I think that's simplistic. As stakeholders in a sport that appears to be, at best, standing still, I think it's reasonable for people to have a view on how the man responsible for the health and welfare of the game is performing. Perhaps basing it around his salary is an error - but his stewardship of the game is certainly subject to scrutiny.

It is simplistic and if pressed I be very much in the "lets have a new man in charge camp", but would this petition have been start d if it had not been for the releasing of salary details?

It's not that difficult to find out the highest paid directors salary, you can get that from the financial statements, hence, I knew his pay was circa £252k in th previous year.

The game is going backwards, there is no doubt. I have looked at some of the comments on that petition, some are reasonable but some are just petty minded and a couple are plain insulting. Is that the really going to be taken seriously?

Personally I think the position of CEO has a live span of approx 5 years. Beyond that, if there is not progress then it's time for change AS familiarity breeds Contempt.

The creator of the petition no doubt has the best interest at heart. It's timing, shortly after Wood's salary was published is poor and will be pointed to question its credibility.

You Sir are Nuts and it is time you got on your Bike and left the country

Granted, but there has to be a correlation between the two. Hence why I think there should be an agreed strategy with KPI's to measure his performance against. if not it ends up where we are today. Subjective and personal.

Absolutely...

What is the long term plan for the game? Does anybody know?

Is expansion a direction the game is wanting to head in? If so, do we know why? What areas are we targetting? What are the long term plans to get there? What are we doing at grass roots level to build the infratructure a professional club requires to build from?

What is the plan with regards attendances? Are we looking to improve attendances at grounds? Or are we more focussed on the commerial aspect of TV audiances? Whichever it is, what is the long term aim? What are the goals? What plans are in place to get there? Or is it both (which I'd guess it is)? If so, how are we going to manage to directly conflicting goals, and again, what are the short term/long term plans and goals?

It feels very much that we just plod along in the 'here and now' with no long term thinking or strategy. We just protect what we've got currently and fire fight the various issues that come along (clubs struggling financially, trends in the game, the NRL moving light years ahead, inability to attract top players). That's not a way to make any business thrive. We need a visionary - someone who can see past the current issues and look at the long term future of the game. We shouldn't worry too much about the NRL's massive salary cap and losing talent right now, we should focus on how we make the game over here the absolute best it can be - if we do that, we'll start attracting more money into the game and many of our currrent issues will then be resolved.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in 17 years we've only had TWO people running the RFL. If that doesn't explain how stagnant the sport has become, I don't know what will!

I don't think there should be any correlation between a roles pay and performance, the pay is the rate it demands whether that's 30k or 300k and that role should be fulfilled to a set of given parameters.

Once you get into correlation of pay vs role you get into the whole rubbish of comparing nurses job to any high paid job CEO / sportsman etc.
Pay is and always has been dictated by two things, can anyone else do what you do and how much cash do you generate for your given company.

If the RFL is making a profit and seeing growth then the argument for no confidence will be seriously flawed.

Quote ="Superted"Absolutely... What is the long term plan for the game? Does anybody know? Is expansion a direction the game is wanting to head in? If so, do we know why? What areas are we targetting? What are the long term plans to get there? What are we doing at grass roots level to build the infratructure a professional club requires to build from? What is the plan with regards attendances? Are we looking to improve attendances at grounds? Or are we more focussed on the commerial aspect of TV audiances? Whichever it is, what is the long term aim? What are the goals? What plans are in place to get there? Or is it both (which I'd guess it is)? If so, how are we going to manage to directly conflicting goals, and again, what are the short term/long term plans and goals? It feels very much that we just plod along in the 'here and now' with no long term thinking or strategy. We just protect what we've got currently and fire fight the various issues that come along (clubs struggling financially, trends in the game, the NRL moving light years ahead, inability to attract top players). That's not a way to make any business thrive. We need a visionary - someone who can see past the current issues and look at the long term future of the game. We shouldn't worry too much about the NRL's massive salary cap and losing talent right now, we should focus on how we make the game over here the absolute best it can be - if we do that, we'll start attracting more money into the game and many of our currrent issues will then be resolved.'" If anyone wants to understand the RFL's strategy and objectives, its all here media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugb ... 4-2021.pdf

