Hetherington needs to quit, his position is untenable. He has embarrassed this club with his comments, and throwing the teddy out the cot for not getting his way. To be the only top flight club with this stance, shows how out of touch he is with the modern game. Really needs to go hide behind a rock now, and keep his mouth shut. As fans all we can hope is that we as a club, as a result of him, are not alienated by the other clubs.

If Hetherington has lost the debate, why should the other clubs care?

In the end there will only be one winner and that is the club with the most money, Wigan, Saints and Warrington are having their day of glory, it won't last long, these three teams their gates are falling, they don't own their grounds their way of raising money is to take a larger slice of the pie from Sky, the reason why they did not raise the number of teams in SL to either 14 or 15 is because the pie would be spread thinner, hence the loop games play a team three times in the season, who is betting that these three teams end up with playing Leeds three times , simply because of the number of supporters they take to away matches. No disrespect to the likes of Salford and Widnes, but how many supporters do they take on their away travels.
I don't agree with what has Happened, I don't agree with what GH was proposing, I would have liked to have seen SL grow to 15 teams, one relegated and the top 4 play to go to the GF, unfortunately the Chairman are not clever people they think of tomorrow not 5 years down the line. Trust me there are some thick chairman in SL. One meeting I was in one Chairman was looking to sell their super league franchise to another club who play in the championship, move everything to this club, candidly I would not employ these chairman to run my firm if they was the last people on this earth. They cant run a business how can they try run a sport

This loop fixture thing ? If there are say 4-5 teams who are most fancied to win SL before the season starts ,will they all get the same Loop fixtures or will some get easier or harder ones ?

I'm not sure if I'm remember correctly but I think in the past they've done the loop fixtures based on the previous year's finishing positions - splitting the teams into 2 group of 6 (1st/3rd/5th/7th/9th/11th and 2nd/4th/6th/8th/10th/12th) and then each team playing the 6 teams from the other group so you get a similar set of easier/harder fixture. Of course, this year you'd probably have to count the top 4 in the middle 8s as finishing 9th to 12th.

He probably is out of touch with the modern game.,though only in as far as Leeds is one of the few clubs not losing money hand over fist. Understandable that he wouldn't take the short-term view of his counterparts.

maybe you need to quite this forum your position is untenable, you come on here and think you are the epitome of wisdom on all things RL. but don't no half you think you do. so what if Hetherington made a stand against the other chairmen, quite clearly is was the 3 fat cats who bullied the other chairmen in to their way of thinking as the lesser clubs are so desperate with there poor crowds to lose any sky money. its easy to bully your agenda onto desperate week men, its much harder to make the stand against it.

Shut up you big tart. What a silly post.

The rest of the game have voted this. All the media who have an interest had the same opinion. Hetheringtons position was self interest, and nothing more here.

You might well have had a point had other clubs without self interest backed him, but they didn’t. The whole game has a different view. And there may well have been a couple of clubs bullied, but not with the size of majority. Even the community game voted agains GH View, that tells you all you need to know about your own view.

If GH had have had the games interest he should have backed the changes but with conditions of his own. We should have had a 14 team top league, without loop fixtures, and he could hav3 led that. But anything is an improvement on the ridiculous eights.

i don't support Gh views at all, but i don't support your view that he should quite just for not being rail roaded into into by other club chairman, and has the rest of the clubs at lower level where told accept it or else. he probably was right to make a stand. personally glad to see back of 8's and i actually agree with you 14 teams and not loop fixtures should have been way to go.

What is the structure 14 team SL? If so does that mean the top 6 of middle eights are in?

so when do we find out which teams voted Yes and which No

It was a secret ballot

We don't have the quality to run 14 teams.

Or 12 teams for that matter. Repeat fixtures are ridiculous though.

All the SL clubs bar Leeds voted for it.

Ahh all the chelping from Lenighan & co about uncertain fixtures so the brains trust cime up with Loop fixtures.


Guess what nobody knows what those loop fixtures will be either.
Im happy with top 5 but id hoped to see the 1 up 1 down extended to 2nd top Championship v 2nd Bottom SL for the MPG.
I think a 14 team SL would be better than loop fixtures & whatever GH thinks a reserve league is a must imo.

14 team SL needs to be put into place in next 2 to 3 years. Give clubs time to build. Need to find a way to get money invested in the game.

GH is our greatest ever chairman but he is wrong on this but it's wrong to say he should go.

So because other teams, who are all much more desperate for cash and security than Leeds because their businesses are generally not well run, voted for something, and Leeds didn't, Hetherington should quit.

If you don't vote for something and everyone else does that's an embarrassment in Gotchaland apparently.

Even when it's something which isn't really that consequential like a league format (which it is clear has been an excuse from all those non-performing club bosses as to why their clubs were losing crowds and money hand over fist).

So some great thinking there from Gotcha: if you don't go with the flow you should resign. Cos all those who voted yes have proven themselves to be visionary forward thinkers. And their club level incompetencey will all be solved by bringing back the competition structure from a decade ago and the play off structure from two decades ago.

Leeds are the biggest club in the game. Other than maybe Warrington we are the only financially stable English Super League club. Our potential relegation had the scope to single handedly knock millions off the value of the next TV contract. Our club is run to break even because the owner isn't looking for a return. Almost uniquely we can take a long view. If the people running other clubs don't agree that's fine. But bending over, voting against what you believe is right for the whole sport, voting to agree with some short termist grasping chancers just to avoid being in a minority would be the ultimate embarrassment.

