Mark has his say:-

Super League wanted to slash £1m off lower league distribution claims Fax chairman Moore
June 14, 2018 Matthew Shaw

Halifax chairman Mark Moore claims the Super League board wanted to take £1m of funding from Championship and League 1 clubs as part of the proposed new league structure.

Members of Super League, including Wigan and St Helens chairmen Ian Lenagan and Eamonn McManus, showed a presentation to their Championship and League 1 counterparts regarding the league structure they would like to come into effect next season several weeks ago.

Moore claims that the proposal included the funding to the lower leagues been slashed from the current figure, which is distributed between the 26 clubs.

The revelation comes after Lenagan claimed on Tuesday that they were fully committed to continuing funding the clubs below Super League until the end of the current broadcasting deal in 2021.

The proposal was outright rejected thereafter, and Moore is of the belief no further discussions have taken place since.

“We had a presentation from four Super League club chairmen which we all listened too and watched,” he said.

“Their presentation included the financial consequences that could occur and that is £1m would be taken away from Championship and League 1 clubs to fund these changes. That’s where the negotiations have to come in. In any partnership, it has to be two-way and at the moment we’ve only had it one-way, which was the presentation made to all clubs around four weeks ago.

“Our advisory group is trying to push the agenda further, but I believe it hasn’t got anywhere on that.”

Moore also joined others in hitting out at the Super League board for making their proposals public, despite an agreement on next year not being reached.

“It’s quite disappointing to say we’re professional people who are supposed to be negotiating changes to the game going forward.

“It’s my own personal opinion that this is potentially a way to try and bully us into accepting what they’re after, which doesn’t fit in comfortably with Halifax when you’re halfway through negotiations.

“In my eyes it’s trying to push us into a corner as they don’t want to negotiate with ourselves. They believe it is better for the game.

“One thing I support Gary (Hetherington) 100% is that we had four Super League chairman trying to dictate us on how the game should go forward, however only one of those clubs are making a profit. They should try and get their own house in order first before going out to say they can fix the sport.

“Not bragging about Halifax, but look what we’ve done this year on engagement, our gates are up, others are saying how fantastic we’re doing. It would be nice to see Super League clubs do what we’re doing.

“If a club like Halifax can move the goalposts, certainly those with the financial backings of Super League clubs should be able to do the same, then they wouldn’t need to have to come tapping into our purse strings.”

Moore is also of the belief that Super League clubs want to structure changing as they are becoming increasingly threatened by clubs in the Championship, and he claimed to change the structure would make things significantly harder for Championship clubs to compete on and off the field.

“The main issue here at the moment is the concept of the Super 8s, they probably didn’t see four Super League clubs be in the situation they’re in at the moment.

“Everyone knew from day one what the consequences of the Million Pound Game was going to be. The exposure we got in the eights last year, we’d never get that if it went back to old school. Yes, it needs some tinkering, but why are we changing things all over again.

“I believe it would be a harder sell if the sport continues to go down the international expansion route. If it’s true that new clubs are coming like New York who can chuck money at it, this will become a hard sell to board members, investors and more importantly, supporters.

“Even though it’s not a closed shop, it will all come down to money. I’m a believer it shouldn’t be that and I think Halifax are proof it doesn’t have to be as we’re fighting with clubs spending over £1m, but it’s getting harder and harder, and if it becomes one up, one down, and you have international teams coming through, it will be a hard product to sell. I thought the objective was to make it more entertaining and more competitive.”

