People may be interested in buying the club - but NOT from its present owner.

That official club statement,from the official club website,is quite happy/prepared/open to explain that it has not paid 6 players - simply because they are not prepared to be bought off/accept less than their contracts stipulate.

Once again the sport lays itself wide open to bad publicity.

This time on the other side of the hill from another big,professional club,in the heartlands,who commenced the season in the lowest professional tier - from which I hope they escape with victory on Sunday.

Leigh were in Super League in 2017 and had a parachute payment at the commencement of this campaign.

Still some people wonder why parents are not encouraging their children to play the sport of rugby league.

Expansion? It is more like contraction,by the day.

I hope the 6 player don’t cave in to the bullying tactics and hold out for what they are legally entitled to in their contracts. The fact 4 of them played for Leigh despite Leigh not paying them shows the true character of the players compared to that of the club.

Nice personal insult. The rules have been in place for the last few years, why should they be changed at the last minute just to accommodate Leigh. It was Mr Beaumont who chose to sign a load of players he couldn’t afford and then offload as many of them as possible just before the qualifiers, that’s no way to run a club and he should take full responsibility not the RFL.

Despite all the ordure surrounding Leigh and the apportioning off blame, the RFL have a choice. They can accept the inevitable and cancel, postpone or give Fev different opponents or they can make Leigh play the game, get the supporters in and then see the ref abandon the game when Leigh’s team has less than the required number needed to continue.

What a sad predicament Leigh find themselves in. Unlike others on here, I wish they can find a speedy resolution.

Sweet baby Jesus.....

He probably wasn't even born in the early nineties

RFL have now allowed academy players to be signed (so long as they haven't played 1st team RL).

You really are going to need to expand on the three parts above to clarify that you're just not blindly pushing expansion with no idea of what it actually means.

=#008000Firstly, how does the Statement from Leigh, saying that to date they'd had no offers or interest show that expansion is "vital"? We've had expansion in SL for 23 seasons now, with PSG (Paris not big enough for you), London Brocos, Gateshead, Sheffield, Catalans and Crusaders and the only one bearing any kind of top flight fruit is the one that was a merger of 2 ailing clubs in a region with a core support for the game.......of the others, London survive purely through the guilty conscience of their owner, but are in no way shape or form a SL club, nor a model that the likes of Argyle will accept.
=#FF0000Which dovetails nicely into the second claim that Millionaires want big cities to invest in. This is again unfounded opinion....Paris is the #1 city in France, yet they happily throw cash at soccer and Union, but why not League.......Sheffield's not exactly a small place and has 2 Soccer clubs...both were in the top flight together at one stage, yet Sheffield are playig inside a running track......where's the money men? Toronto are an example of what can be achieved when you had out tickets like confetti and are prepared to make a loss...interestingly they think the receipt of £1.8 million will make them profitable next year.......boy oh boy are they in for a shock! It was costing David Hughes £2,200,000 a year to Keep the Broncos afloat with 5,000 PAYING FANS......
Lastly, we have the "must expand to survive" comment. London started taking the SKY cash when LMS was 10 years old and Tony Clubb was 9. These two are by far the best Broncos players to date some 23 years later.......and London had a small but active RL pedigree before the SKY cash. Toronto, by definition will have a couple of their products playing in SL some quarter of a century after they crate an academy......until then, they will raid SL/NRL and the NSW/QLD cup comps for players...so they aren't increasing the player pool in my lifetime. As for income.....they pay the TV production company....there is no TV deal. Their sponsor is a contra sponsor....no cash is changing hands.....they are simply a different home for average players and £1,800,000 of money that had been going into the game in the UK.

