Re: Hock : Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:46 pm  

Sharpy_4a wrote:

Loosing players of Hock's calibre to any comp whether it be NRL or union, obviously isnt a good thing for the british game. There are few enough players who its worth paying to watch in the comp as it is, and anyone who thinks it is a good thing is crazy IFL included!

Im not sure raising the cap in the short term will make any substantial difference as we would just pay the same average players more to be average (see football for more money doesnt convert to better players) and we still wouldnt be able to offer the top players the same as the NRL and Union, as there just isnt the money in the sport. People keep saying that we have awesome viewing figures on sky, well this should be translated into the brass coming into the game should it not?

I have said for ages that the easiest job in the world is the Head of Marketing for the RFL as they dont do anything. We get a couple of wagons driving around the country, seriously when was the last time you honestly looked at the side of a wagon and thought, "that looks good ill have a bit of that!"

I dont have sky sports anymore, as I went off watching non wigan games on TV about 5 years ago, couldnt put up with tweedle dum and tweedle dumber. In that time I cant recall seeing 1 advert on the tv regarding superleague. (I have however heard the advert on talksport a few times this week, so it seems someone has done a bit of work this month at the RFL)

Its not difficult to put together a marketing campaign, but the RFL would have you believe its a regular Manhattan Project!

Short term we need to increase revenue, which given the viewing figures shouldnt be so difficult and long term we need a complete re-think of how we coach sports as a whole in this country and move away from an attribute based system of coaching to a technique based system, but thats an argument for another thread.

If he does leave though, all the best to him, but it makes me feel even more confident in my decision not to renew my season ticket for the first time in 24 years.

I fully agree (apart from the ST comment). I used to watch every game on Sky and would regularly watch highlight shows on both Sky and the BBC, but now I hardly bother. I think I watched about 5 non-Wigan games last season.

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 12:40 am  

sally cinnamon wrote:

The big problem British RL has is Aussies don't take us seriously, they think we are crap.

This is the flip side of producing talent and if Warrington produced a load of good players and some of them ended up in the NRL then that would be great. Wigan have had good service out of Hock and if he goes and proves himself in the NRL it gives a signal of quality of Wigan RL and British RL to the Aussies which is where the powerbase of the game is, and builds our reputations.

I can only presume you are trolling with some of your comments on here if you sincerely believe that the most damning problem for British RL is that Antipodeans think we are crap. I really wish an Aussies opinion of our game was the main almighty dilemma that we had to deal with in British RL.

The other paragraph which I've highlighted is perhaps more ridiculous. To suggest that getting a few pats on the back from some Aussies in a pub justifies nurturing a fabulous talent like Gareth Hock from 12 years of age, developing him as a player through our development systems, all of which involves countless investment and resources, progressing through our academy systems, integrating him into the first team, establishing him in the first team, allowing him to flourish and to fulfill his natural ability as an outstanding RL talent, to then stick by him through his drugs ban and support him in his recuperation, to not ostracize him from the game and see him make a return back to his best and have him penned to a five year deal, to then after a couple of years see him pinched by an NRL club at a time when we can't afford to lose such a top class talent after a heavy exodus of experience players to the NRL/retirement (?) is all justified because it apparently makes Wigun look good?

I seriously question whether players from Super League moving to the NRL actually does anything for the reputation of our competition. I remember both Tim Sheens and Des Hasler making spurious comments about Gareth Ellis and James Graham regarding the need to redevelop and retrain certain areas of their game to play to the standard required of them for the NRL. When both players have made a success of it I think you'll find the Aussies take credit in "making" these players a success rather than crediting any past experiences in Super League. Players moving to the NRL builds greater reputations for themselves as players and not Super League as a competition.

And to be honest, either way, who cares - there are far more significant challenges that faces British RL than having the Aussies take us seriously.

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:10 am  

Without more broadcasting revenue, the game will continue to go backwards. I've got no faith that Fat Nigel is the man to lead the game forward, but he's got the safest job in sport! Ridiculous and depressing

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:36 am  

On the TV deal thing, is it not just a matter of demographics. Whether we like it or not kick and clap attracts a lot of rich public school types. As an advertiser those kind of people tend to be more valuable than your average working class folks.

That 'might' be why BT are willing to pay so much more to attract fewer actual viewers, or they could alternatively just be bloody idiots.

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:40 am  

fleabag wrote:

No, but being as this is the Wigan forum. Please forgive us if we have comments to make when we see a large number of our last seasons team all departing, very quckly, and reducing the overall quality of our team.

Being as you support another team, maybe you see all this as a benefit ?

Fair enough if Wigan fans have concerns at that (although Hock was banned for 2 years and Wigan won Super League during that time), what I'm talking about is the argument that Hock's departure to the NRL is some form of sign of death knell of rugby league in the UK. If Hock had been just a rank average player, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

cadoo wrote:

I can only presume you are trolling with some of your comments on here if you sincerely believe that the most damning problem for British RL is that Antipodeans think we are crap. I really wish an Aussies opinion of our game was the main almighty dilemma that we had to deal with in British RL.