Mr Campbell is not happy either

Featherstone chairman Mark Campbell has become the latest club executive to air his views on Tuesday’s controversial Super League press conference – slamming the proposals from some chief executives for ‘radical change’ amidst the scrapping of the Super 8s system.
Campbell issued a lengthy statement in which he slammed Wigan chairman Ian Lenagan, new chief executive Robert Elstone and other key figureheads following talk the Super 8s may go and be replaced with a one-up, one-down system.
He said: “At a meeting between the clubs, the Rugby Football League and Super League – less than one month ago – it was agreed no future plans would be discussed publicly until a solution was found for all concerned.
“So, as you can imagine, it was a huge shock to yesterday be informed that a press conference had in fact taken place. It was one thing to unveil Robert as Super League’s new chief executive but to make such bold and sweeping statements about the sport’s future was something else.
“Robert claims he has a desire to create a “positive working relationship with the RFL”. He has been in the job for two minutes and has already chosen to ignore the agreed consolation process which the RFL, Super League, Championship and League 1 is – or was – playing a part in. Perhaps Robert is just a puppet for Ian Lenagan.
“On Ian and some of his quite remarkable comments from yesterday, this is a man who is talking of “radical change” and the start of a new era. Going back to one up, one down. Re-introducing what we call ‘loop fixtures’ to essentially pad out a season. They are nothing more than a random lottery and have proven hugely controversial in the past. We have been there and done that. How is this radical change? If it was so good before then why was it changed to begin with?
“Did Brian Barwick, chairman of Super League and the RFL, know about yesterday’s press conference? If not, then why? If so, then why did the man at the top of the organisation not attend this alleged new beginning for elite rugby league? There must be a very good reason.
“Where is the RFL in all of this? It appears their so-called figureheads, one of which is supposed to be Brian, and spokespeople are all on holiday – given their total lack of response as a governing body. (Note: the RFL have since responded.)
“From where I am sitting, and the fact I am speaking on behalf of a challenging Championship club is irrelevant, this is about one man attempting to control the game – with the support of owners and chairpeople who are only interested in self preservation and, ultimately, clinging on to their existence.
“One of those clubs, in the town in which the sport was born and bred, is this week letting everyone in for free as an act of sheer desperation. Yet this club could survive, be rewarded for failure on and off the field, and continue to tick over in the top flight essentially free of charge. And all because of these “desired” changes.
“Those who sat at the top table yesterday and smiled for the cameras want the sport’s key stakeholders to believe this is for the ‘good of the game’. Don’t make me laugh.
“When the current format was introduced, none of the Super League chairpeople believed a Championship club could even remotely challenge for a place in the top flight, based on central income in the second tier and overall revenue.
“However, because the gap has and will continue to narrow, there is a genuine possibility that four current Super League clubs could be relegated as early as this year. There is now too much on the line, hence the desire for immediate change to protect themselves and not the sport as a whole.
“The sport of rugby league, now more than ever before, needs its clubs and fans to rise and voice their opinions. This is quite possibly the most pivotal period in rugby league’s history and it would be an out-and-out disgrace for three or four chairpeople to be able to take the sport apart.”

Nailed on Widnes will get relegated. They're awful and won't even make the million quid game. All top 6 Championship teams would beat that lot so doesn't matter who the qualifiers are. Justice seeing that they got through the back door via the dodgy franchise system.

Can anyone picture this scenario, the new regime at R F L Europe introduce the franchise selection, however all are blind applications, each team is merited on: stadium viability, reserve team playing structure, operating costs, attendance v gate receipts, number of G B players, viability to be financially secure (without massive injection from T V ), current profitability if all faced foreclosure. The above are not in order of importance but each as to be accountable . How many current super duper teams would/could win a franchise? Will the R F L grow a pair and issue such a directive?

The game will be totally under the control, including funding or player arrangements of the SL clubs.

SL take the bulk of the money.

The rest become feeders (if they survive) with an increasing number of the SL clubs players making up these teams on DR, Loans or whatever they decide, no reserves needed for them with this in place.

If Lenagan and Co get their way they will be running the game, it's all about them, he has all but come out and said it and as his latest actions show.

