People have been predicting the demise of RL since it's inception. I guarantee that if the internet existed 50 years ago that it would be awash with posts from people complaining about the governing body, the referees, the play the ball, the standard of matches, the chairman, the BBC etc. The game will carry on no. I'm not burying my head in the sand or putting my fingers in my ears. I no the game has problems, but there're also many positives within the game. Do I agree with everything that the RFL and the S chairman decide? Of course not, but ATEOTD they're more qualified than I, or any other miserable old pleb with sand in their gash who "wants their game back".

I watch RL because I enjoy it, even the 5hite games are enjoyable for me. Of course I want every game to be close, competitive, and full of skill, but I know that's impossible, so I enjoy it anyway. If you don't then I'd suggest you go watch or you do something that you do enjoy, it's that simple.

It is quite possible, but I think we all know William isn't "concerned".....and hearing it every week also leads to questions why someone would spend their time doing so.......but some like to bury their heads to that question.

So "safe in this knowledge" you predicted Leeds to finish in 7th place at the start of the season! .........at least your judgement is consistant..

You can't expect The Printer to understand that simple logic. The second sentence is him to a tee.

Unless my reading is amiss you posted "Go follow another sport then"!! how can you deny that?

William loves this sport more than most and I would suggest he supports the sport at all levels far more than some one team supporters who can't see beyond what is happening at Headingley hence his posts of concern. The fact that you cannot see that suggests your ability to understand simple posts are questionable?

You have been to the last four games Leeds have played - in your view is that the standard the League should be offering? Its an embarrassment to elite level RL. You,it would appear, unlike William are only interested one club and not the game as a whole.

As a counter are London / Bradford any worse than the like of the awful Huddersfield, leigh and Halifax teams of the past?

Quite true and, in your case in particular, views are validated by reasoned argument and constructive suggestions on how matters may be improved. It seems to me that if someone continues to make the same criticisms and never put forward a sensible solution to the problems they perceive, then that person shouldn't be surprised when they get dismissed as appearing to be a "sado, pleasuring themselves over back copies of the Australian Rugby League Week in a darkened room". For the avoidance of doubt, the speech marks are not a reference to a previous quotation, I put them there for effect.

:30bca337

Because before you added "if you don't love what is on the field".....never wrote that at all.



Again waffling on about me apparently denying anything is wrong with the sport.....

Please quote where I've said this.

Totally agree Eagle which imo shows we need fewer teams and reduced play off numbers.
Hopefully a 12 team league will prove to be better but i disagree with the 3 x 8 format I'd go with top 5/6 and 1 up 1 down.

Unlike some I do not take some things too seriously. Predicting finishing positions in the league is surely no more than a bit of fun.
At the time I was trying to display my disappointment in the club's apparent lack of ambition in making well considered new recruitment ( unlike say Saint Helens - Salford have shown how not to do it by contrast ). Obviously the club realised there was simply no reason to recruit. The degenerating old pack and first choice pedestrian half backs are still sufficiently competitive in the equally degenerating overall standards of the present league.

We probably have a player pool to sustain an 8 team top division. But (and I have no access to the books to assess this, so it's a question) could we keep generating enough revenue with so few games?

Maybe we should have been more radical, and siphoned off a chunk of the new TV deal money to run 3 or 4 big regional elite academies and run a NFL-style draft system for the resulting talent.

I'm not sure whether thats a serious suggestion or not.

Little point when you will not even admit to stuff you actually posted - your blindness is duly noted

I did write "Go follow another sport then"

I however, did not write this....

"Go follow another sport then if you don't love what's on the field"

........Now where are these quotes of me saying the sport is in amazing health and thinking all is rosy?

Please share otherwise we'll all see that you made all that up in your head in poor agenda driven desperation and now look foolish.

He is. But does his model really differ much from what was done at Bradford in the 90s and early 2000s?

Or what Wigan were doing prior to imploding financially and having to sell their home to clear their debts?

Individuals with large sums of cash coming in can only ever be a short term fix, unless they address the underlying issues at their club to make it into a viable business. Koukash seems to have no interest in making Salford self-sustaining, just on paying over the odds for big name players.

Rule of thumb.

No matter what era, good, bad, excellent, mediocre whatever. There will be people who claim it was better 'back in't day''.

So these people bemoaning the current state of super league, claiming it was better in the late 90's when we had a different system, well back then we had other people claiming it was better before super league.

