Quote ="Bullseye"There's a clear conflict of interest in SL clubs deciding the structure of the game. Quite a few of those clubs are failing businesses and propped up by a sugar daddy. They are no different in many ways to clubs below them in the championship.
The RFL should be leading the process but the issue is that it relies on a majority of clubs to vote. The majority of clubs are outside SL, so they'll decide even if it's against the will of all SL clubs. It seems barmy.
The main problem is we have a bunch of cash strapped clubs fighting over what is not enough cash. There isn't enough money coming in as a whole. Adding an extra few hundred grand to a club's budget here and sacrificing clubs to pay for it there won't be a game changer people seem to want (unless its detrimentally).
What the game needs is a significantly bigger TV deal as a whole. The game was healthier when we had salary cap parity with the NRL. Now we don't we're a 2nd class comp. Development of the game has been cut. Participation is well down. Arguing over a few hundred grand is like arguing over the deckchairs on the Titanic.'"
One of the major problems is that, if we are to believe what we hear, the TV money is far more likely to fall than to rise, so I don't know how that would go down, but I'd suspect it would be more likely to increase the infighting than decrease it.
That is also compounded by the fact that, yes, arguing over a hundred grand is a bit like moving the deckchairs to most, but I'd suspect that for some clubs in our league, £100K would probably amount to somewhere near their total annual turnover, so not, in any way, small change for them. I think those clubs would definitely regard it as detrimental.
If someone were to write a novel, or make a film, about the game of rugby league it would be panned by the critics as just too detached from reality to be believable.