Its a power grab in a similar way in which the Premier League in football has managed to make the FA seem inferior. Thankfully it looks like it has been exposed before anything is signed and sealed and it is good to see so many club chairman actually speaking out freely.

www.totalrl.com/championship-clu ... in-stance/ Interesting read. Unless the championship and championship 1 agree looks like they are stuck with the middle 8s until 2021

www.totalrl.com/championship-clu ... in-stance/ Interesting read. Unless the championship and championship 1 agree looks like they are stuck with the middle 8s until 2021

There’s is now probably some irony that a large number of people who didn’t want the likes of Toulouse and Toronto to get in to Super League are now supporting that to put the noses of the big knobs in SL out of joint. From a Fax perspective those two teams going up would doubtless help us as the two teams coming down will generate more away support at the Shay.

So it will be interesting to see the next steps and also if the whole sport ends up in court or not over it.

This weeks press not surprisingly has a good few pages on it.
One report says in part.
The decision making process for the structure of next years comp is that the RFL board of directors will make the decision whether to stay with the existing structure or move to a more conventional structure with one club promoted and one relegated.
If the RFL decide to stick with the current structure the SL clubs could force a vote on it at the RFL Council meeting.
At the council meeting all SL clubs have 2 votes with the Champ and Champ 1 clubs 1 vote each.
The SL clubs excluding Leeds Rhinos could therefore muster 22 votes and the Champ clubs with Leeds voting with them muster 28 votes.
(Added, even if all the SL clubs voted in unison and get 24 votes if the Champ clubs vote together they would have a majority of 2 with 26 votes.)
Report continued.
Press understands the RFL would likely go with the SL clubs unless the Champ clubs could show them it was unfair to do so.

Added. The article doesn’t say if the Champ clubs can call for a vote if the RFL BOD decides to change the structure for next year at the next Coucil meeting.

Toulouse and Toronto should be in $uper£eague or not in our leagues at all. Makes no sense for part-time teams to be doing all this flying. It's going to cost £5000+ to go to Toronto whereas we were promised they would pay all costs. Then there's the visa issues - Dewsbury ended up with 16 players at the weekend. No wonder Toronto are winning games - turning up shorthanded just makes the game look to be a shambles.

Toulouse and Toronto shouldn't be in either league.When we were in s/l i hated the bland home games against London/Paris with no away support.Can't see the prospect of 4 pointless home games appealing to anyone.Surely for eg Cas would rather have homes against us/Leigh/Bradford/Fev.

Very hard to see what the gameplan for development of RL is . The easiest fix of all is to make professional clubs have a reserve grade . It's a hell of a lot simpler than pipe dreams in France and Canada. I am all for change but there has to be an element of practicality in what red Hall does and how it is communicated. I can't see that fat controller has left any form of sustainable legacy for the sport that provided him with an exceptionally generous life style and salary.

makes the game look to be a shambles.

The game is a shambles i would love every S/L & Champioship Side to have Reserves but where are all the Players coming from ? The Amateur (i refuse to say community clubs) are also struggling with falling participation

1 up 1 down will pave the way once again for the yoyo clubs to safeguard the SL teams.
It won't work without a small SL2 of 8 teams.

Rugby League is going the same way as the industrial heartland of the North.....down the pan.

A “working class” game, when we no longer have a working class in most of the towns the game is home to.

Simply to expensive for so many of those who live in these communities and who have to choose how to spend their incomes carefully.

The solution is two leagues of ten clubs. One up one down. Leagues to include North American and French teams each of twenty clubs to get equal allocation of funds, plus a graduated payment dependent upon league position.

Dbvada. 2 leagues of 10 clubs? Who would be the unlucky ones? And what would happen to them, one up one down, and how would they get funding.
To me your idea is not much different to what is proposed now but expanding the S L system .
Would you still have play off ie top 4 of each league to determine champions?
You could have the basis of an idea, oh hang on wasn't t there something like that in the 70 and 80 s ?

I see nothing wrong with going backwards to go forwards.

Realistically we cannot continue to treat clubs that get the same attendance as a village fate as viable...they aren’t. 20 pro clubs equals about 400-420 full time players, that frankly is probably more than is viable, so squads in level 2 would be mixed pro/semi pro as now.

