Did they get to see the contract before the meeting? That hasn't been said anywhere. From what I've read so far it seems they didn't have access to all the details before the meeting:

Neil Hudgell ‏@NeilHudgell Jan 30

Cautious optimism over tv deal. 8 years is a long time. Could have done with more than 2 hours to consider the detail #indecenthaste?


Regardless, my point was that MK did speak out against the deal, he voted against it. I sincerely doubt he was speaking for the deal beforehand and had a sudden change of heart when it was time to cast his vote!

I'm not quite sure what kind of increase in the TV deal would have kept Koukash happy, but he at least has some credibility since he voted against it. Ian Lenagan's position is laughable. 24 hours is easily enough to look over a deal like that. To vote for it (he could have abstained) and then trash it in the media is just schizophrenic.

As for Koukash's other remarks, I hope they're just for gaining media attention. For example if he really believes the people at the RFL are paid too much then he's living on another planet. The problem is that they're paid too little so we don't get a high calibre of applicants for the job.
His remarks on Steve McNamara are daft as well. Especially from someone who knows little about the sport on the pitch. He needs to stay out of that area and keep nudging the RFL about off-field issues.
Who is England head coach will make little difference to whether England/GB win a series/competition or not. The quality of the players we have available along with the amount of those players, how tired they are, how high a standard they've been playing to all season and the amount of quality young players coming through all have a monumentally bigger effect on the England/GB side rather than whether the head coach is an average coach or a slightly better/worse average coach.

I dont think Koukash's issue is with the increase in the TV deal, but with the period of time the RFL have committed to. He obviously believes the sport will be valued much more than it currently is in three, four, five, six, seven or even eight years time.

For once, in this barmy mans reign of terror, I agree with him.

As Noble not only guided Bradford to Grand Final victories but also 3 World Club Championship wins,I cannot immediately think of any individual better qualified to be the national coach during the time he held that position.
As for beating Australia;well Phil Clarke walked away amid suggestions that the RFL were not being very helpful in that cause.
Into the next decade and what has changed..?

There is now a groundswell of opinion beginning to realize that someone who has spent a lot of time in the real world,can come into rugby league and almost immediatey realise the problem.

As for Brian Noble;I believe he has come back refreshed and improved on what he achieved as a fairly young coach.

You got any ideas on how to improve things or do you just enjoy slagging people off who bring finance,intelligence and sporting knowledge to the game?

Oh,and unlike some knighted Scot in the round-ball game fomer players coached by Noble,who go into coaching,seem to have a modicum of success.He must do something right!
Even players who have played for him before want to repeat the experience.

It is valued more in 3 years time, more than double if the numbers in the press are to be believed.
But it's a risky strategy isn't it? To wait and see? This provides stability along with a big increase in money. Hardly the worst deal of the century.
But like I said, he at least has some credibility in his views as he voted against the deal so fair play to him.

I have no active bt line into my house. If I wanted anyone else I would have to have the line. I pay virgin; what they do with it is their business......I do pay for sky sports though.

Either way I think BT have taken a big gamble which may backfire.

They had 24 hours notice of a meeting but weren't told the details of the meeting. Once there they were given 2 hours to decide what to do, apart from Hetherington who seemingly new all about it.

Taking out the fact that IL has since changed his mind and regrets voting for it, not that 2 people voting against would have made any difference. Does it not seem like the time frame has effectively press ganged all the clubs to vote in favour of the RFL's ideal solution? Whether that solution is the right one isn't the issue. It's the amateurishness nature that our sport seems to be run. I don't for one minute believe SKY TV would contact the RFL with an offer and say "We want an answer within 24 hours otherwise the deal is off" so either the RFL were told about it way in advance or they just made up a deadline.

I never said otherwise did I but we're not talking about then are we?



Rugby League isn't the real world? Fact is, he knew the rules before jumping in and if he didn't then he's an idiot.
Seems like he's just spitting his dummy out to anyone who'll listen because he can't just go out, splash his cash and buy trophies.



That remains to be seen.



What other than new sponsors, record TV deals, record breaking World Cup and new formats?

But I never claimed to, just gets a bit boring as every time he opens his mouth he's moaning that those big nasty clueless men at the RL won't let him spend his money. I made one comment about him stupidly suggesting BN for national coach, get over it and stop being so precious.

Mr RFL right there. Rugby League would be lost without the sleeve.

No. If Lenagan, or anyone else for that matter, didn't think he knew enough about the deal he could vote no or abstain. He didn't. He voted for it. No-one forced him to do that. As seen by Koukash's vote.
To vote yes then whinge about it is just daft.

Plus why would the RFL "press gang" clubs into voting for one tv deal over another? It makes little difference to the RFL since the vast majority of the money will bypass them and go straight to the clubs.

Personally, it just seems like the TV deal was quite a good one and that doesn't fit in with the "RFL incompetence harming the sport" image that some club leaders want to portray.
A good tv deal strengthens Nigel Wood's position and a poor one weakens it. So Lenagan wants the money but doesn't want to strengthen Wood's position.

Plus since the only real objection to a tv deal from clubs is the amount of money or the duration, does that take even 2 hours to think about?

I'd have much more sympathy for Lenagan's view if he hadn't voted for the deal.

