The problem is that the doc is confusing two different issues with one solution.

The RFL is crap Which is true

The RFL treated me wrong over me fiddling the salary cap. Wrong.

The solution for me is to get on with the punishment for the SC breaches. But for the chairman to come up with some ideas on how best to run the game. That has to be a c considered and planned step. Not as a knee jerk reaction

But sport IS different to a business. That's just a simple fact of life. And running A sport is more different still. As I said a business has ultimate power at the top. All the major decisions come from there and nobody else in the business can do anything about it. That isn't true of RL is it? Name me a business that has the equivalent of what Koukash has just done?
That doesn't mean it shouldn't be run "like" a business but you have to recognise the differences. In the end the RFL have little power over the SL clubs.


So which venues were available? It isn't difficult to do. It's not like it takes a great brain to book a venue. It's obvious what the issues are. We don't own any of them. We don't have significant influence over any of them. And we don't bring in any more money than any other event. Why would the venues bend over backwards to accommodate us? The fact is they won't. And they don't. As I said, why would Liverpool be keen to book an RL game in? It's one game, it's unlikely to fill the stadium and it could affect when they play a far, far more lucrative and important premier league game.
Like it or not. We are 2nd choice. And it's got sod all to do with who is organising it.

'"

the equivalent of a business criticising the regulatory body? it isnt very uncommon. Sport is not unique. It is not any more different to a supermarket than a media conglomerate is to a leather factory.

why dont RU have that problem? or Cricket? or Football? How do we manage to book the GF and CC final? If we cant sell an international to Liverpool why are we holding it there? You are looking at the end, finding excuses and then pretending it was inevitable.

They can only sell in the environment the RFL create


But you can create an environment and an image which appeals to a new fanbase.


Since 1996 the amount of TV money (adjusted for inflation) has gone down. Thats not because of what happened 35 years ago.

This is the RFL's system, its the RFL's tv deal, Its the RFL's organisation and has been for years. We arent here with this system and this tv deal and this environment because the clubs had too much power.

Its the RFL creating an environment where a club is criticised for investing in its product. We can continue to hope that 12 or more clubs independently stumble on to a formula that works but it is very unlikely to happen.

Different sports, and different industries and different companies within those industries show what you need to do to grow. We can continue to insist we are different and that we need to do something different but the results of us doing that wont change.

I've changed my mind, I don't give a $hit any more. I think it was the discertations that put me off

It's bizarre to me that there seems to be almost a uniform belief that the game of Rugby League struggles simply because the RFL are "incompetent". Rugby League is and always has been a minority, geographically isolated sport with very passionate fans. Many of those fans simply can't believe that it isn't universally popular and that there has to be an underlying reason and/or someone to blame. They divorce Rugby League from its history and from factors completely outside of the control of anyone in the sport, ignoring that it remains much as it always has been because it's bloody difficult to do anything to shift that status quo in the British sporting market.

The most laughable thing though are the people pointing the finger - Koukash, who has shown nothing at Salford to suggest he understands the strategic requirements for growing the sport within its means, or expanding its player base or fan base. On other occasions it has been Lenagan, who presides over a club whose crowds are consistently falling and who are technically insolvent. Handing over control of the wider sport to the 12 club bosses would be absolute insanity - their self interest would be complete and the rest of the game could go hang. Is the RFL perfect? No. But the clubs and those who run them are even more imperfect and even less transparent.

Smokey leave Him alone. It's like watching a succesful businessman arguing about the UK economy with a home baker at a village fete cake stall.

But you don't have to read them, if your brain can't handle more than a sentence then stick to Twitter, or FB statuses.

Well it seems the League Express on Monday should make interesting reading as they are hinting that many of the SL clubs do not agree with mar and that it will even be difficult for him to get the majority required for a vote. Also Catalans response to Marwan and Marwans usual attempt to have the last word is taking our sport to new depths with an out and out accusation of cheating aimed at Cats and yet again another barb/slur aimed at the RFL. Come on RFL hit him now with the 2015 charges and lets have done with it.

So it's not a business then? It's a regulatory body?
Yes it is different. Of course it's different. When are the supermarket playoffs?


Union own their stadiums and have regular schedules from World Rugby. We don't.
Thanks for proving my point with the GF and CC final. We know when they are, every year, so we can book them. We're also virtually guaranteed a big crowd.
Why do you think we're holding an International in Liverpool?
So what's the reason then? When we prove we can book major stadiums when we know when it's going to be, yet it takes longer when we don't know.
We could of course just cry "INCOMPETENCE!" as loud as possible. Or we could look at the situation and think about it. It's pretty bloody obvious. We've got Old Trafford booked out year on year. Even to the extent that they turned down England RU in the RUWC to keep our business. So we can do that, and Wembley. Yet somehow we're too incompetent to book Anfield.
Don't be daft Smokey.


And yet when the RFL try to change that environment there are howls of protest. See franchising, London Broncos, Crusaders, Catalans etc etc.
Plus are we really saying that the clubs, all based in the heartlands bar Catalans, couldn't do more to sell themselves, build their infrastructure, get more or different people in and develop more and better players? Because that is all, entirely, their responsibility. And ALL SL clubs range from merely average to plain useless at those things.



And who do the RFL have to get approval from before they can do that?
And with what funds do they do that? You're complaining at them taking £6m a year from the TV deal. Most of which is paid back to the clubs anyway.


Really? It's because of what started around then and continued right up until SL (and still to a degree continues today). Many people complain that RL sold its soul to Sky in 1996. Well they didn't. It had already been sold to stave off bankruptcy. Clubs selling their only assets left right and centre or letting them fall apart. If clubs had kept up to their stadiums in the good times you wouldn't have had the stagnation we've seen over the SL period. Though that attitude continued in SL and still does. Clubs would (or could assuming they were run properly) have the revenues to increase the salary cap or to put more into youth development etc etc.
Now most clubs have no assets left, they can't do it again. Yet we still see very few clubs actually strengthening as a club. They'll strengthen the first team but nothing else. See Salford as THE example.


Lol. The clubs have agreed to every single one of these things. They get the money. They hold the power. They do nothing with it except look for short term gain. The RFL should be criticised for letting go of control over the last 20 years.


You mean Salford? Nobody has criticised Koukash for putting money into Salford. Sadly he ignored areas of his club that would bring LONG TERM success and instead focussed on short term gain. Actually he fits in RL perfectly. Did Salford even qualify for a proper academy this year? Either he went begging to the fans to fund it.


Successful companies look to long term growth and development. To RL clubs, long term means the end of next season.

yes the RFL is a regulatory body. Where do google sell their lettuce?
Why?
Thanks for proving my point with the GF and CC final. We know when they are, every year, so we can book them. We're also virtually guaranteed a big crowd. '"

Successful companies look both short and long term - short term means within the financial reporting year i.e. the season in RL terms. Long term is perhaps 3-5 years max. most likely the intended lifespan of the CEO.

Leeds is a very good example - when Caddice took over what did Leeds do - short term they brought in a load of players, bought Iestyn and got a new coach - Hetherington knew they had to be competitive from the get go. Not a lot different to what Marwan did. Longer term they invested in youth development it took 7/8 for that to bear fruit. Leeds are in a different position regarding youth development the have a bigger pool of youngsters to choose from.

Perhaps if the RFL did a better job at generating income/exposure the clubs would be in a better financial state than they are - maybe not - I do think the majority of owners of SL clubs are pretty shrewd business people these days. The excesses of the past are very unlikely to happen these days.