Discussions on the future of rugby league held between RFL, Super League and clubs

[Wigan_forever1985]

For me:

1. Make the league the biggest prize - how you can expect to draw any casual fans in to a structure that makes the last 4 games of the year the only ones that count matter is beyond me there needs to be something riding on every game. Most league games are half team turnouts "resting" players because realistically the same teams will be there and there about as long as they keep pace. maybe instead of Grandfinal the League winner plays the Challenge Cup winner and if its the same team then the opposing teams of them play off to play the League and Challenge cup winner. Win the league your champions - win the grand final youre grand slam champions

2. Allow players to earn sponsorship - sports are sold to casuals on people not the sport - F1 is a niche sport but Hamilton draws masses of casuals, same with Joshua and boxing, o'sullivan in snooker. Characters draw people into a sport i bet outside of possibly sam tomkins there isnt a single rugby league player a non RL person would be able to name - change that and you change your draw

3. Reduce bans for fighting back to a yellow - sorry but it was part of the show i don't care if that's crude the brutality is a selling point of RL and has any real damage ever been done through a RL fight - ever? Stance on high shots etc should remain because they do cause injury but a couple of jabs isnt

4. Put a rule freeze on for 5 years constant swapping changing doesn't help anyone follow the sport

[nathan_rugby]

Yes, Josie. My point was that we've crammed so many games in at least partly for Sky. So it's a bit rich for them to say standards have fallen. They shouldn't be surprised since they helped cause it.

Now,now Morley stop talking sense my good man it’s sky we are talking about.

The thing that has irritated me most about this aspect of the story was when you think back to last season and there was no live sport at all but SL put its hand up and went for it,causing this,in my opinion downturn in quality,I know tv contracts had to be fulfilled but the clubs did and then some more only for sky to dump on them from a great height with the new deal.

What I think is happening sky’s new owners don’t want the sport and are looking for a way to leave it without being seen to leave it (if you know what I mean)

Why?

Probably costs Sky more time, effort and money than it brings in.

[medlocke]

De-sanitize the game and bring back the biff

Scrap the cap and stop holding back the big clubs

Return to winter

Bring the corner flags back into play

Reinstate proper international tours

It worked before it will work again

[Wiganer Ted]

It didn't work before, that's why it was changed because massive improvement was needed for the game to survive.

[josie andrews]

For me:

1. Make the league the biggest prize - how you can expect to draw any casual fans in to a structure that makes the last 4 games of the year the only ones that count matter is beyond me there needs to be something riding on every game. Most league games are half team turnouts "resting" players because realistically the same teams will be there and there about as long as they keep pace. maybe instead of Grandfinal the League winner plays the Challenge Cup winner and if its the same team then the opposing teams of them play off to play the League and Challenge cup winner. Win the league your champions - win the grand final youre grand slam champions

2. Allow players to earn sponsorship - sports are sold to casuals on people not the sport - F1 is a niche sport but Hamilton draws masses of casuals, same with Joshua and boxing, o'sullivan in snooker. Characters draw people into a sport i bet outside of possibly sam tomkins there isnt a single rugby league player a non RL person would be able to name - change that and you change your draw

3. Reduce bans for fighting back to a yellow - sorry but it was part of the show i don't care if that's crude the brutality is a selling point of RL and has any real damage ever been done through a RL fight - ever? Stance on high shots etc should remain because they do cause injury but a couple of jabs isnt

4. Put a rule freeze on for 5 years constant swapping changing doesn't help anyone follow the sport

Belting reply. Send it to the RFL

[josie andrews]

Get ready for another reorganisation

It looks as though Super League will consist of only ten clubs from 2023, after going up to 14 clubs in 2022, if the proposal presented to the clubs on Friday comes to pass.

The RFL seems to have decided that relegation wouldn’t be fair this year, so Leigh Centurions are set for a reprieve.

But that doesn’t mean that promotion won’t happen and it appears that two clubs will be promoted to Super League, but only for the 2022 season.

On the face of it, the two clubs being promoted are likely to be Toulouse Olympique and Featherstone Rovers, who faced each other on Sunday, with Toulouse triumphing in front of an encouraging attendance of 4,021 spectators.

