Moving on slightly, because while I take your point we could go round in circles for a while, this last point interests me. Do you not think it’s a major issue that they haven’t really settled on a position yet? They might not be as savvy as you give them credit for and they/the RFL should really have taken stock a long time ago. Like I said before it seems to be one foot in and one foot out on expansion and that is going to lead to a shocking negotiating position. From the sounds of it Elstone seems only to be interested in a deal with Sky which limits our negotiating position further.

SL/RFL are two wildly differing things now despite Mr Lenagan's latest hint at the cooperation of Simon Johnson.

Elstone is interested in whatever the SL chairmen tell him to be interested in and that is SL only. I think they would be over the moon with getting exactly the same price they got last time as long as it is divided between them only.

I don't see the expansion issue arising in SL/SKY negotiations, aside the Elephant in the room that is Toronto (who might well only be a short term irritant to the SL chairmen anyway). I think SKY and SL will both be on the same page on that (non) issue.

The RFL however seem to have the own agenda and are happy to entertain anyone who ventures even the wildest of ideas. I am not sure there is any long term plan for it all and much will fizzle out but some sort of statement of direction and plan for the future of the game outside SL cannot hurt. They really need to be looking after the needs of the existing members and the potential of such as Newcastle and York as SL will cut them adrift given the opportunity or need.

It may well have been Elstone, but the fact seems to be in a 12 club set up 9 must be English clubs to satisfy SKY's English subscribers. I can understand this as SKY perhaps should not block the games ambitions to expand, had TWP gone up last year, and Toulouse gone up this year we would have such a set up.

But the key word is "expand" and the definition of this whether as it was as defined to Catalans in 2006, Toulouse 2015 or Toronto 2016 was that Superleague does not want an expansion of the number of miles it takes to get to games, and they don't care what crowds "expansion" clubs get because few away fans will come here anyway.

For all three expansion clubs the expansion required was defined as more TV money from French and North American broadcasters and more quality players, and for Catalans that meant players good enough to stock the French International side - we must remember that. We must also remember for Toronto the game did not want to wait 40 years whilst TWP developed a "grass roots" they wanted players NOW and were promised grid iron conversions.

So when SL review the new SKY deal at whatever level it may be - maybe between £120-150M for a 5 year deal, then they will have to revue the inclusion of overseas sides to create expansion. You know as well as I do that review will expose Catalans, Toronto and Toulouse as total failures to expand the SL player base or the SL TV money.

I never ever said there would be a total guarantee SL would drop to ten. But given...

a. Expansion has been a complete 100% failure on the targets the game here set for the expansion clubs
b. There will be less money to share amongst the English clubs
c. SL have already tried to drop to 10 but lost the vote a year ago - but can revisit that and win it at the TV negotiations
d. We don't have 12 English clubs with solid backing from benevolent benefactors

.....Then clearly the odds for a 12 club Superleague are around 100-1 against and for a 10 club superleague odds on, that's of course "absolutely no guarantee" but very very likely for good reasons. I see no reason for the clubs to continue with failed expansion clubs nor put clubs in SL who can't afford it..............Don't you??

Quote ="notorious"I thought the overseas club quota commitment came from Elstone not Sky? And was in anticipation of our negotiations for the next TV deal. On your second point - the clubs, especially the big ones, will always want a bigger piece of the pie and they obviously foresee a smaller TV deal and less money. That doesn't guarantee we go down to 10 teams though. If they follow the Toronto model we could end up with 9 current teams taking central funding and 3 expansion teams funding themselves as one example. Many questions to answer and absolute no guarantee we go down to 10 teams.'" Just on the 10 teams thing I've managed to find the link here........ https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/5610037/ ... tier-plan/ [i""Top flight clubs are talking about the future of the competition after seizing more power from the Rugby Football League over the off-season. It is expected they will vote on whether to increase the top tier to 14, with much stricter off-field rules on eligibility to play in Super League, for the 2020 campaign. But SunSport has learned of another proposal that would see it cut from 12 to 10, with another tier of 10 underneath. However, all central funding would go to those 20 clubs, meaning anyone outside them would have to find money themselves or wither and die"".[/i No absolute guarantee but SL tried it the other year and lost the vote..................It's worth looking these things up.