Thats what stops a thriving international game from developing which is really what marks RU out from RL. If the Aussies really thought playing GB was the ultimate challenge, like they do in cricket in the Ashes, then things would be a lot better. The tickets for the cricket Ashes sold out very quickly when they went on sale and next summer cricket will be huge in terms of sporting profile.

But in general, this issue of players leaving and moving on is something that has always happened. In Wigan's glory days you used to sign up everybody from other clubs, Hanley, Andy Gregory, Offiah, raid RU for Botica, Tuigimala etc. People back then used to say Wigan were ruining the game for everyone else. Most clubs have to deal with the food chain reality that if they produce a good player, they will struggle to keep on to him for more than 3 or 4 years and will then have to watch him playing against them for their rivals, it's what happened to us with Harris and Sculthorpe, happened to Wakefield with Ellis. Wigan don't even have to worry about this. It's not like players are coming through, playing a couple of seasons with Wigan and then saying I want to move to a bigger club. Hock has been at Wigan for a decade and he's got the chance to play in the NRL....this isn't a reflection on Super League or Wigan being substandard, it's Hock being good and getting opportunities. How many of you guys that support Wigan, if you were professionals and had played for Wigan for a decade, would honestly say you wouldn't be interested in a move to the NRL?

For all this talk about marketing and making the game bigger do you really think that would change someone like Gareth Hock's mind after a decade in SL and having the chance to test himself in another league? Maybe he's been on these forums and seen people say stuff about players like Peacock or Cunningham "yes he's good but if he was really that good how come he hasn't gone to test himself against the Aussies".

As for the game dying and all this crap look at the gates SL clubs get now (despite the economic times) and compare to back in the late 80s and early 90s, I know Wigan fans will regard that as the golden age of RL but outside of Wigan, Saints and Leeds there were hardly any fans, it was just a hardcore of a few thousand at most clubs. Now the game has better stadiums and bigger crowds.

Anyway despite Wigan losing a number of players, its not like Warrington and Leeds are going to avoid this problem over the coming years is it. Now that it's harder to sign up loads of players from the NRL there will be a premium on which clubs have the best young players coming through, surely Wigan of all clubs are going to be well placed for this?

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:03 am  

cadoo wrote:

I seriously question whether players from Super League moving to the NRL actually does anything for the reputation of our competition. I remember both Tim Sheens and Des Hasler making spurious comments about Gareth Ellis and James Graham regarding the need to redevelop and retrain certain areas of their game to play to the standard required of them for the NRL. When both players have made a success of it I think you'll find the Aussies take credit in "making" these players a success rather than crediting any past experiences in Super League. Players moving to the NRL builds greater reputations for themselves as players and not Super League as a competition.

And to be honest, either way, who cares - there are far more significant challenges that faces British RL than having the Aussies take us seriously.

Totally agree. We now seem to exist in a world where, thanks to satellite TV, the Aussie game is viewed by some as a extension of ours (or vice versa), and an opinion is held that if our players go to the NRL it's no big deal. They're still playing the same game, they'll still be available for GB, who will probably improve as a result, etc etc. It's a just like they've gone to a rival club, so the game overall will benefit.

Well no, it ISN'T like they've gone to a rival club and it IS a big deal.

Our domestic game is so weak in terms of talent at present that it simply can't afford to keep shipping its best and brightest to the other side of the world, where, regardless of the nice warm feeling we may get seeing them plying their trade on obscure satellite TV channels that no-one else in the UK is watching, they have basically been lost to us. They're not waving the flag for the British game while they're down there (no-one would notice if they were); they are putting the fruit of all the talent that our game invested in and developed into a different game on the other side of the world. Discounting the few (dubious) benefits that our international teams draw from this, they may as well be in Rugby Union.

Losing our players to the NRL is now a much bigger danger, IMO, than losing them to that 15-a-side joke game, the main reason being that going to the NRL will not damage their reputation as sportsmen. No-one would take Chris Ashton, Kyle Eastmond or Joel Tomkins seriously as rugby players now - they traded wealth for respect. But the likes of Morley, Graham and Burgess are held in high regard. So it's even more likely that good players will go there.

And it doesn't totally surprise me that some Warrington fans are refusing to see this as a problem. Much like Saints did when the main threat was Rugby Union (until Eastmond of course), they so far seem to have led a charmed life in this regard. But all that may change very quickly if players like Westwood, Atkins etc were suddenly to rip up their contracts and vanish over the horizon.

[DaveO]

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:25 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

Changing the Salary cap has no impact unless the revenue can increase. Unions big earner is the 6 nations, it pulls in huge amounts of cash and it's not something we can match. The TV deal is a bit of a Mystery, we pull in better figures, but get less cash???? I think the issue there is a lack of offers from TV companies outside of SKY. This has to be down to the RFL/SL sales team. How we cannot link better viewing figures to a better TV deal is beyond me unless simply in the high echelons of TV advertising we are seen as good on figures but that does not translate to adverts somehow?????

You have hit the nail on the head here. We have a better product but can't market it.

