Think Gary is trying to pull on heart strings and get fans to dig deep for the club. He forgets we'be all been hit by this and we've endured years of under investment and a terrible spectacle on the playing side now.
Not sure sympathy levels are that high right now.....

Leeds have been champions more times in the last decade than we were in total between 1895 and 2004; some of the more fickle fans seem to have forgotten the element of humility that makes sport worthwhile.

Why do we have to label people into groups like 'fickle'.
Fair enough you don't agree, but labeling just kills discussion on the spot....

The most frustrating thing about the salary cap is that it’s been held at around the same level throughout Super League, so in real terms is well down from its previous level.

I’d like to see a formula introduced linked to the tv deal and number of home games. For example 80% of tv money +£50k per home game. So if the next tv deal gets SL clubs £2m per year each and they have 14 home games the salary cap would be £1.6m + £0.7m = £2.3m

Clubs cant afford 1.8m whats point in raising it to 2.3m??? Im totally lost

It should be raised by 10% per annum for at least the next 5 years & clubs should be obliged to spend at 85 to 90% of the cap level. Failure to spend should result in reduced central funding the following season.

I haven’t suggested increasing the cap to £2.3m, I’ve suggested creating a salary cap formula linked to the tv deal and the number of home games.

That’s a recipe for disaster though. With clubs forfeiting spending on infrastructure in order to meet the 85% rule.

For me it has to be a cap tied to income. It ensures clubs should be relatively financially sound and encourages increasing income.

As ive said before its easy for Leeds fans in a city the size of ours to say the cap should be based on income and others clubs should grow their income if they cant compete. Would you say that if you supported clubs like Salford, Huddersfield and Cas?

An income based cap wouldnt be a level playing field which is supposedly the whole idea of a salary cap.

We need to go back to licences and more importantly mergers. Then we can run the cap the way it should be, which is higher. We can’t compete with our number one competition globally because of it, so do something about it, don’t make it worse.

That’s all very well, but how would you like it if we were told to merge?

We wouldn’t. But regardless that is irrelevant, I would have the same view if I was a Wakey, Cas, or Salford fan. Licences should require a minimum standard, and if you can’t reach that as a single club, the other option should be explored.

Think we are heading into fantasyland again.....

Which club could merge with Salford to make them a sustainable enterprise going forward then???

If Cas and Wakey dont meet minimum requirements how would merging help? Sure they would have a bigger catchment area but nobody would be in the slightest bit interested in whatever name they come up with. They still wouldnt have a decent stadium to play in either.

The idea of merger assumes that there are other town /cities willing to take the place of one of the merged teams. there has een no evidence of this in the uk since the last licensing, only Toronto have come on board and we are at present unsure of their sustainability, mergers were rejected in Cas /Wakey /Fev, Hudds /Fax, Cumbria, Widnes /Leigh. The Hull /Gateshead was a disaster. Licensing did not work last time.

RL in common with all other sports including soccer and RU has been struggling for years to attract new players and spectators. The RFL recognised this over 10 years ago and identified one of the key problems as the amount of competition for the “leisure pound”, i.e. so many “new” ways for people to spend their time and money. Like other sports it hasn’t managed to react. What most have done is sell themselves to tv which in turn leads to decrease in live gates. It’s a vicious circle.

Whatever we decide going forward we need a genuine vision for the game that the RFL, SL, players, and Sky all get behind and work towards.

We can't carry on just making it up as we go along and changing it every few years.

Except I think the cap has done its job as far as it can of levelling the playing field.
We’ve had Salford making the Grand Final. Huddersfield finishing 1st. Cas finishing 1st and making the Grand Final. Huddersfield, Hull FC, Hull KR, Cas all making the Cup Final. Warrington finishing 1st, making the Grand Final and winning the cup. Hull FC winning the cup.

These teams won’t be able to compete consistently until they up their revenue streams and can not only spend on players but also spend on youth systems that rival Leeds, Wigan and Saints.

I agree with most of that but you are talking about small towns. Cas has a population of 40k yet they get around 8k crowds most weeks. If Leeds got that high a percentage of our poulation we would need a stadium bigger than Wembley.

All very well saying increase your revenue streams but how can they do that when they are working wonders to compete as they are.

I bet Cas' hospitality is booked to capacity most games now.

Theres no money in the game.

Fundamentally, how can a sport which struggles to achieve "critical mass" thrive when it's riven with in-fighting? I don't just mean in the UK, I mean the global game.

We need a root and branch approach to the whole sport globally, pooling resources and probably a move away from the slightly Norman structure we have now, of independent money men in their castles.

What you cannot afford in tough times is a lack of vision.

So your vision is ?

We have root & branch reviews every few years, all done in house. Like previous changes, it will be rejected after a few years and either another solution found or a return to the previous status quo.

I know what you mean and agree to a large extent but it’s where I think we need to look beyond small towns otherwise 8k will always be our limit.

If Cas can’t reach further afield then we need clubs with bigger reach who can attract more money into the game.

A league of:
Leeds
Hull FC
Hull KR
Manchester
Newcastle
London
Wigan
Saints
Warrington
Catalans
Toulouse
Toronto

Looks a lot more likely to attract investment than:
Leeds
Hull FC
Hull KR
Wigan
Saints
Warrington
Wakefield
Huddersfield
Castleford
Salford
Featherstone
Leigh

Which is a league we could easily end up with if we don’t provide a proper direction for the sport.

If I were marketing or wanting to be associated with a sport, and I weren’t a scrap metal merchant or local fish and chip shop, then I know which league I’d prefer.

But either way, the cap dependant on income truly gives clubs the opportunity to prove their worth to the league. We could even include a rule that over so much spending on players incurs a 20% tax that is then spent on infrastructure for clubs in development areas or for marketing the sport. It then further restricts the ability of one club to
massively spend more than the others.

For Manchester see current Salford team
For London - see current London team
For Newcastle - see Gateshead Thunder.
Toronto and Toulouse are unproven,
not sure I would be banking on these at the expense of established clubs.

The problem is the current “established” clubs are only established at being a bit sh|t. I don’t think we should bank on them finding another 10k fans each.

at what point does a club become established? London 40 years a professional club Gateshead/Newcastle over 22 years, Sheffield 36 years, or by established do we refer to "traditional clubs" Fact is the game as thrown so many expansion clubs under the bus over the years and missed so many opportunities. when the RL threw a million at gateshead hull merger why could they not just give it to Gateshead when Hull had over 120 years to get things right, same with Sheffield Huddersfield.