Given the size of the NRL's TV deal, I think Nigel Wood should go prostrate himself at the feet of our Aussie cousins, and ask for a few crumbs from their table, on the grounds that they won't miss the loose change, and it'll enable their players to carry on coming over here for a jolly for a few years more.

Last year's deal was an absolute shocker, which not only got us bugger-all last year, but has - as others have pointed out - probably made it much harder to get a deal this year. A few of us called that at the time....

I dont think BIG Nige could live with the crumbs off anyones table

I agree its not easy, and that the RU brand is worth far far more ( basically because your brand gets all the additional free exposure from the wide media coverage ) ... however....they're paid good money at the RFL and its not supposed to be easy. The question is not 'are we doing as well as Union?', because that would be unrealistic, but rather, 'are the current people at the RFL delivering somewhere near the best that could be realistically acheived?' The reason I don't like the excuses is that it seems we have virtually no standard by which to measure Wood et al. if every 'failure' is excused by 'well its hard'. How will we ever know if they're doing a good job? Put it this way, if I were an applicant for the job, I'd expect to have to commit to delivering a decent sponsor within 9 months, and expect to be fired if I didn't. I don't think its unreasonable for Wood to be held to that standard. If, after firing him, the next guy also fails to find a decent sponsor, then Wood would have some grounds to turn around and say "told you so, aint so easy is it" but he's been in the job too long and we should thank him for his service but take a shot at some new blood and fresh thinking.

Can we not go the same route as cycling?

They avoid the over reliance on one title sponsor for races like the Tour de France by signing up a pool of smaller sponsors.

The risk and exposure is lessened and its easier to find replacements when one sponsor leaves as the cost for a new company is shared with other title sponsors.

What I fear is that a publicity seeking, desperate RFL promote one of those lotteries where companies can pay £5k or something for a ticket and there is a clubcall type draw to pick the winning name. For me that would cheapen the value of SL.

don't panic the RFL/ SL have geared up three blue chip sponsorship deals for SL CC & WCC
Comet - Jessops & HMV
our future is safe

if HMV get on board will it be a record year?

(really sorry about that, i'll get coat)

This might be a daft question but there is a commercial department at the RFL ?

I assume there is, maybe that's where they're going wrong!

I couldn't find anything on the RFL site that actually points towards a Commercial Department (useless I'm going blind!)!

Quote ="MP"I assume there is, maybe that's where they're going wrong! I couldn't find anything on the RFL site that actually points towards a Commercial Department (useless I'm going blind!)!'" If you ask them, I'm sure they'll say there is, but the whole thing just comes across as not-very-professional. Random example, look at the photo of the Directors www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/about_t ... _directors. Granted, you'd need a bit of work to make that lot look dynamic, but even so...ill-fitting crumpled suits and a cardigan, guy at the back resembling a used-car dealer from the 70's. Stood outside an old red-brick building. Does a commercial partner think "these guys will get value for my brand"? Not to mention the dreadful image quality. We have a massive uphill battle marketing this sport at the best of times, but we don't help ourselves by not getting the details of presentation right. This stuff seems trivial, but it matters.

Quote ="MP"I assume there is, maybe that's where they're going wrong! I couldn't find anything on the RFL site that actually points towards a Commercial Department (useless I'm going blind!)!'" If you ask them, I'm sure they'll say there is, but the whole thing just comes across as not-very-professional. Random example, look at the photo of the Directors www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/about_t ... _directors. Granted, you'd need a bit of work to make that lot look dynamic, but even so...ill-fitting crumpled suits and a cardigan, guy at the back resembling a used-car dealer from the 70's. Stood outside an old red-brick building. Does a commercial partner think "these guys will get value for my brand"? Not to mention the dreadful image quality. We have a massive uphill battle marketing this sport at the best of times, but we don't help ourselves by not getting the details of presentation right. This stuff seems trivial, but it matters.

Oh, and whilst I'm ranting, look at this defintion of 'Vision, Mission, and Strategic Aims': www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/about_t ... na__values Most of you have probably heard of S.M.A.R.T. when writing this sort of stuff. It's not management-waffle ( though it can be in wrong hands) but common-sense. Make EVERY goal: SPECIFIC MEASURABLE ATTAINABLE RELEVANT TIME-BOUND Almost all the RFL's goals fail to match almost all of those criteria. The result is that the 'strategy' is itself just a load of waffle, against which its almost impossible to decide if they're delivering or not. Which is probably just how they like it.