Quote ="notorious"I thought the overseas club quota commitment came from Elstone not Sky? And was in anticipation of our negotiations for the next TV deal. On your second point - the clubs, especially the big ones, will always want a bigger piece of the pie and they obviously foresee a smaller TV deal and less money. That doesn't guarantee we go down to 10 teams though. If they follow the Toronto model we could end up with 9 current teams taking central funding and 3 expansion teams funding themselves as one example. Many questions to answer and absolute no guarantee we go down to 10 teams.'" Just on the 10 teams thing I've managed to find the link here........ https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/5610037/ ... tier-plan/ [i""Top flight clubs are talking about the future of the competition after seizing more power from the Rugby Football League over the off-season. It is expected they will vote on whether to increase the top tier to 14, with much stricter off-field rules on eligibility to play in Super League, for the 2020 campaign. But SunSport has learned of another proposal that would see it cut from 12 to 10, with another tier of 10 underneath. However, all central funding would go to those 20 clubs, meaning anyone outside them would have to find money themselves or wither and die"".[/i No absolute guarantee but SL tried it the other year and lost the vote..................It's worth looking these things up.

Quote ="Donnyman"Just on the 10 teams thing I've managed to find the link here........ https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/5610037/ ... tier-plan/ [i""Top flight clubs are talking about the future of the competition after seizing more power from the Rugby Football League over the off-season. It is expected they will vote on whether to increase the top tier to 14, with much stricter off-field rules on eligibility to play in Super League, for the 2020 campaign. But SunSport has learned of another proposal that would see it cut from 12 to 10, with another tier of 10 underneath. However, all central funding would go to those 20 clubs, meaning anyone outside them would have to find money themselves or wither and die"".[/i No absolute guarantee but SL tried it the other year and lost the vote..................It's worth looking these things up.'" It's worth noting that the link you quoted is basically a year old. Things move forward quickly in sport and while you have some good points, quoting old material and hoping for a reduction in teams is not helping imo.

Quote ="Donnyman"Just on the 10 teams thing I've managed to find the link here........ https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/5610037/ ... tier-plan/ [i""Top flight clubs are talking about the future of the competition after seizing more power from the Rugby Football League over the off-season. It is expected they will vote on whether to increase the top tier to 14, with much stricter off-field rules on eligibility to play in Super League, for the 2020 campaign. But SunSport has learned of another proposal that would see it cut from 12 to 10, with another tier of 10 underneath. However, all central funding would go to those 20 clubs, meaning anyone outside them would have to find money themselves or wither and die"".[/i No absolute guarantee but SL tried it the other year and lost the vote..................It's worth looking these things up.'" It's worth noting that the link you quoted is basically a year old. Things move forward quickly in sport and while you have some good points, quoting old material and hoping for a reduction in teams is not helping imo.

"OLD MATERIAL? REALLY??

With respect dismissing a major vote on the structure of the game in which clubs differences were laid bare, because it was a year ago and where the Superleague giants got a bloody nose from the RFL and the Championship clubs doesn't help one bit. Effectively that vote settled the "matter" only at the time, but to pretend Superleague are going to take that on the chin and in 2022 they are going to divvy up a lot smaller TV deal across what?? 37 clubs plus six more with Ottawa, New York, Vancouver, Timbuktoo, Valencia and Belgrade making 43 clubs -well you have to be joking.

The whole reason Lenegan, Moran, Davey, Koukash Pearson and Hudgell were at bitter loggerheads with the RFL was that the RFL took large amounts of the SKY deal and gave that to the Championship. As a result Superleague embarked on a long battle with the RFL for control of the game. Superleague won that and it will be Superleague NOT the RFL who negotiate the SKY deal this time. How can you indicate that looking back at these major events off field aren't helping the debate going forward???

The result of the battle between the Superleague clubs who now have McManus Fulton and Carter on board, and the RFL was the impending closure of Red Hall and the mass redundancies therein. The next stage in the ongoing dispute is for the Superleague bosses to negotiate the 2022 deal. In forcing a vote in which SL basically said "we are planning to dump 17 clubs"sent a very big signal to the game, you appear oblivious to? OK the vote was lost then but you cannot pretend that is the end of it when at some point in the future the new SKY deal can pay Superleague clubs ONLY for Superleague rights in the same way they did on all the TV deals before the one Solly and Wood negotiated, "shafted" Superleague giving £millions to the Championship.

