No,it SLE problem to increase the number of sl standard players and as a consequence,international standard players.
Its up to the championship clubs to produce championship standard players and if any of those players prove good enough then they can step up to sl,especially now that sky funding is being cut even more to the championship clubs.
I said invite new club not invent them. The clubs might already be out there,scolers,gateshead,sws, there are a number of clubs in yorkshire that might see there future as feeder clubs.Just remember these are issues for SLE and not championship problems.

But the stream of players wouldn't be constant , one week you could have 7 , next week 2 , it couldn't be constant if every club wasn't a feeder club , as then some clubs could have 7 full time SL veterans playing for them , and other teams wouldn't have any , who would have SWS as a feeder club ? , so players are going to train full time in Lancashire/Yorkshire , then also train at night 150 miles away ? , Gateshead maybe ? , so clubs that are already getting hammered week on week would be playing even stronger teams ?

That's why it wouldn't be competitive

No comment on us losing our biggest club , with the replacement being Crusaders , the SL equivalent of losing W1g4n and gaining Leigh , we are to receive less money from central funding than in the past , our TV coverage will be on a channel with less profile ,

More players being released is a sign of clubs struggling , almost all clubs are stating they will be spending less this year than last , many are stating sponsorship is getting harder to find and they are getting less money for it

Newsflash fella, that can happen when your not in the top league. The FL Championship lost Newcastle and gained Burnley, Portsmouth (administration) and Hull City. Was the FL Championship on its knees last year?
The best go to the top. I don't get why you think anything different should happen? It wasn't worth commenting on.

And the TV comment is massively contradictory to what you've been saying in the past. You were saying that people wouldn't go to games because they'd watch it on TV, so it wasn't worth having on. Surely having TV coverage with less profile is better in your opinion as less would watch on TV and more would go to the game? You can't have it both ways.

That's a sign of the times unfortunately, it's not exclusive to RL. Clubs are gonna have to cut their cloth accordingly like in any walk of life. It doesn't mean it's on it's knees.

It's just needless cynicism. You're not happy unless you're complaining about something, even if it contradicts other points.

Yes , but the previous year the FL gained Newcastle



They have 20 odd home games a year , we have 9

You try running a club on 9 games a year

And yes I totally disagree with Championship RL on TV for free , I'd rather we didn't have any , Thursday nights kill crowds , so why continue at all with it , with the move to Premier Sports even the argument about extra sponsorship for the local night club or builders merchant goes out the window

You are very selective in which parts of other peoples posts you respond to , very ' smokeyish ' , so keep it up , then everybody can think your a as well

No need for feeder clubs. What about agreements between local SL and NL clubs saying we will loan out promising youngsters to them for a certain amount of time during that season. Nothing that will hinder the progression of the NL team or harm any possible SL application for them. For example Wigan - Leigh, Hull - York or Wakey/Cas - Batley. Does not even have to be that local. I personally think it helps out young players of SL teams playing in NL where they will learn loads and add potential quality to the NL team.

This system is already in place its called dual register/contract.There are 4 players involved in this deal and thats enough.

Some clubs need to send a few more young players out then. Not sure of numbers but iam sure some clubs dont use it as much as they could (which would be developmently beneficial to them instead of putting out their strongest team in the reserves). Because they will learn more in NL than in the reserves in my opinion.

These clubs choose not to use this system,whats the problem?

It should be used more by SL clubs instead of fielding the strongest reserve team in my opinion. A young player would learn more in NL and become more rugby intelligent playing there which would benefit the SL club more in the long run than playing a player exclusively in the reserves. It takes u21s out of their comfort zones playing NL against intelligent ex SL players/wily veterans and brings the players game on more than playing against less experienced reserve players. In a nutshell i think it is underused.

Its got nothing to do with the SL clubs.If some of the CC clubs choose to use this system upto a maximum of 4 players then thats up to them,If other CC clubs choose not to use this system then thats up to them.

And lost 5 former PL clubs, and gained two tiny clubs from the league below. It's swings and roundabouts. The best eventually go to the top.

The irony is you'd also be complaining had Widnes not gone up and someone else did (say Crusaders for instance). Again, you can't have it both ways.


For someone saying I use obscure examples, this is a pretty ironic reply!

They pay millions more in wages. The costs are completely different. As are the number of games they can physically play a season (even a week). Not to mention you don't play 9 games a year, do you? You discard other games to peddle your argument.


Well don't argue about it then. You can't claim the Championship is on its knees because of less TV coverage and then say you think it would be better off TV. It's whinging for the sake of whinging.

You're entitled to your opinion (I disagree with it, but aren't arrogant enough to believe I'm right and you're wrong). But you are not entitled to peddle two contrasting arguments when you feel like it.


Selective in what way? What haven't I addressed?

The way I see it is you are selective in what you want to read. I have addressed everything you've asked me to address.

Which is what I think the feeder situation should be. If a Championship club wants to partner up with a SL club, they should be allowed.

I am of the belief that every player should be playing at as high a level as possible every week. There are a pool of players not getting played every week in SL that have to make do with playing academy level when they could be playing Championship level, strengthening that pool of players.

Sorry mate i've already given you my opinion on this.

Sorry, I missed that post during Starbug's contradictions on the TV situation.


No, it's not SL's job to produce internationals anymore than it is Championship club's job. Internationals can come from anywhere. It's up to the game as a whole to produce players as good as possible.

If you create a new league and invite new clubs to it, wouldn't that be more damaging to the Championship than allowing them to be feeder clubs in that league?