An interesting post - just because you run your business effectively and don't forget Leeds has significant advantages over most other SL clubs in terms of potential audience especially corporate revenues it doesn't mean you are in touch with reality.

Leeds can only continue to prosper if they have fixtures that supporters/corporate/TV want to be involved with. If GH had his way the salary cap would be set to lowest that any team could manage i.e. Wakefield. Financially perhaps that would be good thing in the short term long-term it would be a disaster for the game. We have seen the drop off in the standard since the NRL salary cap increased how does lowering the cap improve the spectacle?

GH doesn't want to run a reserve grade - so again players are simply cast aside at 19 and lost to a game that is crying out for participation - again how is that good for the game.

Sometimes you need to be mindful of the long-term future of your business when you are looking down from your ivory tower. A deal is only a good deal if it works for all parties. SL generates all the revenues in the game - without the SL players you wouldn't have internationals nor would you have a CC competition worth anything. For the long-term prosperity of the game we have to have an elite competion that generates real quality and interest something that GH seems to have not considered.

The reserve team I agree on, not because Hetherington's approach is wrong in practice but because of the destructive effect it has on the league below in using dual reg for a de facto reserve teams.

But the excuses being made that the 8s is the root of all problems is laughable. Is it too much jeopardy for too many SL teams? Possibly. But it's enlivened that end of the table and the championship. On the other hand the short notice of fixtures is a definite challenge so it has its weaknesses. But changing format isn't going to suddenly make viable all those clubs which aren't viable. Grasping a bit more money at the same time would have, slightly, but that seems to have been fought off.

Going all in to save the 8s is probably not what I'd have bothered with if I were running Leeds as, frankly, it doesn't really make much difference to the end of the table we generally swim in. But standing up for the interests of the rest of the game is something I do applaud Hetherington for.

The Warning bells have been ringing for years. The fact that so few clubs in SL are thought of as financially stable should be a major cause for concern for those who follow this great game, including those that follow "sucessful" clubs. We struggle (and fail?) to maintain a truely competative 12 team comp, both on and more importantly off the field, Whilst I'm sure that many who don't follow Leeds will take a degree of schadenfreude from our performances this season and fair play to them. There is no joy for me in seeing clubs like Salford or Wakey struugle on the financial front. If we think the game is struggling now, imagine it if there were only 4 or 5 viable top flight clubs. Our failure to generate a truely competative world cup or international competition has, IMO, damaged the sport financially in the Norther hemisphere. If we can not pull together a sustainable model for top flight RL over here then we are doomed to a slow decline into total obscurity. We need strong collabrative leadership at club and RFL level and please god, a decent strategic plan.

The 8s may not be the root of problems but are a major concern. Attendances at matches and viewing figures are woeful. The system has obviously not enlivened things up as if it had it would be reflected in the attendances and viewing figures.. If they continue will have very adverse effect for negotiations for TV rights next time around. Clubs don't like the system, fans don't like the system so why continue with it.

If you believe Hetherington was standing up for the rest of the game in an altruistic way and should be applauded you must be very gullible. He was trying to stir things up purely to serve his own ends as he always does. He is always full of himself when putting forward his views but noticeably quiet when things go against him. The Fev Chairman was very considered in his response. Expressing his disappointment yet acknowledging the need to work together in the future. What was Hetherington's response? No comment he needed time to consider the situation. I wonder if the reporter managed to avoid the dummy?

If only a quick fix solution was available to cure the problem. The game at the moment is stagnant, boring and lacking any kind of appeal whatsoever. Phil Clarke the other night on sky said the championship clubs should have the money to them reduced. Because they had not improved or expanded the game. That may be the case ,but that accusation could apply to several super league clubs. Unfortunately I am in my late sixties, the only plus side is over the years I have been privileged to watch some superb players. Some of the games I have witnessed this season have taken boredom to the extreme. The number of talented players on view is minuscule.

He didn't say that at all. What he asked was is that the best use of the money, questioning if it could be better used to support community clubs with the aim of increasing player participation.

I’m torn on this one.

I like the 8’s, it’s probably the only system that eliminates as many “meaningless” games as a system ever can do and it does breathe life into the bottom of the table and the top of the Championship.

However, I think it draws too many clubs into potential relegation. Leeds being a good example of this this season. A team finishing 9th in the season is having to delay signings and planning for next season and beyond because their future in SL isn’t certain. Now for a club like Leeds they can probably deal with that uncertainty for a year but smaller clubs who are in that position year on year must be struggling.

So whilst I’d prefer a licensed league, I prefer the new structure over the current one. I like the top 5 playoffs as well.
I don’t like the loop fixtures. I get clubs would struggle with only 11 home games but I’d rather expand the league than have extra games against the same teams. Personally I’d expand the league to either 16 or even 20 teams.

What I don’t like though is the squabbling and time and effort that has been put into this from elements of the sport when they should be finding ways of improving attendances, corporate sales, sponsorship and non-game day revenues instead of just blaming the RFL for all the game’s ills.

The structure of the league isn’t going to significantly improve the health of the league. Clubs improving their own infrastructure instead of spending all their money on players, will.

Personally I’d introduce a rule on the salary cap, either you can only spend a maximum of 25% of your clubs income on players wages, or 50% but discount the TV money from a clubs relevant income for the calculation.

That way a club would have to bring in around £4m a year of their own money before they can spend the full cap.

I get there are concerns about the size of our salary cap compared to the NRL and Union, but whilst their salary cap is much higher so are their revenues.

We need our clubs to grow their revenues before spending more on the same players.