Quote ="Superted"Absolutely... What is the long term plan for the game? Does anybody know? Is expansion a direction the game is wanting to head in? If so, do we know why? What areas are we targetting? What are the long term plans to get there? What are we doing at grass roots level to build the infratructure a professional club requires to build from? What is the plan with regards attendances? Are we looking to improve attendances at grounds? Or are we more focussed on the commerial aspect of TV audiances? Whichever it is, what is the long term aim? What are the goals? What plans are in place to get there? Or is it both (which I'd guess it is)? If so, how are we going to manage to directly conflicting goals, and again, what are the short term/long term plans and goals? It feels very much that we just plod along in the 'here and now' with no long term thinking or strategy. We just protect what we've got currently and fire fight the various issues that come along (clubs struggling financially, trends in the game, the NRL moving light years ahead, inability to attract top players). That's not a way to make any business thrive. We need a visionary - someone who can see past the current issues and look at the long term future of the game. We shouldn't worry too much about the NRL's massive salary cap and losing talent right now, we should focus on how we make the game over here the absolute best it can be - if we do that, we'll start attracting more money into the game and many of our currrent issues will then be resolved.'" If anyone wants to understand the RFL's strategy and objectives, its all here media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugb ... 4-2021.pdf

Quote ="Stanley Unwin"If anyone wants to understand the RFL's strategy and objectives, its all here media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugb ... 4-2021.pdf'" Principle one of that 13-point plan is the key one for me. We simply don't have the key stakeholders aligned to the common goal, because too many clubs either don't have the skills to reach it, or because others don't share that same vision. I posted this on the RFL Exec's thread - it sums up where I think they key problem is with the sport at large. Quote This is where there is a real lack of joined-up thinking from the RFL and the other key stakeholders - the clubs. There is a fair criticism to be made that the sport is poorly marketed. What I think is unfair is how most of the blame for that is pinned on the RFL. If you actually look at attendances for the main events that the RFL is responsible for marketing (the Grand Final, Magic Weekend and the CC Final), the trendline points upwards for each of those events. The vast majority of the events in the RL calendar are league and cup fixtures where the responsibility for marketing those fixtures falls onto the clubs - and that is the biggest failure of the sport in my view. Whilst the RFL has its responsibilities to market the league as an entity, as a very basic 'Marketing 101 approach', you have to grow the audience at the main point of consumption - and this is invariably at local level. That local engagement then feeds into support for international events and the wider sport. What seems to happen at the moment is that the RFL provides some branding and some collateral at the start of the season, but the clubs seem free to use that as much or as little as they want. There's very little consistency of activity, and very little joined-up thinking between the RFL/SLE and the clubs. We have 12 Super League clubs, and very little growth at the majority of them, so we really need to look at why - and what they are doing to engage new supporters, to encourage ticket sales, to speak to and cater for the sorts of audiences that we want to attract, and the audiences that will attract the sort of sponsors that we want to attract, to engage young people through their community system to play the sport - all pretty basic points of marketing. The clubs know their local markets much better than the RFL. They know their proposition much better than the RFL and they know their business models much better than the RFL - the onus is on them to all deliver audience growth at a local level. Forgive the anecdote, but I know of two clubs that have no documented social media marketing plan - despite this form of media offering enormous opportunities to overcome what many in the sport percieve as a media bias against us. I can tell you of another that is spending 60% of it's social media advertising budget advertising to people who are already buying the product being advertised. This is basic stuff that they should have been getting right five years ago - not still struggling with today. It's not the RFL's fault that certain clubs can't sell tickets for a true, sustainable market value. It's not the RFL's fault that some clubs struggle to engage new supporters. It's not the RFL's fault that some clubs still play in grounds that really aren't condusive to attracting people new to the sport. It's not the RFL's fault that around half of the England squad in the Four Nations came from the acadamies of three clubs. It's not the RFL's fault that clubs can't get basic marketing principles right, or that they see marketing as a cost centre. The RFL deserves it's criticisms but there's no doubt in my mind that it is being hamstrung by pretty much all of the member clubs in one shape or form. It's time we started sharing the blame accordingly, rather than always looking to Red Hall.'"

