....Lock, Stock and Barrel.

Controversial? yes, I was listening to Martyn Sadler on the London Rugby League podcast last week and he made some valid points. Most franchises which start out in a new or unsuccessful catchment area become popular when the governing body puts the full weight of its resources, power and influence into making it a success. AFL and the Sydney Swans are a perfect example, the AFL done everything in their power to make them a success and they were.

Being owned by the RFL would make the club unpopular and some would question the RFL's ability to be impartial, however pro rugby league needs to be rebranded and it needs that X factor and at moment we haven't got that.

I completely agree. And they should be allowed 14 players on the pitch at once, should get 6 points for a try instead of 4 and should get 3 league points for a win.

Brilliant idea!

Yes , with a franchise system in place there is no reason it should not happen

If the RFL just admitted that London is exempt from franchising and will always be a permanent SL team, sponsors, players, top quality coaching staff etc would be more inclined to get behind them, as they would be part of a long term, top flight project. Same with Crusaders. This would then lead to the sides being able to compete at the top end on a regular basis. Will never happen though.

So no change there then

It would be funny to see Quins have so much favouritism that they would be able to put a team out with the quality to win the Grand Final! The big 4 would see their cosy monopoly under threat! That’s why it would never happen, it's ok to bend the rules a little to gain an edge over the likes of Wakey, Cas and Salford but threaten the big boys and all hell will be let loose!

The problem is that the RFL do not have the funds to replace the money that is currently poured in every year by David Hughes. If they took over ownership and Hughes' input was lost then you'd have an even worse situation than the current one. The RFL are not a cash rich organisation, certainly not to the extent where they could inject ~£1.5m per year just to stand still. At least the current situation is being sustained by someone else's money.

Only problem is, the RFL would be skint within two years.

instead

It would be a help to all concerned if SKY either comfirm or not that the expansion clubs are the essential part of the TV rights deal. If that is the case then some of the money should be spent on promoting the game & special deals to get punters in the seats. I somtimes wonder if they are that interested as they dont even promote Super league on thier own channels & media outlets (compare the endless drivel about soccer). I am sure the RFL want to help expansion but they are strapped for cash & the sport England money has to be spent accross the board not just at the top level. The real example of how to promote a sport is the NFL it was dying in the 1950s but TV took it on built up the game & the rest is history, our only problem is that they only had to contend with (at the time) basketball & ice hockey plus they had the basic game in schools & collages. I just dont think there is one easy solution I just hope that the self interest of clubs is ignored & the expansion experiment is stuck with for the long term good of the game.

The "endless drivel" about the most popular spectator sport on the planet and Sky Sports biggest single source of subscriptions? That's like complaining that Volkswagen spend all their money advertising the Polo and the Golf and not enough on the Passat.

As for the governing body owning even a stake in one club but not in others - no thanks. There are enough things about the sport already that make it look ridiculous to the outside world (the two bites at the cherry play-off system, the tiny international game, the inability to appoint neutral match officials) without adding more for the conspiracy theorists to play with.

I appreciate where you’re coming from regarding the Sky deal, and the £250K, however, whilst I’m not party to the Quins finances it’s alleged that their Sugar Daddy has to chuck a rather large wedge in, to prop them up each year.


If the RFL fail to get an increase from the Broadcaster of a similar amount, then the rest of the clubs would have to take a hit to offset it, which would be problematic

.

The point being in his and most of the other posts is that if it is clear and out in the open , what ' conspiracy ' can there be , that is the point , in Australia , governing body / SKY ownership has happened , and been succsessful in establishing new expansion clubs , all we are advocating is something similar here

Not if it is made clear that without a London based SL club , all the others wont get as much money as they currently do

Let's look at the Willie Mason situation, and substitute an RFL owned London club for Hull KR.

Given allowing de-registration was at the RFLs discretion, do you seriously think there wouldn't have been screams of fix if the decision had gone in their favour?

This is one of the big problems with sports businesses , the inability of some people to separate the ' sport ' , from the ' business ' , I have no problem with it , I have suggested that clubs should collaborate in ' business ' for their common good , and have spoken to club owners about it , they have responded with refference to ' sports ' problems as the reason they will not work with other clubs to make more income

I think its called cutting off your nose in spite of your face , or plain bloody stupidity

Really valid point.

Are you sure ? , dont forget I am a bitter biggoted flat cap wearing supporter of a club in the heartlands that despises any form of expansion as it makes my club poorer , and blames all expansion clubs including yours for Leigh not being in SL , or so you would think from some of the replys I get to posts on here



I want all clubs to survive and prosper ,

I agree with alot of what your saying, in fact all of it, sports administration is like anything you have to have a certain level of conviction in order to make a franchise popular in untested waters, and only part of that is finance led, it is as I mentioned conviction. Even if it's likely to upset other teams the RFL has to take the Bulls by the horn and make rugby league popular in london.
We don't need Abramovich type money or an AFL budget in order for a London RL club to succeed, just wise decision making, consistency and the right branding.
Other AFL teams dont complain about the level of investment pumped into Sydney, Brisbane or Gold Coast because they have a certain vision where they understand that the success of the sport in these areas will add value to the product and television rights. The value of the recent AFL TV deal is $1.25 Billion so they know what they're talking about, but again it's not just about the size of the investment it's conviction and the idea or concept that as a sport we will do everything in our power to make the sport in london a success at this level and that needs to be backed up by the sport as a whole. Unfortunately there are too many people in Rugby League who only care about their club and the sport suffers as a consequence.

Dont get me wrong , if what you and I have suggested , you would hear massive amounts of moaning from the non SL clubs and their fans , and in a way they would be right as some of those clubs are probably as strong as the Expansion clubs , although the idea is that eventually even they might see some benifit , but only in the very long term

But you would also hear it from SL clubs fans as well , even though it is their clubs that would be benifitting in the short to medium term

The problem would arrise when you had some success on the pitch , which as I said earlier , many sports administrators are very short sighted when it comes to separating the ' Sport ' from the ' Business ' if their club is on the wrong end of the sports competition

I thought this had been happening since 1996 anyway?

Hi Chaps, Flat Capper here.
RL needs a successful London Franchise. The current one is in the wrong place and plays in the wrong colours. Let Sky/SLE own the franchise, take £100k a year from all other clubs share and make it a success by moving it to an area that plays RL at junior level - even linked to a soccer club as a viable summer option in the locality.

When teams are struggling in the MLB, the MLB takes control of said teams. Last year they took control of the Texas Rangers who then went on to the World Series the same year, and got purchased by some very, very rich people. This year they have already taken charge of the LA Dodgers.

This shows that it works in another sport, and the RFL taking charge of the every day running of Quins, whilst looking at a hugely rich new backer will help the club move forwards, the way forward would be while the RFL have control market the club all over, get cheap tickets on the go and give them a name that as soon as you hear you don't think Union.

The only problem with this, of course, is that it will give the conspiracy theorists a field day.

Totally agree!!