Looking at the debacle what has happened at Bradford, London and Wakefield how right he was last year, the guy ought to be put in charge of the rl. I'm not the biggest fan but give the guy credit where credit is due spoke out on the state of the game and wasn't scared to give what is the truth concerning the running of the rl.

He is a smart man NH. The directors can't make any money owning a SL club he alone knows this. as he is a fan of KR otherwise he would have walked years ago but how will the docat salford make his money back? It will take years..I suppose every club could do with a money man like salford have unless the marketing is done right as it is at Leeds & wigan where it is backed up with silverware what happens when salford win nothing & the fans clear off will he walkaway? Like at bradford? Should they be allowed to come & go & leave these historic clubs up pooh avenue?

Utter, utter nonsense. Bradford, London and Wakefield are victims of mismanagement, pure and simple. They spent money they didn't have, and got themselves in trouble. That will happen however many clubs are in Super League. In fact, if the competition shrinks and has less teams, the television revenue will be cut and all the top players wages will increase. After one season, no club would be better off, we'd just have a much smaller talent pool to draw from. The answer is so simple - just spend within your means If you have less fans than another club, spend less!

Everything Hudgell has said stinks of short term self interest from a bloke that cares about his own club, and not for the needs of Rugby League in this Country, and indeed Worldwide. If we can't run our national show-piece competition with 14 clubs, we may as well give up.

I agree clubs have been mismanaged but the current rl supremo's have known and allowed this to go on, how have they let this happen if it had been fc or kr it would have been tough go and play in the lower leagues. Bradford London and Wakefield should get the same treatment has Rangers did in the Scottish fa and give other teams a chance.

Salford & fans?

I am not one to state our fans are better than yours or moan about how many fans a club has, after all I want London in SL. But unless I have missed something I have yet to see any evidence of the people of Salford buying into the Salford revolution other than a few hardened fans on twitter. Koucash will be off sooner or later. No doubt quoting how he was prevented from doing. What he wants how he wants to do it. The only positive for him will be that he will lose a lot less than he would if it was football club he was buying.

As for Hudge well from where I'm standing I believe he has made massive losses while in charge at HKR and has very little to show for it. Hardly a shinning example of how to run a club. They have improved from lower league to big. League safety but at what personal cost to him?

Totally agree on the punishment, just disagree with the club bosses that want to reduce the number of teams in our competition. Sheffield have managed to be very successful with hardly any fans and working within their budget. A club like them could easily operate in Super League with the amount of money SL clubs get. By all means punish the clubs that overspend, but replace them with teams like Sheffield and Featherstone who have achieved loads sticking within an absolutely minuscule budget. We have to rid ourselves of this ridiculous blame culture in RL. Every club knows their financial restrictions at the start of the season, and it's up to them to work within those budgets.

Running a club at breakeven is extraordinarily difficult when others aren't. I suspect as much of it comes down to owner subsidy as it does good management in most cases. Saints lose more money than Bradford and Wakefield, iirc, but nobody complains about their profligacy, because McManus picks up the tab.
Because he can, so they're living within their current means. And clubs should be allowed to find their level - Sheffield and Featherstone do okay on smaller budgets, as you say, though at a lower level, against clubs with smaller budgets still. It's just the gap between levels is more of a chasm nowadays, to the point that risking falling into in by being prudent might actually be imprudent.

Would the television deal be cut? Did it go up as a result of going from 12 to 14? I genuinely don't remember. I don't see why top players' wages would increase - there are other factors as play, but a higher worker to employer ratio would likely have a deflationary effect in the short term.

Where I think NH was right, was in that the RFL has been too interventionist. To the question, 'so you'd have them stand by and do nothing when a club is struggling?' with minor caveats, I'd say 'yes'. They're governing body not an emergency service for clubs that have imperilled themselves. RL is a competition and by helping one, you're handicapping the others. And then once you've helped one, you make it your thankless duty to help others and it is never ending.

Hudge and AP sing off the same hymn sheet when it comes to the super league structure

the fit and proper persons test should in theory prevent this kind of thing, but sadly we are seeing more and more examples of its failings - right across sport, not just in RL

It should pick out the spivs and ne'er do wells, hopefully. But in RL, has that been a major problem? I think most of them have meant well, it's just much easier to lose money than make it in RL. That probably keeps the shady characters out as much as anything. I mean, looking through SL's benefactor-owners, they've got pretty good records in business and yet they nearly all lose money at this.

The whole idea of making money in rl is a comlete pipe dream, nearly all clubs make a loss and the only one I can think of that makes a profit of any kind (leeds) I wonder how real that is and how propped up by other income it is.

That means the only way of running a successful club is to have a rich fan/benfactor plowing in cash purely because he wants to. Moran being the prime example.

Even if, and it will never happen, rl became a top, cash rich sport the players would just get paid more and the debts would raise proportionately, football being the prime example.