Funding...all twenty clubs get an equal central distribution, then prize money based on where they come in the leagues, they also keep all revenue they generate. I would keep the top league top four end of season play off.

The sport is on its Ar*e we simply cannot go on as we are I am putting a view, others will have different ones, but we cannot be inward looking in a sport that is getting declining participation, Media viewing and attendances.

The snag is - where do developing players play ?







Cutting down on clubs means cutting down on players.







And we don't have enough.

There is no conceivable way that the existing SL clubs will vote to divide the money equally between more clubs.

One of the main reasons they want change, is to do the exact opposite with more for themselves and less for everyone else.

The word "change" in this context means implementing a system, any system that achieves that.

Dbvavda you still have not said who would miss out at present 14 s l. Clubs top 6 championship what about The dulls? Would you gave p / r each league or is it a closed shop . I do not disagree with you entirely but as Faxcar says do turkeys vote for Christmas?
Yes the heartland of r l is on it's uppers , but backwards is not always forwards, unless you are Marty mcfly and have a doc brown somewhere.

I am not saying what I think will happen but a suggestion on what I think could work.

I suspect “Turkeys” will not vote for it, but they are not the only ones with votes.

Development of players would come from.....a reserve league. Surely we must have one no matter what. I would like all games, unless televised, on sundays!

As for the twenty clubs, I would seek an independently evaluated plan and accept the most viable...it might even exclude some existing clubs. We could have a play off system at the bottom of league two, but I would like to see a closed shop for a couple of years. Nothing wrong with a development league below, but they would get no central funding.

Just a thought, always happy for better suggestions....as long as no mention mergers!

In this analogy, SL want to own the turkey farm, the restaurant, the chefs and write the menu.

The RFL have a nice comfy room in the hotel off the back of them formally called “Woodys Wedge” but currently undergoing refurbishment waiting to renamed.

We are the turkeys, with about the same prospects and the same future if they get their way.

More Stuffing anyone?

Dbvada not wanting to start an argument, but you have moved the goal posts . quote ' 20 pro clubs equals ' (sic). quote 'We could have a play off system at the bottom of league two' (sic) ?, make your mind up either 2 equal leagues or 2 divisions. If 2 equal leagues how do you divide them?, geographically? seems back to 1895.
As for a development league quote 'Nothing wrong with a development league below, but they would get no central funding.' how do they exist?, N C L? A closed shop? welcome to franchising, oh we've done that as well,what a joke that was.
You do make some good points but to my mind radical flaws, I don't pretend to have the answers, and some would say in reality I live too far away to have a say, reading between the lines I would sack the lot of them and start again.
off thread:
People say the system works in Association football, ask the teams outside of EPL if they think the distribution of funds is fair, they have yoyo clubs alternating EPL and Championship, plus other ex 1 st division stalwarts that cannot get out of the Championship because of parachute payments to relegated clubs, allowing them unfair advantages, in effect the EPL is a closed shop to around 25 /26 clubs.

I think Fax in Asia your comments are fine, it’s a debate, I’m thinking as I go and don’t have a clear solution.

I think most team sport in U.K. that has open promotion is actually almost a closed shop. Union has a system of one up and one down at top level and two up two down lower down, but in reality the top League is not an option for most clubs. A lot of historical famous clubs now sit in the leagues below and will not return with out a huge investment, attendances outside the best fourteen teams is well below league.

I don’t watch much football, but the rich here appear to be getting richer and lower league clubs can only progress with big cash injection. Wolves, Fleetwood examples.

Our other main team sport, Cricket, is a closed shop...but undergoing some modernisation.

I think in league we need to accept the old ways are broken. Perhaps the Union structure is the way to go, but for most clubs it means top level rugby will never happen again, it creates a false hope...which perhaps is all some want.

Hey Dbvada for once we are on the same page, knowing it needs change, but like most things in life 5 % of the rugby world has 95 % of the money, and don t see why it should change, just because they were lucky and got a break, or were born into riches, and can 't see further than their private gated driveway.