I guess the big question is what the objectives of the game are now.

Surely it has to be to grow the game's appeal, extending its fanbase and commercial attractiveness. Any strategy needs to be clear about what it is, and critically isn't, prioritising. E.g A strong and diverse top tier vs maintenance of heartland clubs whose attendances will only ever be, say, 1k. Everyone will have a compelling narrative - founders of the game in its heartland vs brave new world, risky oppprtunities. The same situation we were in at the time of Framing the Future and the essence of those recommendations, bar move from winter to summer, has essentially been disregarded, hence a broadly similar debate to the one 20 years ago. I simply don't see how we can progress as a sport unless fundamental changes are made, and reshuffling the current deckchairs on the Titanic won't do that.

https://www.totalrl.com/sky-driving-rfl-restructure/ This is interesting, proposals are being driven by Sky.

https://www.totalrl.com/sky-driving-rfl-restructure/ This is interesting, proposals are being driven by Sky.

Sounds like they're looking for an excuse to pull out altogether in 2 years time.

If they're unhappy with the quality of some games, they should be investing more in the game now, nothing is going to change for the better in the short term.

Or maybe they're dangling some carrots?

Sky will continue to squeeze the sport, as it diverts money into things like women’s football and trying to maintain its premier league deal.

We’re not in a position to play hardball, so we’ll have to take or leave their valuation of the game. Sky know how reliant the clubs are on the deal so they take advantage of that.

Football clubs are also reliant on TV money, but of course their draw is that much bigger. Sky renewed on the same terms as before, but there’s no way they’d have offered football a reduced contract.

https://twitter.com/RugbyLeagueLiv2/sta ... 13701?s=19 Relegation this year, staying with 12 next year, strong appetite for 10 in 2023. Make or break that last point as I reckon Toulouse will come up and be more competitive than Leigh.

https://twitter.com/RugbyLeagueLiv2/sta ... 13701?s=19 Relegation this year, staying with 12 next year, strong appetite for 10 in 2023. Make or break that last point as I reckon Toulouse will come up and be more competitive than Leigh.

I guess its a bit of a fudge really because everyone wants change apparently but they can't decide what change. One has to wonder if decisions by the clubs are made more to suit their own requirements rather than the good of the game. After all that hoo haa about fourteen teams in the end the allocation of Sky money and the threat of its reduction between the current clubs won the day again and we are as we were, although Sky who lets face it hold the future of the game as we know it in their hands are pretty adamant that from 2023 if the deal is to go on beyond the end of 2024 then they want two divisions of 10, all professional and and being broadcast.

Determining the top 10 will be so contentious. Obviously you have the Big 4 plus Catalans then a raft of clubs vying for the other 5 spots including London, Toulouse, Bradford etc. Could see a revert to franchising or similar.

The way it is being set up (obvious caveats about how it actually turns out acknowledged), the controversy wouldn’t be all that significant for the top 10, imo. Being in the second tier wouldn’t be like it is now, on the other side of an economic gulf. So if, against the odds, one of the Big 4 finished second bottom next year (massive injury crisis sorta scenario), it wouldn’t be such a dislocation.

with a smaller disparity in central distributions, personally I’d like two conferences of 10 (18 games H&A against your conference rivals and 10 H or A against members of the other conference). But perhaps the jeopardy of P&R helps sell it all. Anyway, the point is more what happens beyond the relocated gulf outside the [u20[/u.

If we used current league positions, it would mean clubs including Sheffield, Widnes, Newcastle, Dewsbury, Oldham, Swinton, Barrow, Workington, Doncaster, Keighley and Rochdale… doing what? Tbh, there’s several there I didn’t expect to see in the top flight again my lifetime. But four of them have played in SL previously. And Newcastle seem ambitious. But how, or even whether, they fit in the new pro RL ecosystem is probably the most challenging issue if all of this goes ahead.

Quote ="Mrs Barista"https://twitter.com/RugbyLeagueLiv2/status/1425534669530013701?s=19 Relegation this year, staying with 12 next year, strong appetite for 10 in 2023. Make or break that last point as I reckon Toulouse will come up and be more competitive than Leigh.'" This article from a source that is normally reliable tells a different story regarding the attitude of the clubs to two 10 team leagues https://www.totalrl.com/super-league-cl ... on-format/

Quote ="Mrs Barista"https://twitter.com/RugbyLeagueLiv2/status/1425534669530013701?s=19 Relegation this year, staying with 12 next year, strong appetite for 10 in 2023. Make or break that last point as I reckon Toulouse will come up and be more competitive than Leigh.'" This article from a source that is normally reliable tells a different story regarding the attitude of the clubs to two 10 team leagues https://www.totalrl.com/super-league-cl ... on-format/

They’ve just announced that the Challenge Cup Final is moving back to May from next season.

As a one off, next season’s Final is being held at Tottenham’s new ground (62,000). It then returns to Wembley in 2023.

Good decision as a July/August Cup Final can affect the end of season run in. Also keeps the Cup momentum going early season.

Sky have to take some of the blame for the decline in quality of tv games , No body likes Thirsday games and then forcing clubs to play on a short 4 day turn around even before covid hit is just asking for a low quality game with 2 fatigued sides .

For what Sky pay I think they've got a bargain. The standard of the competition has undoubtedly been compromised by covid and Sky have used this this as a bargaining chip to pay less. It hardly does a great job promoting upcoming fixtures itself.