I was thinking this earlier on today.

If you feel the deal is too rushed then you vote no, not yes.

Yes makes a commitment, no can mean no or no not now.

If the majority thought it was too rushed they could vote no and then if there was a time limit on the deal, the chairmen could say they thought they could do better and if there was no time limit they could check any issues they had with it.

Also why would the RFL want a lesser deal???

That's just crazy, if there is a bigger deal then there is a bigger admin fee for them.

It just makes no sense to vote YES for something you don't know enough about.

It's this dicotomy of power that really annoys me. The chairmen hold all the cards, but snip from the sidelines at the governing body whose recommendations they can take or reject.

Talk about not being responsible for your actions. Fair play to Koukash though, he thought it was too quick and stood his ground, but his gripe should be with his fellow chairmen, they are the ones who voted for it.

As you'll know, the proportion of Leeds fans who will think Noble is an inadequate international coach far exceeds the proportion at all other Rugby League clubs for reasons already alluded to.

I am not being precious.You suggested a part time coach,who has left this country to improve his coaching/further his coaching education at a NRL club would be better than a part time coach currently in this country who have achieved more success at clubs in this country than McNamara has achieved.I disagreed.

Dr Koukash saved the future of Salford.He was not fully conversant with each and every nuance of the governing body.
It would also seem he may now differ in opinion from the owner of St Helens,who first invited him to a game.

Everyone in this country is allowed an opinion.
He keeps expressing his,and each time he wins more supporters.
More than your posts have done.

I personally can see why the governing body decided to leave clubs out of the negotiation process for the new deal. The fact is that half the clubs (those with money issues) would be taking the first deal they could get that included a sweetener to alleviate immediate cash flow issues whilst the richer clubs would be happy to hold out for an improved deal. It would have been carnage!

Yes its a long deal, and yes the RFL could have held back until we were nearing the end of the current contract, but who's to say that the bargaining position would have improved. What happens if the new format is a flop and viewing figures tumble? how marketable would the game have been in that instance. The fact is we have a deal that pays more than any the game has ever had. We as supporters are guaranteed more televised games than ever before and the clubs get more revenue than they've ever had.

I would much rather the money was in the bank than gamble on being in a better position in the future. Ultimately, in a period where the games league structure is going through a massive change, we have a deal that will cover its infancy and any unforeseen issues.

As regards the good Dr, he reminds me a little of the Allams at Hull City. Happy to shout off, less happy to hear other peoples opinions. I find his comparisons of the TV deal to bedding women just Crass and class less.

I do agree that the salary cap needs increasing though. The only down side to that is that it won't just be the top players that want a pay rise, every plodder will see the extra cash and want a slice. Before you know it we're in a position similar to football where un-extraordinary players are on silly money. I think having 1 or 2 players being paid outside the cap (other than home grown or union converts) is the best way to go. Being able to pay someone like billy slater silly money off cap would be a huge draw.

What do Lenegan and Koukash know about business? We're much better off in the safe hands of the great Nigel Wood with his vast track record of success.

Indeed. Pretty much everyone wants RL to grow, but a very large number of people want that growth to happen on ridiculous and totally delusional terms (equal competition, low player wages, no mouthy owners, everyone playing nicely all the time). Cloud cuckoo land.

The attempted coup has failed, hence the recent outpourings of grief.

GH... erm... I mean Nigel Wood by plenty.

Like I said just now... GH... erm... I mean Nigel Wood by plenty.

...except when it differs to your own or your barmey Chairman's it seems.

And isn't this interesting....



Which differs a bit to some of the bile we've read over the last day or three. Seems like Dr Allcash and the perennial whingers didn't get their own way last week and have proceeded to stamp their feet ever since.

You're not keeping up !
Dr Koukash was the only one who refused to accept the tv deal/voted against it.
Lenagan voted for it but has gone public on his doubts.
Hudgell felt rushed and hopes for the best.

Dr Koukash does NOT believe even with the tv sweetener that there is any realistic possibility of a Championship club being promoted.

Mark Aston at Sheffield feels similar.

I don't know how any,other than Koukash feel about your choice of national coach.

No, Dr Allcash isn't keeping up and it looks like you missed it to. The club's voted to vote on it, he was outvoted.

So to go whinging to all and sundry because he didn't get his own way just shows him up to be, well, a whinging, foot stamping, dummy spitter. I give it 12 months before he takes his ball home.

Well,yes,I know which way the vote went.

I suppose you will support Barwick,after all he was responsible for the 'Wally With The Brolly',in the round ball game,at national level and you have shown your support for McNamara.

Barwick only seems to appear after criticism - the last time when the Yorkshire Post and RLE printed their disappointment.

Some suggest Barwick,with his 'book of contacts' would be good for the sport,and his experience in television invaluable.

The paper and upholder of left wing views was just a little scathing on that score - [url=http://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/oct/05/brian-barwick-faAs Long As He Leaves The Sport Better Than He Found it[/url

I'm not supporting anyone and I think i've said 3 maybe 4 times in this thread that i'm no McNamara fan, but if it makes you feel better to make stuff up then go for it.

As for supporting Barwick, you're making stuff up again. I just quoted from the statement he made earlier today which kind of contradicts some of what the foot stampers have come out with.

Bless.