Quote ="Stanley Unwin"If anyone wants to understand the RFL's strategy and objectives, its all here media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugb ... 4-2021.pdf'" Principle one of that 13-point plan is the key one for me. We simply don't have the key stakeholders aligned to the common goal, because too many clubs either don't have the skills to reach it, or because others don't share that same vision. I posted this on the RFL Exec's thread - it sums up where I think they key problem is with the sport at large. Quote This is where there is a real lack of joined-up thinking from the RFL and the other key stakeholders - the clubs. There is a fair criticism to be made that the sport is poorly marketed. What I think is unfair is how most of the blame for that is pinned on the RFL. If you actually look at attendances for the main events that the RFL is responsible for marketing (the Grand Final, Magic Weekend and the CC Final), the trendline points upwards for each of those events. The vast majority of the events in the RL calendar are league and cup fixtures where the responsibility for marketing those fixtures falls onto the clubs - and that is the biggest failure of the sport in my view. Whilst the RFL has its responsibilities to market the league as an entity, as a very basic 'Marketing 101 approach', you have to grow the audience at the main point of consumption - and this is invariably at local level. That local engagement then feeds into support for international events and the wider sport. What seems to happen at the moment is that the RFL provides some branding and some collateral at the start of the season, but the clubs seem free to use that as much or as little as they want. There's very little consistency of activity, and very little joined-up thinking between the RFL/SLE and the clubs. We have 12 Super League clubs, and very little growth at the majority of them, so we really need to look at why - and what they are doing to engage new supporters, to encourage ticket sales, to speak to and cater for the sorts of audiences that we want to attract, and the audiences that will attract the sort of sponsors that we want to attract, to engage young people through their community system to play the sport - all pretty basic points of marketing. The clubs know their local markets much better than the RFL. They know their proposition much better than the RFL and they know their business models much better than the RFL - the onus is on them to all deliver audience growth at a local level. Forgive the anecdote, but I know of two clubs that have no documented social media marketing plan - despite this form of media offering enormous opportunities to overcome what many in the sport percieve as a media bias against us. I can tell you of another that is spending 60% of it's social media advertising budget advertising to people who are already buying the product being advertised. This is basic stuff that they should have been getting right five years ago - not still struggling with today. It's not the RFL's fault that certain clubs can't sell tickets for a true, sustainable market value. It's not the RFL's fault that some clubs struggle to engage new supporters. It's not the RFL's fault that some clubs still play in grounds that really aren't condusive to attracting people new to the sport. It's not the RFL's fault that around half of the England squad in the Four Nations came from the acadamies of three clubs. It's not the RFL's fault that clubs can't get basic marketing principles right, or that they see marketing as a cost centre. The RFL deserves it's criticisms but there's no doubt in my mind that it is being hamstrung by pretty much all of the member clubs in one shape or form. It's time we started sharing the blame accordingly, rather than always looking to Red Hall.'"

Quote ="bramleyrhino"There is a fair criticism to be made that the sport is poorly marketed. What I think is unfair is how most of the blame for that is pinned on the RFL. If you actually look at attendances for the main events that the RFL is responsible for marketing (the Grand Final, Magic Weekend and the CC Final), the trendline points upwards for each of those events. '" Quote If anyone wants to understand the RFL's strategy and objectives, its all here media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugb ... 4-2021.pdf'" Yes the clubs should be held responsible for some of the figures before but as part of their own strategic plan.. Sell out the ‘Million Pound’ game on one occasion by 2017; 2015 Belle Vue 7,236 Capacity 9,333 2016 Craven Park 6,562 Capacity: 12,225 So not only did it not sell out, but attendance went down. • Sell out on one day of the Summer Bash by 2017; 2017 Bloomfield Road 11,557 Capacity: 17,338 Only two years into the 6 year plan and they have already failed. I HATE the dick waving the RFL did when they said it was a record breaking weekend, with 16,444 there over the weekend, glossing over the fact the Sunday figures would be 4887. Almost a quarter the capacity.

Quote ="bramleyrhino"There is a fair criticism to be made that the sport is poorly marketed. What I think is unfair is how most of the blame for that is pinned on the RFL. If you actually look at attendances for the main events that the RFL is responsible for marketing (the Grand Final, Magic Weekend and the CC Final), the trendline points upwards for each of those events. '" Quote If anyone wants to understand the RFL's strategy and objectives, its all here media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL-Rugb ... 4-2021.pdf'" Yes the clubs should be held responsible for some of the figures before but as part of their own strategic plan.. Sell out the ‘Million Pound’ game on one occasion by 2017; 2015 Belle Vue 7,236 Capacity 9,333 2016 Craven Park 6,562 Capacity: 12,225 So not only did it not sell out, but attendance went down. • Sell out on one day of the Summer Bash by 2017; 2017 Bloomfield Road 11,557 Capacity: 17,338 Only two years into the 6 year plan and they have already failed. I HATE the dick waving the RFL did when they said it was a record breaking weekend, with 16,444 there over the weekend, glossing over the fact the Sunday figures would be 4887. Almost a quarter the capacity.

Nigel Wood didnt fall in to the job or get it by accident. Its not simply that Wood needs to go but there is a reason why the job went to him. The entire governance of the game is wrong from top to bottom.

Wood should go, Rimmer should go, and rather than replace them, an entirely new governing structure of the game should be implemented.

As a side issue I think a big problem with how the game is managed is the lack of voice for the supporters. The key stakeholders in the future success of the game is not the club owners or those at Red Hall; it is those who are involved at an amateur level and those who spend their hard earned cash following their club.

Nigel Wood and his colleagues have for years turned the game into a joke with little or no opposition from the supporters and certainly no collective representative of the fans.

While we're here, Brian Barwick has seemingly offered nothing to Rugby League since his appointment. Not a true scale of his influence but to search for 'Brian Barwick Rugby League' offers practically nothing via google search or news section.

The last thing of any note comes from October 2015 where Barwick says Rugby League must learn to grow its brand and engage people in it. So 2 years on, what evidence is there of that? People are disillusioned as ever. Just more fans to exploit financially.