I am all for expansion, but not for the sake of it. It has to be done properly and with a series of achievable goals along the way. The statement from Toronto that they hope to make a profit next year once they receive £1,800,000 smacks of Crusaders mark II. Toronto tried and failed to find failed NFL/CFL stars who could play the game.....so they'll need to start at a younger age.....do you reckon Argyle has the patience to wait 25 years for a couple of Canadian born stars to appear? He talks of a Rugby of Excellence in Canada.....I wonder how involved World Rugby will be and how long it will be before they take over?
He's a wealthy guy......great for Toronto for now, but the saviour of the game.....I don't think so.

How about a quote from your head coach, Danny Ward.

"It's huge, I'm a massive fan of the expansion and I love what Toronto have done," Ward added. "They have their knockers and we can debate all day about that and the heartlands.

"But I love Toulouse and Toronto, it'd be great to see a few more outpost clubs in Super League.

"I believe the game needs it, we've got to branch out and have cities around the world playing the game.

"Toronto, there's talk about a New York team, get another French team like Toulouse who are doing so well, London, Newcastle." Ward added

Back on topic.... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/45736296

Back on topic.... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/45736296

Some common sense at last.

So instead of responding to CMG's points, you post quotes of somebody's OPINION on expansion, as opposed to providing evidence to support your points, whatever they were:

I have the same questions for Ward as I asked you......maybe he'll give the answers that you plainly can't?

I'll try again.

What will Toronto bring to the table other than a different home for average players and £1,800,000 of TV money?
Why did Paris, London (in SL) Sheffield all fail...Big Cities, with decent size populations and no interest. Toronto admit they are hemorrhaging cash and relying on freebies to get fans to games...£1,800,000 ain't gonna fix that, so how will they "make money"?
Toronto currently pay the production company to film their games and then give those games free to networks. Next year, if they take the £1,800,000 then they aren't allowed to show anything without SKY TV saying so.....so no TV deal. Their Sponsor will now have a minimal outlay as away sides will pay their own way....so where is the Benefit to the game?
What makes you think NYC, Hamilton or any other pin-dropped city will fal in love with the game, other than the you think it's a great game?
Do you think that a side in Canada, playing in a UK league using UK players from a shrinking player pool with no local development structure is going to deliver the sport from it's current scenario and if you do, please expand on how they will do this?

Oh, BTW. I regards to Danny's comments. What would you expect the coach of an expansion team to actually say about an expansion team?

Well, it's a solution in order to stop the game being a farce - albeit by allowing new players in they're turning the Championship Final into a glorified friendly, which still makes it an embarrassment for the sport.

It's a solution - agreed. And fair play to the RFL, and Championship/League 1 clubs who have agreed to it. The alternative - of one club turning out with between 9 &12 players, and the other with about 13/14 - doesn't bear thinking about.

You say it has been turned into a 'glorified friendly', but the whole concept is a bit of a farce anyway, in my opinion. We had the situation where the two finalists were decided, before any of the games had been played. Both those finalists came within 1-2 points of competing in the Middle 8's, had to jettison players to balance the books and, in all honesty, have just been going through the motions of a terrible anti-climax, since their fates had been decided.

Thats all it has ever been, can you name any previous finalists (without using Google ?)

To be fair, I don't consider London an expansion team any more at all. Still remember their first game as Fulham in the Early 80's. 15k fans rings a bell ? 37 years of existence tells its own tail, good, bad, mad and sad !

FWIW, good luck to London. I hope they upset the apple cart as there are a few bottlers in that Toronto side from their Leigh days. Its funny how Leigh have thumped London 3 times yet they still managed to finish top 2. Fair play to them ans I wish them well.

Paper round days, them. Fulham made the back page of most of the tabloids on the Monday following their opener.

Yes Bradford

Quote Edited Durham Giant. Try to stay on topic. Take your schoolground spats on to pms'"

Nope, but then there's days when I don't know where I put my keys or glasses either, or who won the Challenge Cup or SL Grand Final.

Yes thanks: Fev, London, Bradford, Sheffield (twice - lost both occasions), Toulouse

Winners highlighted.

I bet you cheated Mr Dog !

Cas won both at a canter. Hope that saves you agonising.