I haven't seen any comments. I may have missed them; maybe you can link something recent he's said on that topic?

This idea that the small clubs prop up the game and are the roots is ridiculous, if you have a tree and its dieing you cut off the dead branches or the whole tree dies.

I’d agree however I’m not sure the lower league clubs are the roots of the tree. I’d say that’s the amateur clubs.

Whilst I think the lower league clubs have a role to play I certainly don’t think they should be the primary or even secondary concern in any setup.

Would the community game in Featherstone or Dewsbury be as strong without the local professional club coordinating the amateur clubs and giving a very clear focus for local young players?

The majority of SL clubs want to reduce their exposure to relegation and get their hands on the money that goes to the Championship clubs.

There are plenty of problems in Rugby League and the RFL have played a difficult hand poorly. But the idea that the biggest problem are the smaller clubs and taking money away from them to add relatively small increments to the top flight's funding is ridiculous. Much more could be achieved if those so called big clubs operated effectively.

This argument is absolute nonsense.

Wigan is part of Greater Manchester with a population of 2.8 million.

Wakefield and Castleford are only a 20/25 minute drive from Leeds city centre. They have the same potential corporate audience as Leeds.

You make the point I was trying to make far more eloquently than I did. The fact is the RFL and Super League should be looking to expand the money coming into the game, not making a grab for a larger share of a diminishing pot.

I agree. summed up perfectly by the ghost!

greed pure and simple is at the heart of the change

Of course it would - there are SL clubs in close proximity to Featherstone and Dewsbury. The SL clubs are a business and like all businesses they want to reduce risk - seems pretty normal and it works really well in the NRL no P&R.

I would agree that both bodies need to work together but the best of generating more revenue in the game is to have a vibrant elite competition - ask the PL if breaking away from the FL was a good or bad thing?

That depends on your perspective and what you want for the game as a whole. If you want it to be a successful spectator sport, than the PL format seems to work. If you want a small group of players, owners and managers to make a lot of money whilst the grass roots withers, (Search "Funding Crisis in Grass Roots Football."icon_wink.gif I think it's a good model. If you want to promote and facilitate RL as a wider participation sport, I'm not sure the PL is a great model. Finally and I hope the England Team in Russia have a tournement that makes me look daft for saying this, our international performance hasn't really seen a positive impact from PL has it?

England have always struggled at international level 1966 apart so just perhaps we really aren't that good at soccer. The PL is full over overseas players which kind of suggests our players aren't up to much - so the success or otherwise of the PL will have little impact on the national side.


If you want to promote RL to a wider audience you need star players that are household names - not sure how funding Batley etc. helps to promote the sport to a wider audience. Clubs like Batley have been in existance for decades yet they struggle to get 2k to a game - how does giving them more cash promote the game to a wider audience?

And with out the Park teams and the lower league teams where are the these household names going to come from? How do we attract people to the game if there isn't a route into the game at a local level. With out the park teams and the lower leagues how do we bring in the youngsters some of who may be the stars of tomorrow. I agree we need more money in the SL, but that has to come from hard graft and new ideas not, as I said before from grabbing a larger share of a diminishing pot.

It all depends on whether there's a plan to grow the pot. If not then its just shifting chairs on the Titanic. If there is, then commercial decisions need to be made by the few clubs big enough to have positive input. On a commercial basis there's nothing at all that can be added by most Championship sides, or most struggling SL sides either.

There are very few top players that haven't come through the SL development program via a SL side. There will be very talented young players who aspire to playing for Halifax or Oldham etc.

If we are to get more money in the game it will not be generated by the championship clubs that is for sure.

I accept most of that, but where does the initial interest in playing start? Most if not all of those players will have come through a grass roots club. If enough of the money doesn't make it down to the roots the players won't be there to feed into the bigger clubs.

The players come straight from the amateur clubs who I assume are not having whatever funding they get sucked into the SL clubs.

