Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sat Oct 12, 2013 9:21 pm  

Yes it does the championship players are in the GMB not all but quite a few

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:07 pm  

bewareshadows wrote: And of course the players union would be dead against this as more players in the championship earning better wages, would lead to a more competitive environment for the players union as they would no longer be representing the majority of full time professionals, just the bigger wage earners. So it will become like the bankers union. Not much sympathy for them!!! I think you need to read the press release of League13 as I suspect you misunderstand their position. Essentially they disagree with the three leagues of 8 scenario and are concerned about a few other things, however they have not jumped into bed with Lenaghan and co. Its merely a case of them sharing some of the concerns. Sections of the media have been misrepresenting them. http://www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21 http://www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/06/13/18 Following the press release above League 13 issued the following Following our press release on Wednesday 9 October 2013 we were concerned that some of the detail has been misinterpreted so we have decided to issue a further release for clarification. The clarification will be in bullet point style for the removal of any further doubt. - WE DO welcome the pause for further debate and consultation - WE DO NOT support a 14 team Super League and thus do not support the Ian Lenagan rebellion as mistakenly reported - WE DO support a 12 team Super League - WE DO support promotion and relegation - WE STRONGLY OPPOSE the preferred RFL option which contains the 3x8 league split after 23 fixtures - WE DO believe that simplicity and stability are the keys to success - WE DO believe the league structure is not the central problem - WE DO believe that the marketing of the game has been very seriously under performing - WE DO believe that there is nothing inherently wrong with the wonderful, simple yet totally enthralling, compelling and thrilling sport of rugby league. - WE DO believe that the sport is seriously undersold and undervalued. - WE DO believe that the expertise to deliver clear commercial success exists at some of the games’ top clubs and they should be empowered to lead a sharp, focused and results based commercial strategy that delivers the just rewards for our sport - WE DO believe that League 13 has a pivotal lead role in delivering the player welfare service to all clubs

bewareshadows wrote: And of course the players union would be dead against this as more players in the championship earning better wages, would lead to a more competitive environment for the players union as they would no longer be representing the majority of full time professionals, just the bigger wage earners. So it will become like the bankers union. Not much sympathy for them!!! I think you need to read the press release of League13 as I suspect you misunderstand their position. Essentially they disagree with the three leagues of 8 scenario and are concerned about a few other things, however they have not jumped into bed with Lenaghan and co. Its merely a case of them sharing some of the concerns. Sections of the media have been misrepresenting them. http://www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21 http://www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/06/13/18 Following the press release above League 13 issued the following Following our press release on Wednesday 9 October 2013 we were concerned that some of the detail has been misinterpreted so we have decided to issue a further release for clarification. The clarification will be in bullet point style for the removal of any further doubt. - WE DO welcome the pause for further debate and consultation - WE DO NOT support a 14 team Super League and thus do not support the Ian Lenagan rebellion as mistakenly reported - WE DO support a 12 team Super League - WE DO support promotion and relegation - WE STRONGLY OPPOSE the preferred RFL option which contains the 3x8 league split after 23 fixtures - WE DO believe that simplicity and stability are the keys to success - WE DO believe the league structure is not the central problem - WE DO believe that the marketing of the game has been very seriously under performing - WE DO believe that there is nothing inherently wrong with the wonderful, simple yet totally enthralling, compelling and thrilling sport of rugby league. - WE DO believe that the sport is seriously undersold and undervalued. - WE DO believe that the expertise to deliver clear commercial success exists at some of the games’ top clubs and they should be empowered to lead a sharp, focused and results based commercial strategy that delivers the just rewards for our sport - WE DO believe that League 13 has a pivotal lead role in delivering the player welfare service to all clubs

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sun Oct 13, 2013 7:39 am  

In which case, maybe they have been mis-represented.

However, I don't get the opposition to the 3x8 split.

So far the only arguement I have heard against it is that it's too complicated. Which if it's the case, then I do worry about educational standards.

The 8x3 split does carry issues, but it also carries potential benefits as games towards the end of the season can be more or less cake walks for those in the top 8.

I did feel it brought a new outlook and possibilities to the league. I know people are hesitant to change, but the initial response to me just seemed knee jerk. ie It's different therefore I oppose.

There were also assumptions that the gap in wages would be too much for tier 2 to cover. However, that was assuming current cap levels. I reality, those tier 2 clubs paying £900k could have quality players who could beat a side funded at less than the £1.8 cap.

The real reason for this opposition is money and that it was to be spread further than before. SL clubs want to keep a tight fist on the money. League 13 only represent a percentage of SL players so again don't want to risk money going to players outside of their club.