It's great that there is a plan (haven't had the time for a proper look at it), but from a quick skim read, I can't see any tangible actions that have been taking place to achieve any of the goals, the game is just ticking alon, there's certainly no public voice bringing the plan to life, linking actions with the plan, bringing the end goal to life.
There's a real lack of visible leadership and direction.

Does the RLSA still exist? Why don't we create a group from people on here and approach The RFL with these concerns?

I get where you're coming from, but in my respects it's a daft KPI to set yourself. It's like the KPIs that we had pre-licencing about average attendances, which led to certain clubs simply giving tickets away and massively devaluing the sport, simply to tick the box.

So few of these KPIs are revenue-related KPIs, and they're very easy to fudge or claim a 'false positive'. If you had a MPG involving a Leeds or Wigan away at a 10k ground, you'd probably be able to claim a sell-out with relatively little effort, but I think we'd all agree that it wouldn't be indicitive of the strengh of the sport. I also think that in the case of the MPG it's important to look at a long-term trend as it (if it is allowed to) develops. The first MPG involved two teams very closely located together and a well-supported visting team. The second involved two teams that were three times the distance apart and with a visiting team that are notoriously poor travelers. It needs a fair test to judge whether that fixture is a failure or not.

The problems with the Championship specifically aren't helped by it having this percpetion that none of the clubs (perhaps with the exception of Batley, who are on record as saying that they don't want promotion) want to be in it. It's hard to sell a league as a vibrant, worthwhile event when so many clubs are unhappy that they're not being allowed into a different league, yet so few are actually capable of getting out of the one they are in.

And again it comes down to how we are growing the audience at local level. The more people that the clubs can engage with at a local level, the more that filters through into success at RFL events.

As I said earlier, this is Marketing 101 that clubs are getting wrong - never mind the next level.

I agree with alot of what you say, and as someone with marketing experience, its not just the RFL who struggle with basic practises.. There is other things I could highlight but those stats were simple, easy to digest figures which are already showing the RFL's plan isn't either a) water tight or b) just plain shoddy.

I'm not for a second absolving the RFL from criticism - it absolutely deserves both broard and very specific criticisms and I, like many others, am no fan of Wood.

But for as long as we see the RFL being used as this convenient lightning rod for the game's ills, we'll continue to avoid challenging underperformance at each and every club in Super League and beyond - and that's what will see the game go backwards.

Not only Nigel Wood but all the rest need to go and get people in that can do a good job and make money and sort out the mess it seems to be

Nothing ever comes out. We don't know where the game will be in 18months m, never mind long term. What is their vision? What are their plans? What initiatives do they have in store? We're never told

Is the problem the money or the man?? A lot of people seem to be moaning more about his wage than his "acheivements". I agree he should go, but this is the top job in RL in the Northern Hemisphere, if the person did a great job they could justify a salary of 10 million!

Im not sure who would come in and replace him though, ideally it would be a rugby man and a business man working side by side.

It requires a sports businessman - someone who knows how to run a business, but also understands the sporting landscape.

He might be massively dis-liked, but I'd imagine Barrie Hearn could make a huge impact on our sport!

Barry Hearn is very much about razzamatazz and changing formats. Havent we had enough of that over the years?

RL needs to stick/return to its roots which are firmly set in the north. Yes, try expand the game but naturally rather than forced. If it doesnt happen, then sobeit. The forced expansion has been tried and failed.

A stronger and more stable game makes it easier to market which in turn should bring greater money into it and lead to growth. Create proper competition where teams can be promoted into SL and relegated out of it. Sport is about success and failure; it shouldnt be about franchising but about what happens on the field of play.

it absolutely should NOT have to be a 'rugby' man, in fact it doesn't even need someone from a sporting background IMHO.
I reckon you could bin off the whole of the hierachy/pigs at the trough and replace them with fewer than half to do the same job more efficiently but with more staffers.
offer the job up at 500k+ strict performance related bonuses over a 6-7 year period. Give them full rein to make swathing changes/get rid of the chaff, very likely someone from private industry with a track record of success, integrity and contacts/influence. something that the RFL board lacks in abundance.
Forcing the change is the problem, none of the pigs will give up what they have, not until they kick the bucket/too senile to find the trough. The clubs breaking away from the RFL in totality would not be an easy thing to do, there's also a risk element to it, maybe something similar to the soccer premiership.

A lot of hot air & rubbish is being spouted on here. Us anoraks my be obsessive about our sport & care about it but the game is owned by the owners of the clubs we are just customers we either turn up & pay or we don't, the only way the game will grow is if more people turn up & at the moment we are not doing it. Nigel wood is only the mouth piece for the owners & what he earns is their business. All this talk of stake holders is a myth the game is owned & run by a couple of dozen men our opinions are only important to us. I wish it were not true but that's the way it is.