"How did they end up in that situation"??? What are you talking about?

The situation where Sky came to them after two years of a five year deal and offered them more money, including cash up front but with a tight deadline? Sky are smart people and they know that most SL club owners are two-bit businessmen whose clubs are so badly run that every thing is hand-to-mouth (or handout-to-mouth) who would grasp such a deal if offered. And the RFL couldn't exactly not pass the offer on to the clubs, despite coming completely outside the negotiating cycle.

Call bull all you want mate, but I know different.. and direct from inside Sky.

The sport has the remainder of this contract to get things right. I'll say no more on the subject. Carry on believing what you will.

Yeah I'm sure you do.



It doesn't take someone with "inside knowledge" to know that!

No, what he said was the championship clubs get too big a share of the monies for what they are bringing to generate the monies.

Elstone genuinely believes there are opportunities to increase the value of the deal - what he is saying, quite rightly IMO, the teams that generate the additional revenue should be keeping it. He actually thinks the championship clubs bring less to the game than the bigger amateur clubs - it is not rocket-science to see why.

Whatever way you slice it we are now in a position where he has guaranteed the lower leagues their distributions won't go down when the next deal comes into effect as long as a better deal is agreed.

That's a much more attractive proposition than the previous threats, mostly from Lenagan, of cutting the money.Clearly if the deal is lower there are still problems. But there will be issues game-wide in that scenario.

And the continual dismissal of Championship clubs is more than annoying, it creates a false narrative. The amateur clubs may well be the place most development happens but if you wilfully destroy the local pro team you destroy the fulcrum of the sport in an area, the team that people identify with and who they have an emotional stake in. Even putting aside the relatively trivial amounts we are talking about, it makes no sense to do that.

How many Championship clubs are the fulcrum of the sport in the area? Do you think Halifax are the fulcrum of the attention for all the junior clubs in the area - seriously, same goes for Featherstone, Dewsbury, Batley etc. The attendances in the Championship are pathetic - only 2,300 at the Halifax v Featherstone. I don't know the rest of the crowds but I would hazard a guess - Toronto apart - that was the biggest of the rest which is a sad indictment on the competition and it does beg the question as to what they are actually bringing to the sport other than a place for over-the-hill players, those not good enough to play SL, those who can't get a SL game that week.

SL is consistently providing 15% of the players on a weekly basis.

how many at Salford? Huddersfield? Widnes?

Sorry, my error. I forgot you know more than anyone else on the subject and no one could possibly have any inside information if you don't. After all you are the font of all human knowledge aren't you? Like I said mate, believe what you want. You're clearly happy in your ignorance.

P.S. If you are also aware that we need to sort things out, why are you supporting the current regime that you must also know is currently failing to do just that? Somewhat of a contradiction, don't you think? Unless, of course, you don't "know" anything at all.

Average attendances YTD 2018 season:
Huddersfield 6,116
Widnes 4,612
Salford 5,568

How many Championship clubs have that level of support?

Huddersfield is skewed as they had 9k for letting people in for free. I would say 5k is there average.still crap has ever you paint them

Based on what I'm seeing here yes I do believe I'm better informed than quite a few posters. Sorry if that offends your desire to be Jonny Big Cock on an internet forum.


Where have I said I support the current "regime" (what an interestingly loaded term)? What I'm opposed to vehemently are SL club owners, who have shown themselves utterly incapable of running their own clubs with any sort of business success, making a power and money grab. They are the last people we should be giving the levers of power to.

Elstone has my support as an administrator and he seems a relatively good man with an ok CV. As an RFL CEO or SL General manager he'd be a fine appointment and I hope he becomes one. His initial approach and allowing himself to be revealed as a puppet of Ian Lenagan of all people showed a worrying lack of judgement that he has struggled to recover from. I hope that he does recover (his more recent statements are much more measured) and improves all the areas that SL is failing on at the moment. There is plenty of need for change: commercial, structure, quality of product, game image.

The biggest problem however is the clubs who are, almost as one, lazy and unimaginative, bloated by a Sky funding safety net. If there was a single one of them which showed they were growing crowds or revenues or bettering fan engagement in any way other than the relative lottery of on field success I'd be interested to hear what they had to say. Instead most are treading water or worse in Wigan's case. If Elstone drives some change at club level and forces them to accept their responsibilities to the sport and to the league rather than just blaming the RFL for everything like a bunch of spoiled brats then he will quickly earn my respect and support.

Insults aside, you might gain more traction for your arguments were you to specify of what your inside info consists. You may be unfamiliar with this board but it's awash at times with folk reckoning to be ITK - only to be shown subsequently to have been spouting b*ll*cks.

Incidentally, I for one would love it if Lenahan had come up with a coherent strategy to right the game's wrongs. But I'm struggling to find anything of real substance, particularly now that all parties seem agreed that funding to the lower league's can't be cut, at least in the short term. Though it is, I admit, entirely possible I've missed it through being away while the fallout from the initial statement was continuing.

I run an international music company supplying music to the film and TV industries. However Ghost of 99 is apparently better informed than me (see above post) and I'm just playing "Johnny Big Cock" so perhaps your questions would be better directed to him. I've tried to add what I know (or at least what I'm at liberty to divulge) but your resident internet know it all seems to find it laughable that anyone could be in a position to have information that he isn't privy to. I wouldn't ask his sources, or specifically what they've said, but I'd be damned interested to know what it is he does or who he knows that gives him such an unassailable confidence that his information is better than mine!

No matter. I've added my piece. People will either believe there is a massive problem heading our way or they won't. C'est la vie.

International Music Company eh? Well that's me convinced! FFS!

Are you Simon Moran? Do I win five english pounds?

This thread suddenly got a whole lot more interesting. My money's on it being Daniel Bedingfield.

We've gotta get through this.

Keep it clean guys.

Must be Simon Cowell. He's a regular darn t'lane.

Go on then...are you Chaka Deemus or infact Pliers?

I'll see your pliers and raise you a Shabba Ranks

idiots.he's one half of black lace

Maybe he is infact Gabrielle's fabled right eye.

That may well be the case but they are still significantly higher than all the heritage championship clubs - but they have only had 100 years to build a support base

Spot on.

I am always right.

try changing hands !