Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 4:59 am  

Recently I was asked my thoughts on why the RFL did what they did in 2014!
You remember when they decided with the full? Backing of the SL council to decimate the game by: reducing SL to 12 teams by relegating the bottom two clubs, plus of course relegating 5 championship clubs, to balance the books. Then of course the 3x8s system, foisted onto the League structures after much consultation with clubs-supporters-journalists etc., which of course no one knew anything about it all, until the actual vote on the policy review document that laid out the plans, ( written I might add in 2012/13?)

Coincidentally a parachute sweetener was given to all SL clubs (except the Bulls, of course as they were still in special measures?) in the run up season to the changes,
This I believe was £300k as part of the SKY contract money, which of course didn’t kick in until 2017, (how many of us thought it had already happened?) In the mean time no more Championship games are shown on any sports channels, even though SKY said some games would be shown in 2015/16.

Now if logic had to take over the question would be how the RFL would afford all these financial improvements to the elite 12 Super League Clubs. Perhaps that was/is the answer i.e. relegate 2 clubs and save the previously agreed SKY money of £1.2 million per club or £2.4 m, plus bring in the middle 8s to bring back P&R, which of course is a bit of a misnomer as it is not a like for like situation as the Championship clubs have to step up at least 3 gears to match a SL club who have been playing at a far higher level and intensity all the previous season. Not to mention the additional finances available to them, which allows them to cherry pick players before the so called £m game. Another joke as if the SL team playing this final game wins the status remains as quo, and if by some fluke the Championship team won, where is this £m, well it’s an upgrade of the SKY contribution that the deposed SL team would have got over the following season. Incidentally the Championship team if successfully promoted would need to strengthen the squad considerably within that next season, before being the whipping boys for relegation at the end of the season?

I don’t wish to be negative, let’s say it’s the worst scenario that’s all> The thing is I do believe the RFL statement that over the last two years the Finances of the game have improved, probably because they were looking at their remuneration as the yardstick??

I’m with you Marwen, let’s find a better way before there is no way!

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 5:34 am  

The trouble is, I don't think the mad doctor has any idea of what to replace the RFL with. He seems, in the main, to just want them replaced with a body who'll let him get away with whatever he likes rather than promote the game as a whole.

The fact that he's kicking up a stink after Salford basically got away with cheating the salary cap for two years running shows what his mindset is

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 6:30 am  

I totally agree with you roofaldo. However it sometimes takes the "elephant in the room," to coin a popular saying, to begin a process that other more sensible people should begin to adopt for the good of any organisation. I don't think he will get the other chairmen to give him what he wants, but a few of the better chairmen might think he's got a point that would be worth pursuing, but maybe in a different more sensible way that will get the RFL into a proper discussion about the game, and perhaps a couple of resignations at the top wouldn't go amiss.

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 7:15 am  

Don't forget that his suggestion is that SL should go it alone. This would be something along the lines of the Premier League in football. However, this debate is purely academic as far as Championship clubs such as the Bulls are concerned.

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 7:32 am  

The problem is that a very good point or accurate opinion can be diluted and ignored when it's spoken by a lunatic.

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 8:31 am  

When I read his statement I actually thought he was referring to the Bulls (and other championship clubs) when he stated the RFL were more concerned at promoting the game in France and Canada, as a result strong Rugby Towns/Cities were now in decline (from a rugby perspective).

I think he has a point, and I don't think the doctor would go public without the support he needs. (If he did, it would confirm he is )

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 8:49 am  

The problem with Marwan's position is that he did it after the salary capping saga. If he had done it prior to the salary cap investigation, he would have had an easier time convincing the world of RL that this wasn't just a knee-jerk reaction to him not getting his own way. Again. As it stands, I can't see how anybody should be supporting him, because although his reasons might be that of RFL incompetency, it comes across as spoilt brat syndrome, spitting his dummy out because he can't get his own way.

Furthermore, with the imminent departure of Blake Solly, he is effectively calling for a vote of no confidence in a regime that he has no clue about, unless I'm mistaken. Of course, I'm assuming here that a change of general manager will see some form of governance change. Even if it doesn't, we have no way of knowing what the RFL will do next season and beyond under new leadership, so how he can have a vote of no confidence is beyond me.

In summary - perhaps right to question the RFL, but definitely for the wrong reasons.

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 8:49 am  

daveyz999 wrote:

I think he has a point, and I don't think the doctor would go public without the support he needs. (If he did, it would confirm he is )

He spends most of his Twitter life posting about how much he hates the RFL. As Roofaldo correctly points out, he just wants to be able to do what he wants when he wants, without some governing body telling him he's not allowed to. Any reasonable point his rantings raise are lost because everyone thinks he's mental and just wants his own way.

[Bulliac]

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 8:59 am  

I don't think we, or anyone, should take the ad hominem approach in things like this: listen to what he says, if he's right back it, if not ignore. We really must check the message and ignore the messenger.

Re: Marwen And The RFL debate : Thu May 19, 2016 10:09 am  

DrFeelgood wrote:

The problem with Marwan's position is that he did it after the salary capping saga. If he had done it prior to the salary cap investigation, he would have had an easier time convincing the world of RL that this wasn't just a knee-jerk reaction to him not getting his own way. Again. As it stands, I can't see how anybody should be supporting him, because although his reasons might be that of RFL incompetency, it comes across as spoilt brat syndrome, spitting his dummy out because he can't get his own way.

Furthermore, with the imminent departure of Blake Solly, he is effectively calling for a vote of no confidence in a regime that he has no clue about, unless I'm mistaken. Of course, I'm assuming here that a change of general manager will see some form of governance change. Even if it doesn't, we have no way of knowing what the RFL will do next season and beyond under new leadership, so how he can have a vote of no confidence is beyond me.

In summary - perhaps right to question the RFL, but definitely for the wrong reasons.

That could be argued if he had done it before the salary cap saga it wouldn't have had the same effect. He's using the breach as an example of the RFL's failings under the current regime as in restricting the progression of the game, yet turning a blind eye to the likes of Catalans.

The ‘no confidence vote’ is a wake-up call to the RFL that the current system needs to change regardless of who is at the helm. The split being a very real possibility, if things don’t change.