Sport as a whole is a fools game as investment, just glad there are a few fools about but in answer to the op is nh a name to run the game then I'd say no. He's too big a fan of one club, thd only way to run it like that is a comittee of chairmen and that'd be a nightmare. I personally think its a thankless task with unachievable goals

Surely Wigan made a profit last season . The double , highest average Att in the league , a wealth of home grown kids in the squad and the world record fee for Sam Tomkins ? If they didn't make a profit then were all doomed

On the SL review show,Koucash said he didn't know about the salary cap when he bought Salford,he did a really good check didn't he.He also wants marquee signing exempt from cap,I would sooner see clubs re-warded for bringing players through and having 10 yrs at club...I know the £50.000 rule is in but would like to see it as per player.As things stand,much prefer AP to Dr Koucash as Koucash will leg it and leave Salford in Sh1t street

Was talking to the bro-in-law who is a pass holder at Wigan and he said they have over a million in the bank after the Tomkins and Hansen transfers

Wouldn't surprise me mate . I can't remember if they got a fee for Hock also .

Is this Hudgell the wise sage the OP refers to any relation to the one whose club regularly loses approaching half a million a year and and is around minus £3 million on the balance sheet?

While neglecting his academy?

Bingo

Fair play to hudge he as done a cracking job on & off the pitch at KR, there running at a loss each year but it has not stopped him setting out what he said he was going to do by putting them in the top league & developing the ground & youth system hes changed the coach & players for the better whilst upsetting some fans along the way but hes made these changes with the clubs best interests at hart, & you cant have nothing but admiration for him we would'nt have the biggest/best only real derby in SL without what he as done. As for salford who knows what they could turn out to be he could stick around for years the doc he might turn them into the chelsea of SL i dont believe he did not know he has to spend within the salary cap before purchasing the club.

I'm not questioning the effort Hudgell has put in for the dobbins but the OP was suggesting he should be running the RL! There is a world of difference from putting personal effort (and cash) into one club and building a successful and sustainable league structures and competitions. How would his practices of operating at a loss, exploiting overseas player rules and petty point scoring work over a national competition?

That's a fair summary. Hudgell has done great work at Rovers driven by his love of the club and therefore his own self-satisfaction. Such all-consuming self-interest however is the poorest qualification for running a sport, which he and AP allude to in slating the undue influence of the Hetheringtons at Red Hall. The problem in RL is that there's no one with the authority, gravitas and clear thinking to shape a compelling vision and secure club engagement behind it, partly because the a RFL has fudged so many issues and fecked things up commercially that it's stock/credibility with most club owners is close to zero.

KR have run at a Loss as most new companies do and that's what they've been since entering SL speculate to accumulate is the saying as for running the league who knows he could be capable he runs his law firms up & down the country pretty successful the fact of the matter for me is the RFL do ok but year on year need to improve the structures media & marketing let our game down look at our sponsors there not all nationwide companies Like football & union have & I know this view is not everyone's but why do they try & pump money into the areas that don't care about our game rather then upping salary caps at up & running clubs to boost there youth systems?

Well said that was exactly the point I am trying to get across, this guy has stood up and admitted that his club run at a loss along with every other rl club fc included. Maybe the chairman of all the rl clubs form a committee and bring to task those at red hall who can't even get a sponsor for our game and if they don't want to listen after that breakaway just like what happened to the old arl and form a new rugby league format.

Whilst not denying NH is a very passionate fan/owner of Rovers I just can't understand the sudden love-in with the man from our supporters. Over the last few years he has taken many opportunities to make a number of digs at FC, even when the topic was seemingly nothing to do with us. To suggest he should run the RFL is ridiculous - his club has been moderately successful at best (established in SL, but no silverware), makes regular losses and as mentioned has not invested in Youth, but sought a number of mediocre(and one or two good) Australians instead. He was right to stand up to Hetherington and co, but lets not get carried away just yet!

Does this 'neglect' represent a failure of self-interest or to the RL family?

The first carries its own inherent punishment. The second, well, as you once said, it is dog eat dog.



And the RFL themselves acknowledge there are major trust issues. Arising from not having a strong framework in place and making stuff up as they go along, too often. IMO.
For me the point isn't so much what the system is, number of teams, P&R or franchising, quotas, salary cap and what have you. So long as it is clear, unambiguous and the same for everybody. If the rules are fair and clear, then clubs can plan accordingly and if some mess it up (as will always happen) then they can live with the consequences. It shouldn't contaminate the wider sport. No club should be considered too big or strategically-important to fail - unless we were to run the entire sport as a centrally-planned collective. To allow clubs, independent of central control, and the sport as a whole to succeed, we have to accept failures.




I don't think he should, for the reasons Barham Red mentioned. But the measures of success would be completely different, so someone [ulike[/u him would likely bring a different approach to the task. Like most benefactor-chairmen, he's been successful in his business life outside RL. Many RL chairmen have experience of navigating and indeed exploiting our ridiculously over-complicated quota and cap regulations, so might well be able to turn gamekeeper effectively. As for the petty points scoring - I agree he's not always the most diplomatic. But complaining a thousand times about his clear, if only implicit, criticism of your previous board announcing a signing in May, four and a half years ago, doesn't mean he said it a thousand times. And 'lucky-gate', while, if it was point scoring, I'd have advised a more nuanced approach, it did follow on from AP's saying there'll be one academy in Hull, run by Hull FC. Any others, I've missed?
Overall, an 'outsider' given a strong mandate to make a plan and push it through would be the best option for the sport, IMO.