But both of those clubs, if they are promoted, will face an almighty battle in 2022, because four clubs will be relegated from Super League next year, to reduce the elite competition to ten clubs in 2023.
What a crazy year it will be in 2022!

Apparently all this has been strongly urged upon the RFL by Sky, who are said to be unhappy with the quality of some of the games they have covered in the last twelve months.

The new Sky contract will be for only two years and Sky have told the RFL that the governing body had better get its house in order if it wants a new contract from 2024.

So a reduction to ten clubs in Super League is the way to get more competitive matches, so the theory goes.

Unfortunately I think that’s a false premise.

Rugby League is a sport in which it is remarkably difficult to predict which matches will be one-sided, and which ones won’t be.

For example, it wasn’t too hard to predict that Wigan would beat Leigh convincingly on Sunday.

But who would have predicted Salford running up 70 points against Castleford last month in the week before Wembley?

If we were to take the top ten current clubs in Super League, we would still have some clubs that are perceived as significantly weaker than the rest. So would that mean we should reduce the number even further?

I can understand that the RFL might want to react to the message from Sky, but my fear is that this change would weaken Super League rather than strengthen it.

There comes a point where the number of clubs in a competition can be reduced so much that it become boring watching the same old clubs playing against each other time and time again.

To a great extent that has been Super League’s problem for much of its existence.

It’s the same few clubs winning all the time.

Until all the other clubs can develop Academy systems that emulate those of St Helens, Wigan and Leeds, I’m afraid that trend is likely to continue.

On learning at the end of last week about the proposal being put forward at two separate meetings of clubs I put out a series of tweets on Twitter expressing my reaction to the news.

https://www.totalrl.com/get-ready-for-a ... anisation/

[Mike]

Now,now Morley stop talking sense my good man it’s sky we are talking about.

The thing that has irritated me most about this aspect of the story was when you think back to last season and there was no live sport at all but SL put its hand up and went for it,causing this,in my opinion downturn in quality,I know tv contracts had to be fulfilled but the clubs did and then some more only for sky to dump on them from a great height with the new deal.

What I think is happening sky’s new owners don’t want the sport and are looking for a way to leave it without being seen to leave it (if you know what I mean)

Why?

Probably costs Sky more time, effort and money than it brings in.

Why do they have to pretend they don't want to drop the sport whilst secretly wanting to drop it though? If they want to drop it, they drop it. It's not politics or anything.

[morley pie eater]

The thing that has irritated me most about this aspect of the story was when you think back to last season and there was no live sport at all but SL put its hand up and went for it,causing this,in my opinion downturn in quality,I know tv contracts had to be fulfilled but the clubs did and then some more only for sky to dump on them from a great height with the new deal.

What I think is happening sky’s new owners don’t want the sport and are looking for a way to leave it without being seen to leave it (if you know what I mean)

This is where public service broadcasting should come in i.e. the BBC. I don't know about Sky walking away but expecting to get top quality sport for less money and also making RL pile on the fixtures which can result in poor quality and poor crowds ought to make the RFL and SL start to question if Sky is turning into some sort of abusive partner.

RL being a deep rooted part of the North of England's culture (as well as providing employment and aiding the economy) and with the BBC being a public service broadcaster, the RFL should start to explore the idea of ditching Sky and moving the BBC. The BBC which still pays a fortune for covering other sports and has guaranteed rights to the Challenge Cup has a duty according to its charter to "To reflect, represent and serve the diverse communities of all of the United Kingdom’s nations and regions and, in doing so, support the creative economy across the United Kingdom".

Well I reckon supporting RL as a broadcaster meeting that obligation. Now I am not saying the BBC is going to find £40m a year which was the original Sky deal but if Sky are wanting to pay peanuts there might come a point where it's no longer worth it financially being dictated to by Sky. If Sky walk away as Fozzie suggests then I really would expect the BBC to step in. The game would probably have to revert to being semi-pro if there was next to no money on the table but I am not sure how many people would be surprised at that outcome anyway. The RFL would probably quite like taking the sport back decades if that happened but there you go.