I understand self interest, it's natural. I would do the same. But that's the point of a governing body that sets the rules. Their job is to look at the over all benefit not just self interest of a few elite players and clubs.

Otherwise left to their own devices, I would expect the clubs to continually contract the league to squeeze more and more out of the same funding, by cutting more and more of their fellow clubs.

I think we went to 10 clubs once and that did not expand the game at all. We need a route in for other clubs, but standard P&R with no extra funding to the 2 tier means that 2 tier clubs have to change wholesale in 2 months after the best SL players have already been purchased.

With a cap half that of the top teams and games against lower SL teams, it should provide those clubs with an opportunity to gear up earlier and gain higher intensity earlier.

Like I say, I get the self interest, but to me it sounds like more stagnation for the game as a whole.

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sun Oct 13, 2013 9:42 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

However, I don't get the opposition to the 3x8 split.

For me, my opposition comes from the fact I can't name a single sport in the world who has that set up. There has to be a reason for that, and there are no obvious benefits as opposed a "normal" league system. That means its innovation for the sake of innovation, like clubcall, rhino ball, stobbart, buying odsal, Celtic crusaders, magic weekend etc etc i am tired of them messing with this great sport - the current administration seem so fixated for gimmicks as quick fix solutions (which I feel this is) they don't seem to be seeing the bigger long term picture of constantly fiddling with the set up.

In isolation it probably wouldn't have caused the uprising it's caused, but in context it's probably the straw that's broken the camels back.

That's just my opinion

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sun Oct 13, 2013 10:11 am  

dubairl wrote:

you do realize that saints is one of them right?

Yes.

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sun Oct 13, 2013 10:38 am  

I am starting to see why the Super League clubs are rebelling. Crazy stuff, the document states one thing that is correct and then comes up with a solution that would make it worse claiming it is the solution.

Moving between FT and PT leagues is very hazardous for club finances. So we are going to make it easier for it to happen?!?!?!?

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sun Oct 13, 2013 11:02 am  

The Chair Maker wrote:

Its proposal is that for club trained players, the maximum value that they will represent towards the salary cap is £100k. Hence someone like Jonny Lomax or Sam Tomkins could be paid £400k a season but only £100k of that counts on the cap.
This then rewards clubs that develop their own talent, rather than buy in superstars from elsewhere, as imports or bought in players would count 100% on the cap.

This has to be a the only light in whole lot of dark in this report but does that just create an even larger gap between Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Warrington and everyone else? Also with only allowing 10 elite academies the club trained allowance is only going to apply to 10 teams. So Salford for example who are unlikely to be one of the 10 will be hampered trying to buy their way out of mediocrity, which at the moment is the only way to do it.

Maybe the league should consider setting up elite academies over the country in areas such as South Wales and the North East? If funding is ring fenced why just give it to the clubs?

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sun Oct 13, 2013 11:08 am  

It's the 3 X 8 that is the big problem.

I tried to have a word with Gary Hetherington at a recent Wigan v Leeds U19 game.
I asked him how was he going to sell the idea to season ticket holders if they didn't know who their team was playing or when, or how many home fixtures there would be even after the fixtures were released.

He wouldn't or couldn't answer.

It is a major problem. I, and suspect many other fans book their holidays around their clubs fixtures, but for the last seven weeks of the season (probably the main holiday season) no-one who would know who or when they were playing.

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sun Oct 13, 2013 2:30 pm  

Noel Cleal wrote:

This has to be a the only light in whole lot of dark in this report but does that just create an even larger gap between Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Warrington and everyone else? Also with only allowing 10 elite academies the club trained allowance is only going to apply to 10 teams. So Salford for example who are unlikely to be one of the 10 will be hampered trying to buy their way out of mediocrity, which at the moment is the only way to do it.

...so we hold back the clubs that are producing talent because the others either have no interest to do so or cannot raise the money?

Re: RFL has released its policy review document : Sun Oct 13, 2013 4:19 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

IIRC the reduction to £1.6m was done when removing the NICs. I'm guessing that it was possibly something to do with that EBT tax dodge that many clubs were involved with. I'm presuming it also prevented a few clubs going over the cap when they paid any past debt to HMRC.

The Doghead wrote:

its the tax, its taken at source from the £1.825, leaves you with the lower figure.

If you look at the Euro limits its 2.20M Euros so the equivalent today in £'s is £1868325 at today's rates which is the figure more or less the RFL say we are at now.
Looks like a typo and they have only partially updated it?