Saying that, in Aus they have the NSW Cup (feeder comp) and the Bundaberg Rum Cup (semi-pro comp). The NSW Cup is regarded as the bigger of the two though, so essentially doing what you're saying to do would demote clubs choosing not to become feeder clubs.

While the sky grant that goes to sle has gone up The rfl/sle have cut the grant that come down to the CCs,that tells me how important the rfl/sle see the CCs to the devolopement of rl in this country.so i'll say again,its the interests of the CCs that are important to the clubs of the CCs,not the intersts of sle or the international game.

The CCs are what they are mate and nothing is going to change that, unless they change it themselves,so if sle want a feeder legue they need to sort it out themselves.

Wouldn't partnerships between SL and CC clubs see them get more money though (well, "save" money, make more money available)?

They see SL as more important in the development of players (as it's the top league so this is obviously the case). But that doesn't mean they see the Championships as worthless. It's an inferiority complex to believe that.

If there are a group of Championship clubs that would prefer to be stand alone then that's fine. That's their choice. If there are a group of Championship clubs that would prefer the help of being in a partnership then they currently don't have that choice. I think it would be better that they all play together if they're of a similar standard rather than separate and essentially weaken both competitions.

.Then theres gatehead,sws, skolers,hemel stags,bristol sonics,coventry bears,crusaders,theres league wellsy,get on with it.

If SL clubs want to enter into formal agreements with Championship clubs they already can , to the tune of several season long loans and up to 4 DR players , if the RFL thought it would be beneficial to go further than that , I'm sure they'd happily change the rules , the reason they haven't so far I'd guess is the SL clubs don't want it , and the Championship clubs don't want it

It was you who brought football into the situation , not me , I didn't include the 2 NRC games , but also didn't include lots of other games the FL teams play

You believe what you want , you haven't a clue what is going on below SL , you keep on believing the bollox that comes out of Red Hall , I'm glad Nigel is so excited , at least somebody is , because I can tell you for certain , nobody down here is , the RFL haven't a clue how to deal with the Championships , this year has been a farce , they announced an expansion and re structuring before they'd had any actual clubs apply to join , they've finally realised that Toulouse were a mistake , and yet they are now considering an Anglo French competition , how thick are they ?

No contradiction on the TV deal from me , they either pay for it , or it doesnt get shown , and that includes the finals as well

How much do clubs get from Sky (or did)?
And why would this lead to cuts from it?


You're not making much sense there. You're just pedalling your opinion as fact when it isn't. The inferiority complex is that you think the RFL don't care about them.

The fact that international players can come from any league means it's the games responsibility. The fact that the majority come from the top league is a consequence of the standard of the players produced in the game finding their way to the top, not the other way around. There were internationals before SL you know.


There already are a number of SL clubs that partner with CC clubs. It's not a case of asking them, it's a case of not being allowed to do so much.

Your last sentence doesn't really make any sense.

100k down to 90k.
We already deal with sl clubs we dont need partnerships.Partnerships would lead to feeder clubs which is what you want and i dont, or is that to difficult for you to understand.
Yes its my opinion,but then i'm down here looking at whats happening whilst your in yor ivory tower with your head in the clouds,spouting crap on a mb.
They dont find there way to the top,sl clubs find them and give them professional contracts.
Yes and there was a game for all before sl dont you know.
Did it make no sense because it didn't fit your agenda.

Right, so the CC clubs get £90k from the RFL for doing what may I ask? SL clubs get money from a contract from Sky to host their games. They have value to Sky, so get paid for it. The fact that the RFL give money to CC clubs (a rather substantial amount altogether) means that the RFL clearly do care about them. You JUST said in your other post that the RFL care more about grassroots than the the CC clubs. How much do they get and why?

You saying you don't wanting feeder clubs is not an argument anymore than me saying I want them. I understand you (and others) may not want them. I also understand that myself and others want them and think they'd be beneficial. Comments like "us being down here" and "you in your ivory towers" are the exact reason for the inferiority complex comment. The personal snippy comments because I disagree with you are also completely unnecessary.
The reason I'm questioning your opinion so much is because you said if clubs want to become feeder clubs they should play in a new league. You don't seem against the idea of them being feeder clubs, but against the idea of them being in the same league and I don't understand why. I know you don't want your club to be one, but if the clubs you suggest became feeder clubs (basically all the expansion ones and some Yorkshire ones), then there won't be many semi-pro clubs left in your stand alone league. Would you prefer your club to be in a stand alone league of about 10 clubs? Sounds very much like a big fish in a small pond.

Top players find their way to the top. They work hard, perform well and earn contracts at SL clubs. The SL clubs scout them, but the player puts himself in the window with his work. It's a combination of the two. Top players find their way to the top.

And your last sentence made no sense because it wasn't written well.
"Then theres gatehead,sws, skolers,hemel stags,bristol sonics,coventry bears,crusaders,theres league wellsy,get on with it."
"There's league Wellsy, get on with it". What's that meant to mean?

And can you explain why you've listed a bunch of expansion clubs? And why you think "some Yorkshire clubs" would want to be feeder teams? What club is it you support out of interest?

You want the CCs to become feeder leagues,yes? then go and ask the owners,shareholders/stakeholders if they want there clubs to become such clubs,if the answer is no then go and start your own feeder league and leave these clubs alone.its not hard is it.

It doesn't work like that though, does it?

Why ask them if they aren't allowed to become feeder teams?
If they say no, then how are they going to start their own feeder league with no clubs? It would just be the current situation under a new name.

Why didn't you answer any of the questions?

I haven't read them i really cant be d.