ten years.

Since then we’ve built a club based on home grown talent, seen lads like Sam Tomkins, Williams, Farrell, Charnley, Gildart etc come through the system and as we’ve lost players replaced them from within, all whilst still challenging for honours. We’ve won 3 Grand Finals, appeared in two more, won 3 leaders shields, won two challenge cups, appeared in one other final and won a World Club Challenge. We make some losses but who doesn’t in this current climate (that he’s trying to change) and much of those losses have been due to investment in training and education facilities around the borough that the clubs involved in.

Not bad for a club gone backwards under its owner.