Obviously, your business model wasn't very good then.

So where are these extra half a dozen or so teams going to come from in the long, nevermind short, term to give 14-16 teams who will be able to survive with 10,000 crowds and/or a sugar daddy ?

I'm in talks with Walter Mitty's estate about the LA Unicorns, the junior team are to be called the Leprechauns, then we have the possibility of Ankara Anchors, it's a brave new world...

I'd have the current 12 toronto and toulouse..... Possibly 2 more from the championship...... Beaumont would bankroll leigh with the assurance of top flight survival..... Widnes were successful under licencing.
The NRL, AFL, NFL, NHL, NBL...... All successful without P&R.... Weve had 100 years of jeapordy and were still tiny.........we need a top tier with strong teams and a minimum spend on marketing...... If peoe see full stadiums they want to be part of it....

I agree with what you say why they the RFL and super league can not see it it is bloody stupid to carry on the way we are

I’ve always been in favour of P&R but the problem is when a team gets relegated nowadays if they don’t come back up straight away they go bust or have to go back part time I think we could easily accommodate a 16 team league just add Toulouse Toronto Leigh and Bradford and you have Halifax and Fev waiting in the wings in case things don’t work out for any of teams

When we say that P&R is ingrained in our sporting culture, it is worth remembering that we had no promotion and relegation between 1905 and 1962 or 1964 to 1973, when we had a single league. As well as more recently, when there was none to and from SL from 1998 to 2000, and from 2009 to 2014, when there were other divisions. I’m not saying those are models we should look to recreate, but it isn’t the case that P&R has always been part and parcel of pro RL in this country.

I think P&R has only recently started being used in domestic first class Cricket, though it’s not a sport I follow closely.

I've said elsewhere, 2 conferences of 8 sides, with 14 Home and Away games v your fellow conference sides and 8 (4H/4A) games against the others.....that's 11 home games.
Then, top 4 sides of each division play each other once (4H/4A) as do the bottom sides....another 4 Home games.....15.
Then, in the top division a straight 1st v 8th, 2nd v 7th scenario........better teams rewarded with extra home games........
At the end of the lower 8 comp, If there's an applicant for a Licence that has been approved (diligence, but not in the Bradford sense), then the bottom side plays them home and Away with an aggregate winner staying up.

15 home games.....and no bloody loop fixtures.....

St Helens,
Warrington
Salford,
Leigh,
London
Toronto
Catalans
Castleford
Leeds
Bradford
FC
HKR
Wakefield
Huddersfield
Toulouse
Featherstone/Halifax

Let's not forget York who are 4th in the Championship. I'm absolutely chuffed for them and how well they're doing. It suggests we might have another top flight city team in the making.

Interesting, no Wigan?

How about lets stick with what we have for a couple of seasons



Apart from the missed opportunity of not including Toronto and Toulouse in the last format change, surely, we should stick with the system that we have.
Of course, it's bloody uncomfortable for those under threat and nobody wants their team to go down but, at least with the current format, there is always the opportunity to re gain promotion.
If we go to any kind of franchise / license system, we will still exclude the rest of the Championship clubs and make it difficult to add "expansion" sides to the comp.
The key to what may be possible in the future is likely to be massively affected by the next TV deal and who knows what that may bring.

I really hope Toulouse come up sooner rather then later, hopefully if Toronto bottle it again Toulouse will be waiting. Be better for the game as a whole to have another French team in the top league.

I would repeat my annual, or perennial, question - to which I have never read anything from RFL or SL that remotely addresses it - Where are we going with this?

On current rumours and possibilities you could in a couple of years end up with a SL including
1. Toronto
2. Canada 2
3. New York
4. Catalans
5. Toulouse
6. Barcelona

I will ignore the "no away fans" argument, but that leaves the colossal expense of half the clubs having to jet half a plane of people to and fro every week.

But back to the plot. Where are we going with this? Are we actually looking to build and cement a World Super League? Like a RL version of the Champions League?

Or is the aim (as I thought it was with Catalans, though it was never said) to use the foreign club as a standard bearer to promote RL on their home patch, with a view to the foreign team eventually retiring into a newly vibrant own domestic league?

Or is there, as it has always seemed to me, in fact no real overarching plan whatsoever and never has been, and we just get random applications from moneyed enthusiasts and for as long as they can inject the cahs, we are happy to accommodate them permanently?

Compared to soccer, RL is skint. One leading player's Premier League wages could probably pay the entire RL weekly wage bill. Yet no country allows foreign teams into any of the premier (or indeed any) divisions. If it is such a great idea, then why not? For example, "promote" Man City to La Liga?

I just don't see that the present arrangement of foreign clubs being allowed to come in and stay in seemingly on a permanent basis is healthy for the domestic game. As at today, if you added 5 foreign teams to SL then Wakefield, Leeds, Huddersfield, Hull KR and London would find themselves in the Championship to keep Bradford and Leigh company.

How long would all those "SL level" clubs manage to stay at anything like their present operations, given that at best, only one of them could be promoted each season - and that might be at the expense of another English team anyway.

So your plan isn't actually for 14-16 viable clubs, but merely a bit of deck chair shuffling!

^^This^^

^^This^^

Cardiff/Swansea in the Premiership?
Derry City in Ireland?
Monaco in France?
Vaduz in Switzerland?
Toronto/Vancouver/Montreal in MLS?

I don’t think there is an overarching master plan beyond trying to exploit opportunities that emerge and seeing how it evolves.

