It's breakaway time it has to be now. SL wanted to to be more involved with the RFL when government money was handed out now they want all the money for themselves. Whatever happened to the money that RFL received ?
The 'game' as a genuine sport has gone and instead we have a Sky gameshow. They will change or ditch SL as they wish and those clubs outside need to be aware of that.
The SL clubs are proving that they have no feeling of responsibility to the game itself, only to themselves.
The non-SL clubs have to take their own decisions via the RFL or they will be ground into the dust. Sadly the RFL doesn't have enough men of real power to counter the SL clubs grip on the funds, but, SL will collapse as Sky pull out and with major sporting events on the horizon there will be plenty of competition for Sky funds .
Maybe Rimmer and Co at RFL are already in the pocket of Sky. Who bankrolls their inflated salaries?
It is argued that there is not enough money in the game to sustain 20 plus full-time clubs, nor is the player pool big enough. Perhaps any review should consider whether a part-time game (or hybrid) would be better for the game at all levels at this stage, to break the reliance on Sky money.
All clubs need to take a serious look at their future sustainability and question whether are they doing enough to promote and build the game at local level. Maybe some clubs will themselves recognise that they are not sustainable and have no future, unless they do something to increase local interest.
Why is there a shortage of players in the player pool? What have RFL/SL/clubs done over the past 20 years or more to develop interest and encourage young players to come into the game? Why is SL reliant on over-paid and over the hill Australians? All clubs should be required to have a programme in place through an Academy or similar, to bring youngsters into the game; and also develop closer links with the amateur game.
Can the game afford to pay six figure salaries to players and administrators in future? This approach on serves to soak up limited money in the game in a few clubs, to the detriment of most other clubs and the game in general. The first step would be to have a realistic salary cap to prevent a few clubs with rich backers, taking over the game.
The current leadership in the game are not fit to determine the future structure of rugby league in the UK. A truly independent body needs to be set up to carry out the review.
I don’t believe there is a culture of greed - there is no profit to be had the way the game is at present - I think it is more a case of self-preservation on the part of the top 4 - 6 clubs..
Not sure that it is worth the effort on their part anyway as the game is crumbling around them and a professional league with half a dozen full time clubs is probably the last time the RFL will bring the game into disrepute.
Self preservation is probably a better term, but the effect is the same.
Just along the road it sounds as if Wire have read the runes and had a clearout of staff and methods, probably in anticipation of the funding cut back. Others need to do the same.
The new format seems to be NRL signs and develops young UK talent in exchange for their potential retirees. This in itself shows the way we are heading and probably why the Aussies underate our game.
TV contract which want to influence our game, like Sky, are buying the 'show' not showing the game as the Beeb does, despite its low key efforts.
I agree that the part time club s probably need to make a much bigger effort to attract fans. If that can't be done the game will slip further away. Clubs that can't summon enough local support may have to go when outside funding stops.
The SL game as it stands is pretty low key and you can see why Sky is moving on. Just how things can change over the next couple of years to make it more exciting I haven't a clue tbh. The rebirth of Leeds may excite their supporters but on a national scale hardly makes a difference.
So the game is eventually being “expanded” by planning to get rid of 16 teams? Why is RFL being led by the nose by Sky, when the chances are the SL will be no more competitive and Sky are still likely to ditch the sport anyway? Will Sky be telling SL where there should be expansion – come back TWP/New York etc and goodbye Salford/Huddersfield//Wakefield/HKR and changing the rules to make it a more tv friendly sport? Does anyone really believe that on the back of a poor season, Sky would allow Wigan/St Helens/Leeds to be relegated in 2022? Why is the “long-term” future of rugby league being determined by the “short-term” availability of Sky funding; and the greed of a few clubs to hoover up as much central funding as they can, at the expense of the majority of clubs. I believe that the advent of SL and the culture of greed has seen a steady decline in the game of RL. The next step will determine if there is any future for the game; and any review of the structure needs to be led by people with an interest in the future of the game – and that should not be Sky. There are other tv broadcasters out there.
The game is now completely reliant on Sky, and a handful of benefactors. If you told Pearson, McManus, Leneghan, Moran etc. that they had to find another £1m per year not all of them either a) could b) would want to.
Apart from Leeds (off the top of my head) who actually have different income streams to just rugby the rest is patched up and taped together by funding. It is short term, self centred greed but the sad truth is that if a lot of clubs (Salford, Wakey, and others!) didn't think like this their club would die.
The tough question is whether the game wants itself to reset properly and have an independent team in charge, and it might go back to part time, or just slowly wither away. My biggest issue with RL at the minute isn't even the absolute state that it's in, it's the fact that Sky/RFL claim it's in great shape. Head in sands.
Sky don't seem to think that its attractive enough, why else would they cut the funding?
For those of a certain age this is where SL started! Maurice Lindsay wanted lesser clubs (ie not clubs with a monied backer) to merge and form bigger clubs to be better able to survive. Maybe that was what Sky envisaged then, who knows? But with a very short list of teams the variation in games becomes hard to maintain and the excitement of watching suffers.
In truth I can't recall anybody explaining just who does watch SL! Is it North of Watford or is there a much wider hidden audience?
If is is the former most viewers also pay to see games live and are interested because they are supporters rather than wanting to watch some remote teams compete in a league that they don't care about.
Certainly since we left SL I only watch the odd game on TV and would rather watch NRL games.
It’s breakaway time it has to be now. SL wanted to to be more involved with the RFL when government money was handed out now they want all the money for themselves. Whatever happened to the money that RFL received ?
The money was a loan, and available for all clubs to apply for. Some did, some didn't.
Did Widnes take out a loan do we know?.
I didn't quite hear the full conversation about it on Monday, but I'm fairly sure Finney stated Widnes didn't.
<p style="text-align: center;">
I didn’t quite hear the full conversation about it on Monday, but I’m fairly sure Finney stated Widnes didn’t.
</p>
I do think this all points to us being in a good financial position compared to most next year. Hopefully the fans come back to a decent level
Substitute Rimmer (Wood before him) & Co with Rule & Co, then substitute WV with the RFL
There's your answer.
The RL journos won't call them out, as they don't want to lose their plastic lanyards, and free RL, until it dies. Sorry James, you know the ones I'm talking about (RL Express).
Paulie xx
<p style=”text-align: center;”>
I didn’t quite hear the full conversation about it on Monday, but I’m fairly sure Finney stated Widnes didn’t.
</p> I do think this all points to us being in a good financial position compared to most next year. Hopefully the fans come back to a decent level
Not having a go Spidey but you are missing the point. Widnes can just about afford to run a part time team of about 2 dozen players. If a couple of key / senior players get long term injuries we are stuffed (Tomkins, Jewitt as an example). We rely on two week loans to tide us over which sometimes works (O’Neill) but more often doesn’t (Doro, Robson). We have no depth in the local amateur game so can’t rely on willing locals making up the numbers like in the (very) old days and we don’t have kids coming through because the RFL don’t care about or promote the junior game and kid who might have been interested have moved on to other forms of entertainment.
Basically being financially sound means we’ve got a padded chair on the Titanic, rather than a hardback plastic chair.
The club is 'flat lining' and the game, as a whole, has the pulse of a serial killer. It's beyond saving, because those dining at the top table (Sts, Wigan, Wire & Leeds), have no intention of throwing scraps to the dogs. The announcement that SL will remain the same, basically means, off you pop, Championship RL. Toulouse will be promoted, Leigh will come down, and that will be that. And within 3 years SL will be on it's arse.
Just my opinion
Paulie xx