Sorry but, to say that Union was behind league is just wrong.

Although the club game was perhaps behind league in some areas, the International game of Union, has been and still is so far in front of League that, we are in the metaphorical Vauxhall Conference compared to Premier League.
Yes, Union has massively exploited the revenue streams connected with this but, everything stems from the International scene and shutters down from this.
In League, we are trying to go the other way and we try to suggest that the "product" is so good, why shouldn't we get the same as Union but, in this respect, Union has such a head start on league that it is impossible for us to catch up, notwithstanding that it is the sport of the Establishment and like it or not, we are "just a Northern" sport and too many inward looking people are actually happy with this.

The second part of your post is spot on and if we cant do some of the basics right, we just come across as amateur and it's no surprise that we are not taken seriously.

We struggle to get a sponsor because we aren't an attractive market for sponsors. It's got little to do with the RFL in that sense.
The same goes for internationals or events. They're organised "late" because we don't have our own stadium so we're working around other schedules.

Re Smokeys post - the RFL had Sport England money taken away from them because the targets were unrealistic. And the Sport England numbers are compiled in a way that doesn't help RL (age 14+ IIRC).

Whatever way you want to look at it the RFL need more money. In 2014 their income was £19m. That's sod all with which to run a major sport including the RFL events.

If we want a better RFL we have to pay for it. As Bramley said, the clubs currently (and have for a long time) hold the prime responsibility for marketing, player development etc etc and they make the RFL look professional.

The RFL needs a bigger staff, a bigger base and better leadership to give it the teeth that's needed to push this game forward. Because the clubs sure as hell aren't going to do it.

£19m sod all?

What do they actaqlly use that money for? It's £18.9m too much for what they actually deliver!

The key to the sports future IMO is the international game. To compare us with football is unrealistic as globally no sport compares. A reasonable comparison is sports like Rugby Union and cricket. Their funding is significantly more than ours and that is a result of internationals. We need a set international calendar playing regular games and space in the domestic calendar to do so. I would like to see something like

Year 1 - 6 nations style (with possibly a final) Northern Hemisphere comp, at first England, France, Wales, Scotland & Ireland looking to add Canada & the USA and a similar Southern Hemisphere comp with Australia, NZ, Fiji, PNG & Samoa
Year 2 - Several mid season 'friendlies' then end of season 4 nations (England, Australia, NZ plus another) alternating between northern and Southern Hemispheres with a side competition determining the 4th nation for the next cycle
Year 3 - Same as year 1
Year 4 - Several mid season 'friendlies' plus an end of season World Cup.

This would achieve several things. Firstly generate revenue for the governing bodies to invest into expansion, youth development and grass roots, secondly having a guaranteed 4 or 5 matches a year with also a guarantee of playing the bigger nations would hopefully encourage more players to opt for their nation of birth rather than choosing to play for Australia/NZ because of the guarantee of matches and thirdly increase the profile of the game which would also (hopefully) lead to increased sponsorship.

I'm well aware it would take time for the (for want of a better word) lesser nations to become competitive, they never will without actually playing the matches in the first place.

Following on from this the long term vision should be looking to add teams from Wales, Scotland, Ireland, USA and Canada into Super League and teams from PNG, Fiji and Samoa into the NRL. Having a play off system means there is no real need for everyone to play each other home and away so this could be done step by step by increasing the number of teams without increasing the number of matches. The only logical way to do this would be an eventual return to franchising, I know this won't go down well with a lot of lower league supporters but I think for the sport as a whole it is the way forward.

It has everything to do with the rfl. They create the product to sell and the environment in which to sell it. They are the ones who created/allowed the meat raffle at the working mens club aura around the game which puts sponsors off and they are the ones that by not having bookings and plans in place organise everything late and create an environment where it is difficult to sell internationals.

You have swallowed the RFL' pathetic defence of their failure hook line and sinker. The rfl bid for that money. It was based on their plans and their projections. That money hasn't disappeared it has simply been given to people better trusted to spend it wisely. They failed. It's not a conspiracy or luck or bureaucratic nightmare. It's a failure. One of a litany of RFL failures. In fact the only real success of Woods RFL has been the wholesale lowering of ambition and expectation of a game that now sees any kind of real success as out of reach and any failure as unavoidable and inevitable.

BTW that 19m which is 'sod all' is double what any club in SL turns over and only slightly less than the entire amount SL spends on players for 12 clubs

1 It is the RFLs primary role to make the sport more attractive and bring on board sponsorship/TV rights/new players/coaches .... etc. It is a business and they are the executive decision makers of the business.

2. Aussies don't have dedicated stadiums but they manage to arrange a programme in advance. Look at the British Lions RU for example

You're making excuses for a poor management group who have, and continue to, under perform.

