Super League name could be scrapped

[cpwigan]

Hullaboo about nothing important IMO.

[Kittwazzer]

Hullaboo about nothing important IMO.

Yes, but think of all the excellent menus and silver service catering it will involve. I'm slavering just picturing it all!

[Owd Codger]

So some of you think that a name which does not mention 'Rugby League' is all right and a change does not matter and is a sign of desperation.

As far as I am concerned, it is a sign that together with restoring the name of Great Britain for Tests and Tri- Nations Series against Australia and New Zealand, we have some more positive thinking at Red Hall, especially, now that that Lewis has gone back to his real love of Tennis.

[Nezza Faz]

WW, I think the GB Team is great news for the game as well, but I thought I read somewhere it was only for Tours to NZ/Oz, and not necessarily for games over here in the Tri/4-Nations. I think these will still be Eng/Wales, etc. which is a watered down version to gain funding for the game from Sport England, etc.

The interest in International rugby should certainly improve with this measure returning - I can remember not too long ago, GB taking over 10,000 fans down under for a test series.

[Owd Codger]

WW, I think the GB Team is great news for the game as well, but I thought I read somewhere it was only for Tours to NZ/Oz, and not necessarily for games over here in the Tri/4-Nations. I think these will still be Eng/Wales, etc. which is a watered down version to gain funding for the game from Sport England, etc.

The interest in International rugby should certainly improve with this measure returning - I can remember not too long ago, GB taking over 10,000 fans down under for a test series.

When I said for Tri Nations, I meant series involving just Australia and New Zealand. I think you will find that the name of England will be retained for World Cup and home Internationals against France and Wales.

As you say the name change to England has been to get money from Sport England which in my opinion should be re-branded Sport UK to cover all sport in the United Kingdom.

[markill]

UK Sport deals with 'elite level' funding. Sport England is primarily a 'grass roots' funding organisation.

Therefore, the name of our national team shouldn't change anything. Grass roots rugby league in England should still be looking to Sport England for funding, the elite level go after UK Sport. The RFL I assume are aware of how this works.

Attendances for 'England' internationals in the last 5 years when playing Australia or New Zealand in the UK (i.e. four nations) are much the same as attendances in the same period previous when playing as GB.

however, all that aside, I think it should be GB for at least 2 years after each world cup to play series with the southern hemisphere teams, then England for the year before and obviously year of World Cups. That way players can win a major international series for GB and then can still play for their respective 'nations' come World Cup time, and the year before when I would play some sort of European competition like the one last year but hopefully more competitive

[Sgt. Bash]

The only way to re-brand with an arguably more notable brand than what's been built since 1996 with Super League is to change it to NRL:UK or NRL:Europe - Not for me though. The problem isn't the name of the competition, it's the way it's run.

Keep the name, change the management.

[DaveO]

Rebranding is an act of desperation and is designed by those in charge to put off solving the real problems whilst still looking like they are doing something. Look how many times London have rebranded and how little difference it made to them - yet everytime they seem to think that all they need to do is change there name.

This sort of thing comes from marketing consultants and is a total waste of time as it never addresses the real issues in an organization.

The RFL obviously don't really know how to fix things and are looking for superficial changes that will deflect from the fact that they are not going to address anything fundamental.

I predict that none of the changes to Super League will happen apart from the drop to 12 teams. This is because the real motivation from the clubs is not to do with playing standards etc it is because they all want a bigger cut of the TV money. Do you really think any club will now vote for an extra 10 teams to get an even cut of the TV money?

Any two tier SL that doesn't have a relatively even distribution of TV money is a farce - its no different from the setup we have now just with promotion and relegation reinstated. Imagine a SL with the middle group of 8 in the second half of the season. Four of those teams will have 5-10X more financial resources than the other 4. How competitive will that be? There will be 100+ scores every other week. It will be so bad they will scrap it after 1 or 2 seasons. It can only work if the financial divide between the two division is relatively small - even as little as 50%.

We haven't even touched on how the salary cap is giong to work.

There is almost no chance of a meaningful 2 tier Super League happening. Maybe thats why they want to rename it.

Spot on Mike especially this bit "Rebranding is an act of desperation and is designed by those in charge to put off solving the real problems whilst still looking like they are doing something."

I go further and say the entire exercise of changing the structure is them putting off solving the real problems whilst still looking like they are doing something.

Whatever we end up with won't magic up the £millions needed to compete with other sports.

As to the rebranding I think it's completely nuts anyway. Super League is IMO already a recognised brand name that is marketable. Talk about change for changes sake!

[Owd Codger]

The name 'Super League' means nothing to most people, but any name including the words 'Rugby League' would!

[medlocke]

The only way to re-brand with an arguably more notable brand than what's been built since 1996 with Super League is to change it to NRL:UK or NRL:Europe - Not for me though. The problem isn't the name of the competition, it's the way it's run.

Keep the name, change the management.

ERLA = English Rugby League Association
ERLF = English Rugby League Federation
NFRL = National Federation Rugby League
SLR = Super League Rugby
RLE = Rugby League England