I doubt the New Zealand Warriors will be playing in a NZ-only competition any time soon. In fairness they’re a good bit closer to Sydney than a potential domestic expansion team in Perth.

Let's not forget American ice hockey leagues.

On the general question I don't think there is a strategy.

With only 2 main countries involved in RL, England and Australia it falls to them to grow the game outside of their hinterland as there is no one else.

Now you could take the approach of anyone outside of our hinterland is not our concern, however that would be strategically short sighted.

Look at other sports and they are not content to stay in their traditional local markets because they see the bigger long term prize means participation internationally to generate significant income.

Rugby Union expanded beyond its boarders decades ago with bringing more teams into what is now the 6 nations. Originally it was just a UK based competition then brought in France and Italy. It is now looking to expand further without any concern about whether RU has a tradition in those countries.

The super 12 has already proven the case for cross boarder domestic leagues.

Even the most cash rich leagues in the world in the NFL are not complacent taking several games to Wembley.

Look at football in the off-season, there is no off-season, they take domestic games on tour in the far east to grow their market share.

In wider sports entertainment, WWE do shows in the UK, Japan, Saudi etcetc.

We could say screw the financial opportunities in France and Canada and Wales. But will Saints, Wigan, Batley, Featherstone, Hull ever expand our market to drive more finance into the game?

A very good 5Live podcast with Shane Richardson (Gateshead/Souths) and Mark Evans (Melbourne Storm/ Harlequins RUFC - Closely aligned with Harlequins RL). They discuss expansionism within SL and licensing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07f1k8m It also discusses why SL needs to be run by non club chairmen. The discussion is very interesting including why Toronto will not work and it would be better for Toulouse to be promoted, why we should be concentrating on strengthening the M62 corridor clubs and why Bradford should be given a license for SL. They also mention the fact that most NRL teams are also losing money and are supported by their fruit machine business.

A very good 5Live podcast with Shane Richardson (Gateshead/Souths) and Mark Evans (Melbourne Storm/ Harlequins RUFC - Closely aligned with Harlequins RL). They discuss expansionism within SL and licensing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07f1k8m It also discusses why SL needs to be run by non club chairmen. The discussion is very interesting including why Toronto will not work and it would be better for Toulouse to be promoted, why we should be concentrating on strengthening the M62 corridor clubs and why Bradford should be given a license for SL. They also mention the fact that most NRL teams are also losing money and are supported by their fruit machine business.

14-16 Viable clubs....have you been at the sherry? I never said it was the "silver bullet", but SL currently only has maybe a half dozen "viable" teams and the best way to get the other 10 or so up to speed is with a competition that will appeal to sponsors and fans alike.
London Playing Wakefield 3 times a year isn't what sports fans want.....they want to see different grounds, not be visiting the same place over and over again.
The system I posted gave the sides 15 home games with a minimum of 11 of those games against different opposition before the play-offs, as well as visiting 11 different grounds as well.
Let's say Halifax are in the same conference as Saints and Wigan....it is 100% the responsibility of the Club to fill the Shay and not just expect fans to flock to the games. As it stands, very few RL clubs market themselves of the game very well and as such, we chop and change the system to suit the bigger clubs who just want more home games, but a conference system would give the "minnows" a chance to grow.....it might take a decade, but you'd see the dominance of the top clubs be challenged and that's what the game needs.....we aren't soccer and we can't keep a system where relegation often means bankruptcy....London went down and were only still in business the following year because of Hughes.....Bradford went with them and plummeted......Widnes went down look at them now.....if HKR were to go down, I'd fear for their chances too and given it's likely that Toronto will buy their way to SL safety, another team faces the "black hole" in 2020.
Bradford, Widnes, Workington, Oldham, Halifax and Leigh have all been relegated and face financial issues as a result. Salford, Huddersfield and London are the only ones who survived with the help of a financial Backer so you could argue that the only team to successfully bounce back are Castleford.....and let's not forget the club such as Crusaders and PSG who fell or vanished, or the "megers" that saved some clubs.....we've chopped and changed and at every turn it's been for short term gain and without a long term strategy, we'll be doing the same in 20 years time....

I used to hate 'Licensing' & with good reason *because it was corrupt* however the way things are currently I now believe licensing could be the way forward !

FWIW I would admit the following Clubs with notice to be SL ready for 2022 .....

Leigh *my Club*
Bradford
Toulouse
Widnes

In addition I would admit Toronto from 2021 regardless of P&R results

Obviously this would give 17 teams if none are to be relegated or lose a licence place, however the NRL coped with this & for a short period so could SL, that is until a further Canada/U.S.A club is ready !

Leigh, Bradford and Widnes have tried, and failed.

How many games do you want the clubs to play each season ??
Also, with the game "desperate" to expand into N.America, what mechanism would you have for admitting additional clubs and what is your limit for the number of clubs in the top flight.
Remember, the old first division had 16 clubs when it finished and SL used to have 14 clubs, which was deemed too many, hence the cut to 12.
Personally, 14 clubs with a balanced fixture program looks about right and to avoid increasing the number exponentially, there needs to be relegation and promotion from The Championship.
The current format may not be ideal but, at least if your club gets relegated, there is a way back (at least theoretically).
Franchising will create some winners but, it would also preclude some clubs with genuine aspirations to play top flight rugby.

I've said numerous times that we should have moved to 14 clubs when the last change took place and it's mickey poor that those running the sport couldn't sell this idea to Sky, which maybe demonstrates the lack of appeal which is offered by our all new trans-Atlantic game ?