It's interesting to look how Premiership soccer just did its marketing for the next three years. They have got £2.28 BILLION off Sky for 116 games a season for three years. This figure is being seen as an inflated bid from Sky as they were desperate not to lose the rights. They thought they were bidding against cash rich Al Jazera believe it or not. Richard Scudamore was able to play one bidder off v the next and the bids are sealed so its a blind auction.

So despite it being obvious premiership soccer won't come cheap given its standing as sport Scudamore managed to wring every last drop of cash out of the bidders at a time of global economic austerity. He even said it was the best time to be doing a deal following the epic contest for the title last season. That put the price up as well he feels.

Compare that to the defeatist attitude of the RL leadership who agree to give Stobarts free sponsorship.

One option maybe to allow more interuption in the game. If Sky could throw 2 more ad breaks in every game bar the GF, would it make our product more TV salable? How you do that is up to the powers that be.

You don't need anything like that. You need a marketing department willing and able to do stuff like compare viewing figures with RU and go off to the likes of BT V and say how much for RL? Given the lack of sport on BBC and ITV they must surely be a target who could still give us a big increase in revenue while saving them from having to spend silly money on higher profile sports.

I am not saying it is easy to do this but we don't even seem to try. If RU can get £38m a season based on their viewing figures we need to employ marketing people who can up the value of our product considerably. It may not go to £38m a season right away but they have to get the profile higher so next time the price goes up and so on.

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 2:52 pm  

Cruncher wrote:

And it doesn't totally surprise me that some Warrington fans are refusing to see this as a problem. Much like Saints did when the main threat was Rugby Union (until Eastmond of course), they so far seem to have led a charmed life in this regard. But all that may change very quickly if players like Westwood, Atkins etc were suddenly to rip up their contracts and vanish over the horizon.

Charmed life, really?

We have been losing our best players for years...Harris, Sculthorpe, Nigel Vagana, Kohe-Love, Nutley, Fozzard etc, Andy Gregory if you go back a few years. Wigan have led a far more charmed life than us in terms of being a club that signs other clubs best players far more than has their best players poached.

In fact if you look at NRL clubs themselves, with their tight salary cap rules, there is a LOT more movement of top players and potential to unsettle clubs. If you look at any of the top clubs and their player movement over the past 5-8 years you will see top players emerging and then being lost due to salary cap pressures. In Australia this forces a higher churn which will happen here too, and churn opens up spaces for young players. How often do we say young players don't get enough chance and are lost to the game, but if players get exported to the NRL then it will force clubs to focus on their own production lines to ensure their success.

The long run implication of this is the clubs that are going to dominate SL will be the clubs with the best youth systems. That already happens to a degree but it will be even more so. So its for some clubs at the lower end to worry about more than Wigan. If Wigan ends up being the best youth system, and the only one that loses players to Australia, then assuming the players it loses are relatively big guns that are on big salaries, Wigan will just sign up other clubs best players and take the initiative from their rivals.

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:08 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

The long run implication of this is the clubs that are going to dominate SL will be the clubs with the best youth systems. That already happens to a degree but it will be even more so. So its for some clubs at the lower end to worry about more than Wigan. If Wigan ends up being the best youth system, and the only one that loses players to Australia, then assuming the players it loses are relatively big guns that are on big salaries, Wigan will just sign up other clubs best players and take the initiative from their rivals.

Ergo, a lowering of standards/quality, in SL. And a poorer spectacle for the UK speccies.

Re: Hock : Fri Nov 02, 2012 4:18 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

Charmed life, really?

We have been losing our best players for years...Harris, Sculthorpe, Nigel Vagana, Kohe-Love, Nutley, Fozzard etc, Andy Gregory if you go back a few years. Wigan have led a far more charmed life than us in terms of being a club that signs other clubs best players far more than has their best players poached.

In fact if you look at NRL clubs themselves, with their tight salary cap rules, there is a LOT more movement of top players and potential to unsettle clubs. If you look at any of the top clubs and their player movement over the past 5-8 years you will see top players emerging and then being lost due to salary cap pressures. In Australia this forces a higher churn which will happen here too, and churn opens up spaces for young players. How often do we say young players don't get enough chance and are lost to the game, but if players get exported to the NRL then it will force clubs to focus on their own production lines to ensure their success.

The long run implication of this is the clubs that are going to dominate SL will be the clubs with the best youth systems. That already happens to a degree but it will be even more so. So its for some clubs at the lower end to worry about more than Wigan. If Wigan ends up being the best youth system, and the only one that loses players to Australia, then assuming the players it loses are relatively big guns that are on big salaries, Wigan will just sign up other clubs best players and take the initiative from their rivals.

Frig me Sally, you can't claim Andy Gregory....a Wigan lad who you lot pinched from Widnes and only played 60 games for you anyway!!

Whilst Wigan bought, they also lost a few good ones (to club in the UK & Abroad) before their peak anyway......Henry Paul, Kevin Iro, Bobby Goulding, Phil Clarke and more recently to RU clubs - Jason Robinson, Chris Ashton, Joel Tomkins and Owen Farrell.