Sadly if what has been put on twitter about this press conference is true the this is just another Koukash hissy fit. Lashing out at pretty much everyone with no real coherence.

It's disappointing that he has become almost the perfect shield for the RFL, conflating real and pressing issues with paranoid incoherent nonsense.

For once I agree. He's like a kid throwing a tantrum.

I'm seeing the updates and I would agree; classic unfocused lashing out, having been on the wrong end of a decision. He would have been better served sticking to the idea that the RFL have failed the game in a commercial and marketing sense - it would at least then have been coherent.

Now he's just back to being perceived as a clown - which is pretty much how he should be perceived.

It's not even that he just couldn't stick to one issue. If he had complained about the RFL fsking up the SC, fsking up the marketing and financials, the tv deal etc then people would listen to him but it can never be the rfl aren't good enough or are going the wrong way it's always a conspiracy. When it's not the RFL being out to get them it's hetherington, when it's not hetherington it's Les Catalans, when it's not Les Catalans it's toulouse. Then from somewhere for no discernable reason and with no discernable link it's Toronto.

His underlying idea of SL going it's own way isn't terrible. There is sense and a debate to be had about it because the game is failing in some important aspects, but it won't break away without Leeds and it won't break away to dump Les Catalans and pull up the draw bridge on Toulouse and Toronto so why surround the issue with all this froth and nonsense.

Well if we can manage to get Fly Emirates on board, there's certainly interest out there. We don't even have the biggest fan base in the league..

He can make a good point in one breath and then come across as a complete tool the next.
If he can back up any of those claims with proof (the RFL using incorrect dates and figures during tribunal, RFL discussions with another club who broke cap but no action taken, Salford offered money by RFL to reschedule a fixture to help a bigger club), then fair enough.
But then why start having a go at Catalans, citing their lack of developing French talent as an issue? I'd say Catalan have brought through some French talent already, that burden doesn't lie solely with them anyway, and Salford aren't exactly running a top tier academy themselves right now. Quite the opposite, actually.

Curious as to who this other club breaking the cap in 2014 was though...

Much of that responsibility falls on the clubs as well, and they're failing.

We have clubs giving tickets away like confetti, we have clubs that can't attract supporters to fill their premium seats, who haven't invested in corporate hospitality and who market themselves as a "budget family day out".

The sport is talking to supporters who believe that £20 to see a play-off semi-final is some kind of rip-off, who will only attend international games if they can find a discount code, and who and moan about any attempt by clubs to improve their commercial revenue (just see the faux outrage whenever Leeds launch some form of special edition playing shirt).

That's not to say that it's wrong to market the sport in that that promotes "family value" - there is clearly a niche for that kind of market - but in in that context, it's no surprise that the sport's sponsorship profile includes payday loan companies, skip hire firms, budget car brands and canned mushy peas.

The RFL has actually done some good work since the Stobart disaster, but it needs to do more. However, the clubs (with the odd exception) need to be a lot stronger in this area as well. When we have clubs putting their prime shirt sponsorship up as a raffle prize, we've got some problems.

Sports sponsorship is about buying access to an audience and at the moment, the RL audience is not one that blue-chip companies want to invest in trying to attract. That's something that all of the game's stakeholders need to work on, not just Red Hall. There's a reason why Sky's Rugby Union coverage is sponsored by Land Rover and not Ladbrokes.

so why do catalans get 9 overseas players?

Couldn't agree more.

MarwanK is right, most sane adults know he is right, the fact that he is a bit of a throbber & has 'as yet' not offered up alternatives is largely irrelevant.

The RFL are killing the game we love for so many Clubs & supporters of Clubs, how can anyone not back him ?
Only the 'protected' Clubs would stay away from this challenge.

I for one hope that he addresses the inequality of a system that allows different rules on salary cap, overseas quotas & P&R restrictions imposed on heatland Clubs for the benefit of development area Clubs based on geographical location.

While it was successful for Catalan it came at the price of 6 years direct entry to SL & exemption from relegation, thus it cost a British RL Club a place in SL.

We have seen it all before with various guises of the London Club & the Welsh & French too & we will see it again with Toulouse Olympique & Toronto Wolfpack.
I would guess that the Cumbrians & the Oldham, Swinton & Batleys of this RL Family would love the same amount of protection & investment by the RFL in their futures.

I firmly believe rhat the RFL are not only incompetent but are actively & negatively impacting on the futures of Clubs like Barrow, Sheffield, Oldham etc.

It really is time for the RFL to wake up & smell the coffee.

Substandard TV deals, substandard structures, substandard vision & substandard leadership creating a substandard RL competition *when compared to Oz*.

Expansion? YES ! But not at any cost.