This is the RFL's way of saying the dog ate their homework.



We have a [url=http://www.superleaguefans.com/rugby-league/2012/03/05/rfl-appoints-marketing-guru.htmlMarketing Guru[/url and a [url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/24535/rfl-appoint-new-commercial-directorCommercial Director[/url, neither whom have delivered anything in over 18 months that is worthy of their salaries.
Marketing Guy has produced a series of cartoons that have seen attendances in both first grade comps fall, as well as the embarrassment that was the autumn international series with it's poor attendances that could and should have been used as a trial run for this RLWC.

Commercial Guy has made varying veiled comments about lots of small partners being better than what we had....give we had nothing when he arrived, no ing surprise there, but in reality, whereas the RFL used to blow their own horns hard about financials (1.7 mill a year from Engage), not a ing word has been said about the Foxy Heinz bollox...I am so looking forward to the release of financials for 2012 and 2013 from the governing body...they will show exactly how clueless they are.

Ian L and the others are bang on the money here. The RFL are trying to sneak in their changes in the shadow of the RLWC and he has called their bluff. Without the TV Cash, the RFL are buggered and without those teams, the TV deal is dead in the water.

I'm not worried about the impact on the World Cup - these sorts of drama get you in papers, even if for the wrong reasons. Last week working down south, virtually nobody knew there was a World Cup on. Even if they read about it in an article highlighting club/RFL squabbles, it's better than nothing. Not ideal PR, but net net, a zero loss for the RLWC IMO. As for the oligarchy, I'm not so worried about that either. Its easy to caricature owners as being solely concerned with their own club. It's sort of true, but these are not generally stupid people, and they do realise that you need some half-decent opposition against which your dream team will play. In fact the more like oligarchs they are ( i.e. the richer ) the less stupid they probably are. Give me a Koukash over a small time scrap metal dealer who's made a few bob any day of the week. Self interest is fine, it just needs to be smart enough to recognise that a successful competition is also in your own interest. The self interest of the small time chancers is more dangerous than that of the really big money guys ( as I would argue we have seen demonstrated )

Whilst I'll admit I have absolutely no idea what these changes are that the RFL has planned, I think this disagreement has the hallmarks of a classic 80s/90s RFU mess. An argument that is caused by frustration and stubbornness on all sides and which has no obvious solution.

What are the disenchanted sides going to do? Moan and pull out and potentially scupper the new TV deal and league re-organisation? Great, what will that achieve exactly? Where will we be then with two competitions of roughly 6 sides (I'm assuming London and Wakefield have their life support turned off as the rest of the sides are scrapping around the beds) with no new money coming from anywhere.

Where exactly could this whole mess end up? Are there any possible outcomes that are in any way positive?

Yet ultimately RU got itself into a much better place. In fact, you could argue that had they had their disputes earlier, they'd have got into a better place quicker. When there's serious tension in a sporting structure, better to have the fight and get it over with than go absolutely nowhere for years with endless petty squables.

Pure speculation.....but

Bradford: will support RFL if RFL ratify new owners.


Leeds: will support RFL if their boss gets the nod for the top job in future.
Salford: will support RFL as is an ally of tub'o'lard
Widnes: Will probably sit on the fence....for now but could be swayed.
Catalan: Probably not in the plans for the sooper dooper 10 team comp....no skin of the broadcast partners nose either way and probably not spoken to by IL
Wakefield: In need of cash and probably not prepared to gamble (yet)
Castleford: In need of cash and probably not prepared to gamble (yet)

I don't see the RFL being in a strong position. There is not a cats chance in Hell SKY would buy into a comp with only leeds as a viable drawcard....that would leave the RFL with their good buddies at Premier Sports.

Let's hope they all sit down and work something out, because if this is allowed to fester on during the RLWC then I can see it ending badly for the sport in general.

Massive few weeks for the game! on the field we have a World Cup that could either boost RL and take us forward, or flop and keep us in decline. Now off the field we have all this. Scary but exciting at the same time.

you think this is exciting? Get yourself down to watch London broncos the stoop...hang on, the Hive....hang on, Griffin park,...oh, wait a minute, The Valley! or should that be Harlequins Rugby League

Maybe the rfl were including other things not so far mentioned in the restructuring which pushed these chairmen over the edge.

Maybe they were waiting to see if a Wigan vs Warrington final sold out before making complaints (nothing more embarrassing then complaining that the sport isn't advertised right only to a week later have a sell out final).

Maybe, live the republicans they are trying to use the time dependent nature of the upcoming World Cup to get things changed (chairmen have complained for years about the rfl on deaf ears, with ticket sales seeming relatively decent so far having issues should be the last thing the rfl want) maybe they'll go a step further and threaten to withdraw their players from the World Cup if the rfl continue to refuse to listen to them (I don't know if they actually can do this its mere speculation)

Whatever the reason, I agree the rfl has been poorly, inwardly thinking, run that lurches from one gimmick to the next - I cannot for the life of me see them building anything like a long term strategy for the sport which is something every chairmen should be concerned about. If you look at saints Wigan Warrington, commercially they are doing about as much as they can, for them to continue to grow, they need rl to grow and they have every right to demand that of the rfl.

There is a very interesting split of clubs though for and against.

For what it's worth, my opinion is that the whole bureaucracy need an over haul from top to bottom, the central administration needs control of the amateur and youth teams (which a separate body has currently) all the way through to the very top - especially with the proposals about reducing the number of academies. The refereeing system needs over hauling as well, my brother was a ref for youth teams and the meetings and support are a joke according to him - and it's no wonder we can't create refs as good as is needed. Then with a good strong message, marketing strategy and PLAN, we will see the improvement as more kids get involved at the bottom , work through the system, and into our sport

I don't think this 'split' in the clubs is as marked as people say. There is most likely a whole lot of politicking going on, and I have no doubt there are people with feet in both camps. There is a bit of an RFL power grab happening and the clubs are kicking back. I think the end result will be more autonomy for SL and possibly heads will roll at the RFL, but there won't be a split.

Problem is the 'rebel clubs are yet to put forward their alternative.

There can't be a split. A split will simply mean the end of RL as a pro game.

Saints and the like voting for a split would mean a nice shiney new stadia, empty with no team playing there.

The shareholders of the clubs would have spent alot of cash on nothing.

You can't run a 6 team league, even with Wigan and Saints in it, even a 10 team league is pushing it.

It sounds like more of a childish tantrum by those clubs. But the PR will do the game no harm at all.

A split wouldn't kill the game, there would be 10/12 teams in An SL that administers itself. I don't really think a split would be all that damaging, it's preferable to avoid it. I also font think this is a childish tantrum, there have been murmurings of discontent for a while about this proposed structure, clubs can't allow themselves to be bounced in to it.

Whatever happens, whichever faction wins is pretty much irrelevant. What is important is they put a structure in place that is the right structure, the best structure for the next 20 years minimum.

From my reading, some clubs just weren't mentioned. There wasn't necessarily a split. The article just stated that it was believed those clubs were in support.