It's got the stage where actually praising super league is now seen as towing the party line. I get the impression those criticising super league somehow see themselves on higher precipice of rugby league knowledge, going against popular opinion with far greater insight.

I think it's all bollox.

In 1984 I could have probably predicted the outcome of 90% of all games in a weekend. I don't know what's changed in the 35 years since I started watching the game apart from the fact that Leeds are a consistently competitive team. Something they failed at spectacularly for the first 25 years I watched them.
In all sport there are games that are going to probably only go one way but how many times have we played a pitiful Cas for example and come away with a defeat in the last few years? Bradford are dead bottom, bankrupt and with injuries. Not difficult to predict that result. Pretty much like for about 10 years you could predict that Wigan would win every game they played.

Like a lot of older Leeds fans I think deep down you are not conditioned to expect Leeds to win games. The natural explanation for you is that the quality of the competition must have fallen for this to happen. Perhaps a supporter who watched the great team of the 60's/70's would also have expected Leeds to win these games.

It's also possible to pay to actually watch the game you have "followed all your life". Something you and William haven't done for quite some time. That would be a better contribution to the games perceived ills than some of the contributions on here. Just what does the airing of these "concerns" achieve and how "concerned" do you (William) have to be before you (William) STFU and do something about it?

Problem is, we've heard it all before. Sal (genuinely negative) and William (tired troll) have been crying wolf like this for 10+ years on here. Maybe that is why posters who actually spend their hard earned supporting the game have switched off to them?

Guffaw etc.

Anyone told him where Shaw Cross is yet?

"Posts of concern". Brilliant William, your best work yet. Guffaw etc

Splendid effort.

In the unlikely event that we're ever on trial for anything, I insist on separate defences.

I have a certain nostalgia for the RL of my youth. It's easy to remember the great players, and the likes of Schofield, Hanley, Crooks etc, and matches against that great Wigan team and the wonderfully savage Widnes pack stick in the mind.

But there was always some utter dross around. Wakefield and Bradford, and even London, are no worse than the Barrow side I watched getting 90 points stuck on it at Headingley in the old Championship, for example. The game wasn't in rude financial health and the toilets at more than one ground were a wall and a gutter...

Things weren't always awesome in t'olden days...

I'd love someone to come along and tell me exactly what it was that made things "better" in the old days?

Playing standards? Hardly. Watch a game from the late 70s or early 80s back again, in full rather than just edited highlights. It's slow, it lacks the physical intensity (other than a wide range of cheap shots) of the modern game or the handling skills for that matter.

Facilities? Errm, yeah. Those old toilets with no roof at Station Road and Derwent Park were ace, weren't they? Crumbling terraces, ancient stands with uncomfortable seats, obstructed views. Give me that every day over a brand new, clean, well appointed stadium.

Competitiveness? Really? In the last 13 seasons before the switch to summer, only four teams won the title (Wigan, Widnes, Hull KR, Halifax). The top flight has always had some teams who were whipping boys getting regular large beatings from the top clubs. There has never been some mythical era in which the bottom team and top team were evenly matched.

A competitive international arena? Yes, because GB's results against Australia and New Zealand were markedly different from what are they now - getting close to the Aussies, before losing the games that count. Winning at home to the Kiwis, struggling away.

So what is it that the nostalgics are harking back to?

I haven't read any comments on this thread about how things were better in the past.

I'm away in Birmingham all week next week and will possibly be staying next to a Vue cinema, which is good I thought, for one evening at least I may pay Vue to go and watch one of their films, maybe buy some popcorn and a Ki-Ora or two.

Then I looked at the list of films they are showing and depsite them having a hundred or so screens there is nothing that I fancy watching, absolutely nothing, and I've watched their previews to try and persuade myself that any of them could be worth a £10 punt.

So by your logic what I should really do is pay to go to Vue at Star City next week and just watch anything, anything at all, the film is irrelevant as long as I am handing over my money to Vue in the vain hope that at some undefined point in the future they may have a film showing that I actually want to watch.

I'm going to be in Birmingham quite a lot over this summer, how many weeks worth of shoite films do you think I'll have to watch under your theory of loyalty before a good one comes around ?

Which begs the question; Do you believe things were no better in the past?

If you believe they were then I can start to understand (but not entirely agree with) your negativity.
If you believe they weren't then the logic is simple:
Premise: Rugby League today is crap.
Premise: Things weren't better in the past.
Conclusion: Rugby League is and was always crap.

All of which makes me wonder why you ever got interested in the sport at all.