OK RL doesn't help itself sometimes but it still remains the best sport to watch on TV by a country mile.

Sky must have invested a massive amount securing the rights for the British Lions tour. The hype for the tour was incredible. Wall to wall coverage. I'm not a Union fan but watched the tests out of interest like many others probably did. The quality of the games were terrible. Even die hard Union said it was rubbish. 5 minutes scrums, kick tennis all pile in then penalty scrum kick repeat. There was little running and passing in fact the ball was hardly in play. That game is a mess. How people can watch that rubbish is beyond me.

Considering how Sky are constantly reducing the money they give the game, how are they able to dictate the make up of the game?!

Ah but there lies the rub. People do watch it it and terrestrial tv would have bid for it but Sky can outbid them. We have to get it into our thick heads that RL professionally is based on the M62 corridor and no one else is interested. Media coverage is at an all time low unless it’s a bad story. No Sky dosh, no Super League, simples.

Sadly you pretty much sum it up in regards to the sports situation. Whilst SKY are the paymasters its the RFL and Super League (Europe) Ltd that are at fault which is pretty much the clubs themselves.

The promotion of the sport is very poorly done and all the changes with structures, formats the crazy ways they've wasted money and opportunities such as the Stobart and Papa John deals are just prime examples. Its a professional sport run seemingly run by amateurs and no wonder Elston got no where at SL when theres no one in overall charge to make the decisions for the good of the game just all the clubs thinking inwardly.

Sadly until that mindset changes and they structure things at the top differently to allow and enable the sport to grow it will continue to fail. I'm not a fan of the Hearns but you can't deny they have turned darts and snooker from pub pastimes in to main stream sports generating media coverage, sponsorship and revenue. So that shows you what can be done and with RL as a much more exciting and entertaining sport than those two the mind boggles as to why the supposed business men can't see it, but they don't want to let go of any of it and woukd rather keep 100% of very little then give a percentage away for an increase in revenue, exposure and sponsorship.

I agree, Barry Hearn has marketed snooker and darts really well.

Rugby League could also learn from cricket. That’s a sport that keeps re-inventing itself. Most home Test Matches sell out on the first few days; they’ve introduced Twenty 20 to great success; then create The Hundred. Personally I prefer Test Cricket, but I recently went to a Hundred match and they’ve reached out to a new younger audience by holding it each day in the summer holidays, live DJ’s at each match and created a whole new revenue stream. All App based info and ticketing, I now keep get notifications each evening prompting me with that night’s fixture, which sometimes results in me watching some of a game that would normally not have tuned in to.

As others have said, we have one of the best sports, but we also have the worst Administration and Marketing.

For me, snooker and county cricket in recent years are more cautionary tales than examples to follow.

It's all money and power ain't it. Common sense and growing the game sadly comes second, as those who hold the reins fret about losing an ounce of power and a slice of the cake so to speak.

Sky are a double edged sword, without them Rugby leagues screwed, but they've also turned into abit of a parasite in a way, they seem obsessed with getting rugby league broadcasting rights for next to nothing while trying more and more to dictate the structure, with their ideas being a long way from what the general rugby league fan wants.

Didn't BT bid previously for broadcasting rights?

I'd suggest the Rfl, enter discussions with broadcasters like Dazn who are great for the boxing and alternative broadcasters and call Sky's bluff as they seem an abusive partner.

Also if Sky want a better quality product (the reason for the restructuring) (and threats to pull the plug) give rugby league a better broadcasting deal and pump cash into the sport an increase in salary cap would attract better players across the league. And strengthen clubs infrastructures.

I think we're hamstrung by the rfl though, need to be bought out by the nrl and a total revamp. While the rfl have the power this games going nowhere.

Google the board members for the rfl and read the profiles, your wonder how some are sat on a rfl board, making rugby based decisions

they are like watching paint dry

Hit the nail on the head about Sky but they are now a noose around the neck of Rugby League with them controlling us.
I have said previously we may have to take two steps backwards in terms of income to get rid of Sky buts its terrestrial TV that will grow this sport not Sky .Unfortunately as you say until we can get get rid of the current RFL it wont happen.

Yes, great idea if you want viewing figures for games of about 10,000.

We need Sky Sports whether we like it or not but we need a deal that allows some live games on terrestrial TV e.g. Sundays on C4 or ITV4.

Then why isn't terrestrial TV getting involved?

Which is why I've suggested alternatives, at the end of the day, footballs broadcast over several broadcasters BT, Amazon prime, sky TV etc. I dont think its beyond the realms of possibility saying to sky you can have 75% at this price, then selling the rest to BT etc.

I'd even try to negotiate with a broadcaster like Dazn for ppv per match, like our league did in a fashion.

Fact is we need to stand up to sky, and get tough

It's easy when other broadcasters are interested, but they're not, or at least they don't appear to be.

A lot of that is down to a lack of marketing.
I am certain there was terrestrial tv interest during the previous Sky package negotiation and thats were marketing skills should have been applied instead they just rolled over to Sky as the highest bidder.
Terrestrial tv coverage for limited live games together with Sky at that time would have enhanced national TV coverage of the game but of course that would have meant the RFL having a skilled negotiating team and we all know they dont.

That was reported when the deal was announced.