The championship clubs are a drain on the resources - they bring so little to the party. Best thing they could do is partner up with a SL club as a feeder as they do in Australia and mutually agree a financing structure.

At some point the idiots who think they can split Rugby League into weak and strong have got to be stopped. Are Featherstone in the top flight? No. Are they ever likely again to be in the top flight? Probably not. So they must be dross then, take their money away.

It's mindless vandalism being done to the fabric of our sport. Does Sal thinks the end of Fev Rovers would have no detrimental effect on the production of rugby league players in that town? Rugby League isn't some free market where the strong will fill the gaps when the weak falter. These are towns which are defined by Rugby League, where the sport is a badge of identity and where the local club is the fulcrum which helps keep the interest going. If suddenly the fulcrum in Fev was Leeds Rhinos I can tell you for certain the game in that community would suffer terribly.

I fail to understand what the likes of Hunslet, Swinton, Rochdale, Halifax are actually bringing to the game - their crowds are an embarrassment - how much interest are they actually generating given they struggle to get 2k to attend a game - seriously? Why can the focus in Featherstone not be either Cas or Wakey?


It is just nostalgic coddswallop which towns are defined by RL? you are living in dreamland. The same can be said of the CC - nobody wants to go to the games apart from the final - they are now even having to a have a double header for the semi final such are the pityful crowds.


The game needs to attract players of the quality of Barba not waste money on failed clubs who don't actually help promote the game on any meaningful level. The game is dying - participation is down, standards are rock bottom how is giving more money to Hunslet going to change this situation?

let's just play an 8 team league then because half the crowds in SL are as much a joke. play each other 4 times and stuff the rest

Or why not have a strong 14 team full time competition with a feeder club for each of the full time teams that all work together to provide the best elite competition we can. Try and grow the revenues/standards/interest in the sport. The sport would be better off giving the monies to the likes of Oulton/Siddal/St Pats etc because they do far more for the future of the game than the likes of Batley/Featherstone/Hunslet.

Alternatively we can have you idea and spread the money out evenly so Hunslet get as much as Leeds - all go back to being part time and regress to the 1980's when the sport really was humming (sic).

What a load of sh#*# Salford & Huddersfield hardly attract any fans Fev & Leigh are much better supported.
Also The Championship share isn't on a par with SL Clubs either.
If you want a bigger pot cut SL to 10 Teams.

Widnes Huddersfield and Salford offer far less than a few championship clubs

Correct ,especially Huddersfield, which largely exists due to a kindly benefactor.

listening to last night's rl podcast and if Dewsburys chairman is correct the greedy sl chairman are a dishonest bunch of thieves.

I think the SL need to agree who is in and who is out and make it strategic - have a 10 year franchise that sets out what is expected. That doesn't mean it has to be the existing 12 - for me London needs to be in it, Toulouse too, not sure about Toronto. I cannot see what the likes of Featherstone, Batley, Dewsbury, Hunslet would ever add to an elite competition. Could see Bradford adding value if managed correctly

My 14 would be:
Leeds
Wigan
Saints
Warrington
Castleford
Catalans
Toulouse
London
Bradford
Hull
Hull KR
Leigh
Widnes
A team in Cumbria - possibly Barrow based in Barrow.

You get a good geographical spread but have local derbies - all must have reserve grade e.g. feeder club and proper youth development and facilities that are appropriate for an elite sport. Monies distributed accordingley

You could play home/away once, top 6 play off and GF

Think the Championship clubs get 8% of the TV money, League 1 clubs 1%. If clawing that money away from them is the best solution the SL clubs can come up with, they're f***ed anyway. In fact you could make the argument that the biggest drain on then game are the bigger clubs who sold their grounds to pay off debts and who then moved in as tenants of the local football clubs leaving them very limited ways of making money on non-match days. Yes, you can take the odd game to Australia, issue another limited edition kit etc but ATEOTD clubs like Huddersfield, Hull, Wigan should be bringing far more to the table than the feeble idea of snatching handfuls of loose change off the lower tier clubs.