Oh, and whilst I'm ranting, look at this defintion of 'Vision, Mission, and Strategic Aims': www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/about_t ... na__values Most of you have probably heard of S.M.A.R.T. when writing this sort of stuff. It's not management-waffle ( though it can be in wrong hands) but common-sense. Make EVERY goal: SPECIFIC MEASURABLE ATTAINABLE RELEVANT TIME-BOUND Almost all the RFL's goals fail to match almost all of those criteria. The result is that the 'strategy' is itself just a load of waffle, against which its almost impossible to decide if they're delivering or not. Which is probably just how they like it.

alas, it seems to be the culture in RL to reward failure. I have seen nothing to point towards the guy recruited from Man City (who claimed he single handedly propelled them towhere they are now) that makesme think this was a good appointment, but as this is the RFL, we'll wait until Gillette bail the out with RLWC 2013 sponsorship, we get less than Saracens for SL and the CC is given away before realising that he was all and wind, but had "man city"on his CV.

It's not just the RFL either.London Broncos are being run (into the ground) by another who talks the talk but is in reality is out of his depth. Salford had a massive opportunitylast year to attract new fans, but as is the way with RL, they stuck posts in the ground and expected people to just turn up.....it doesn't work that way.

There are pro-active clubs out there and I for one (I am no fan of Wigan or their egotistical fanbase) would appoint Ian Lenagan to the position of CEO of the RFL. He took over with Wigan averaging 14k and has added another 21% to that in 5 years...his aim is to fill the DW stadium for every game....that's the sort of ambition needed to lead the sport IMHO!

A few journos on twitter, including Pete Smith and Martyn Sadler, are suggesting that a sponsor will be announced on Tuesday (for the CC), and that further announcements are expected within a couple of weeks.

the RFL has tweeted that there will be a series of exciting announcements over the next 2 weeks.

not sure a sponsorship announcement could ever be described as exciting, but at least they have something lined up.

Let's hope its a mass resignation. The rest is detail, sport won't move on in any significant way without fresh leadership.

Any managerial position should be about hitting targets and it doesn't seem that our sport has publicised targets of where the bame should be in 12 months, 5 years, 10 years.
Without a structured plan, the game can only drift along.
Good oportunities may come along and some may still be taken but, this is different to someone or a collection of people moving the sport forward.

Agree with wrencat. I suppose we don't know for CERTAIN that they don't have some structured, measurable targets but reading the bilge (and it really is as awful as I've seen anywhere) that they put on the site concerning strategy, one has to suspect that such rubbish is a fair indicator of their grasp of leadership. If it's not, then it begs the question "why print such waffle?" I often find that where there's a resistance to setting clear measurable goals, its because there's a fear of being held to them. But, setting measurable targets and delivering (most of) them is called leadership. It's hard but its what you get paid for. At the VERY LEAST there's no excuse for publishing such rubbish, but unfortunately its probably much worse than that - they probably don't even realise its a load of rubbish. That's much scarier.

Adam Pearson alluded to a move within SL for the clubs to run the game themselves, he didn't go into great detail (I am getting this 3rd hand, so forgive me) but it seems Wigan are leading the way to try and reform the RFL somehow.

Quite how it would work I know not, but I know Red Hall have done nothing good for the game in years, any developments or improvements (and not all the changes have been improvements imho) have been driven by SKY.

The fact Stobart trucks still have RL players on the side indicates how lax the RFL are.

Just had a thought, if everyone who posts on RLFANS gives £20, we could have the RLFANS Super League 2013, and we could force them to replace Eddie and Stevo!

Quite right, the RFL should stop this lunacy at once. This free publicity during a period when we don't have another sponsor is ridiculous, and is needlessly promoting our game at a time when we should be mourning how bad our game it at promoting itself.

Nope, Stobart passing themselves off as being involved when they no longer are is wrong, and it is a bad image when discussing sponsorship with other potential sponsors, what guarantess can the RFL offer that Stobart will immediately unbrand the vehicles for the start of the season in 13 days?

[urlhttp://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_10774-rfl-backed-in-to-a-corner.html[/url

So RLFANS Super League it is!!

I'm thinking if we all promised to wear a super league tshirt on the way to work we could get it for free!

Something I have suggested before, we completely follow the NFL model. 14 owners of 14 clubs, with 1 vote out of 14. They appoint and vote for the directors, they have the league set up they want. Junior development they want etc etc.

I would split SL completely from the RFL, the only link on a day to day basis would be the continuation of the solidarity payments of 1/16th of the SL contract to the RFL and 1/16th to the lower leagues.