I agree 100%, Dave.

The advantage of being on BBC is the wider publicity the game gets. Soccer is an exception, but other sports suffer from going behind a paywall - even mighty Formula 1 is less known by the general public than in Murray Walker's day.

If we got SL on BBC, and had a coherent strategy to promote the game, it could be a winner in the long term.

[DaveO]

For me:

1. Make the league the biggest prize - how you can expect to draw any casual fans in to a structure that makes the last 4 games of the year the only ones that count matter is beyond me there needs to be something riding on every game. Most league games are half team turnouts "resting" players because realistically the same teams will be there and there about as long as they keep pace. maybe instead of Grandfinal the League winner plays the Challenge Cup winner and if its the same team then the opposing teams of them play off to play the League and Challenge cup winner. Win the league your champions - win the grand final youre grand slam champions

2. Allow players to earn sponsorship - sports are sold to casuals on people not the sport - F1 is a niche sport but Hamilton draws masses of casuals, same with Joshua and boxing, o'sullivan in snooker. Characters draw people into a sport i bet outside of possibly sam tomkins there isnt a single rugby league player a non RL person would be able to name - change that and you change your draw

3. Reduce bans for fighting back to a yellow - sorry but it was part of the show i don't care if that's crude the brutality is a selling point of RL and has any real damage ever been done through a RL fight - ever? Stance on high shots etc should remain because they do cause injury but a couple of jabs isnt

4. Put a rule freeze on for 5 years constant swapping changing doesn't help anyone follow the sport

2 & 4 are doable. So is 1 but they won’t do it. 3 is a non-starter. If a player was seriously injured as a result the lawyers would have a field day. Just the way it is in 2021 and you can’t say “well that’s what the players signed up for” as that won’t wash.

[Caboosegg]

The thing that has irritated me most about this aspect of the story was when you think back to last season and there was no live sport at all but SL put its hand up and went for it,causing this,in my opinion downturn in quality,I know tv contracts had to be fulfilled but the clubs did and then some more only for sky to dump on them from a great height with the new deal.

What I think is happening sky’s new owners don’t want the sport and are looking for a way to leave it without being seen to leave it (if you know what I mean)

This is where public service broadcasting should come in i.e. the BBC. I don't know about Sky walking away but expecting to get top quality sport for less money and also making RL pile on the fixtures which can result in poor quality and poor crowds ought to make the RFL and SL start to question if Sky is turning into some sort of abusive partner.

RL being a deep rooted part of the North of England's culture (as well as providing employment and aiding the economy) and with the BBC being a public service broadcaster, the RFL should start to explore the idea of ditching Sky and moving the BBC. The BBC which still pays a fortune for covering other sports and has guaranteed rights to the Challenge Cup has a duty according to its charter to "To reflect, represent and serve the diverse communities of all of the United Kingdom’s nations and regions and, in doing so, support the creative economy across the United Kingdom".

Well I reckon supporting RL as a broadcaster meeting that obligation. Now I am not saying the BBC is going to find £40m a year which was the original Sky deal but if Sky are wanting to pay peanuts there might come a point where it's no longer worth it financially being dictated to by Sky. If Sky walk away as Fozzie suggests then I really would expect the BBC to step in. The game would probably have to revert to being semi-pro if there was next to no money on the table but I am not sure how many people would be surprised at that outcome anyway. The RFL would probably quite like taking the sport back decades if that happened but there you go.

I agree 100%, Dave.

The advantage of being on BBC is the wider publicity the game gets. Soccer is an exception, but other sports suffer from going behind a paywall - even mighty Formula 1 is less known by the general public than in Murray Walker's day.

If we got SL on BBC, and had a coherent strategy to promote the game, it could be a winner in the long term.

Doubt the BBC would be able to afford it, they are being attacked by all Angles on the TV licences all rooted in the fact they are generally neutral.

While people swallow political motivated attacks on them and complain about a TV licence that is pittance compared to subscription based TV then I cant see them forking out to assist league.

It's a Shame as live matches with a built in on demand replay service for the cost of a licence fee is more palatable than forking out for sky for the same.