Read it all up carefully. McManus appears to be saying SL "[iwon't leave the championship out of the SKY deal[/i", but he doesn't define what he means by the championship? is it the 27 existing clubs? or the 10 clubs he was planning for?. In that vote a year ago the championship was going to be only 10 clubs if Superleague had had their way. YES the vote was lost but the clear signal was still there. The next SKY deal will be negotiated by Lenegan, Pearson, McManus and Hudgell and most likely the money will be organised such that only 20 clubs get a share.

The vote on that will NOT include Championship votes this time - they will be helpless....This is NOT "old material" is it??

The vote on the new deal will be taken by Rimmer for the RFL (who have ONE casting vote) and Lenegan, McManus, Caddick, Hudgell, Pearson, Carter, Fulton, Davey, Moran and whoever holds Salford's vote. TWP and Catalans should abstain as guests, the championship get no say and this time whatever Superleague want Superleague will get. It really is worth taking notice of what happens off the field as it will shape the game 2022 onwards, you may have noticed Nigel Wood reappear with Bradford, and TWP not signing up a raft of new players but securing their squad only for 2020 and 2021. You may have noticed not a peep from NY or Ottawa who both passed up chances to join next year. You may have noticed Les Catalans can no longer be bothered with the development of French players any more.

You may have noticed most tellingly Perez has jumped ship and is now at Bradford working for wood It DOES help to carefully watch the politics and the events of this matter it then helps us see which way things are going, and that ain't Transatlantic, it certainly ain't 43 clubs......

it is interesting that Hull FC have partnered with Bradford, AP keeping friends close and enemies closer?

You can bet that any one of those Chairmen's priorities will change when one of them gets relegated at the end of the year, the question is who will it be.

Plus Ottawa and NYC haven't passed up anything as there will be an announcement soon about their plans for 2021. What that is, is anyones guess.

:37ilnrc7

All the chairmen will accept relegation as long as they are replaced by other chairmen of full membership owning English clubs who meet Superleague standards. Outside of the 10 English chairmen in Superleague, you have the following Gentlemen and their clubs who retain Superleague ambitions.

Mr. John Flatman......YORK
Mr. Semor Kurdi.......NEWCASTLE
Mr. Nigel Wood .......BRADFORD
Mr. Chris Shaw.......WIDNES
Mr. David Hughes....LONDON
Mr. Derek Beaumont....LEIGH

Four of the clubs clubs are already committed to player development and accept a mandatory requirement to run reserves. York are struggling on that issue as the local amateur game doesn't have the numbers. Should Leigh go up reserves should appear. Player development was made mandatory for SL clubs with the advent of the reserves league, and that mandatory requirement was stretched to Newcastle, Bradford, Widnes and London. We therefore now have 14 English clubs at the forefront of the game, who are in good shape and good hands to move forward into the new era of the re-vamp of the game and the new TV deal in 2022.

York will need to boost playing numbers in the city, AFAIK Salford will meet the Reserves criteria.

Whether Superleague stays at 12 clubs in 2022 or drops to 10 we shall have to wait and see, but it could not be more clearer that Superleague has already set it's criteria for future membership of the revamped Elite competition in 2022. The current Superleague competition is now playing out it's final two years of the contract i.e. 2020 and 2021 under the signed arrangement agreed between the RFL and the Superleague.

It is very clear that the current English SL clubs are already making plans for 2022 - wether that is 10 or 12 clubs they have 15 English clubs lined up for that, all of whom will have to meet the rule of running a Reserves side. :37ilnrc7[u:37ilnrc7It really is not hard to see the intent behind the sudden introduction of a rule that puts the likes of Bradford and Widnes in the driving seat in the queue for Superleague 2022 onwards, and leaves Les Catalans and Toronto stranded as ineligble for Superleague 2022 onwards.:37ilnrc7[/u

TWP's rection was to send McDermott out to admit they won't be developing any players, and of course the club has no players at all contracted to play in 2022. Deals are only being extended to 2021. As for Les Catalans, no reserves, no academy and they are currently looking for more English players to add to their first choice team. Why do these clubs bother to play on? I assume they are contractually committed to see their time out, and not spit the dummy out.

Expansion was always about expanding the pro player pool, TWP and Catalans are (1) failures on that, it was about TV deals that paid money, TWP and Catalans are (2) failures on that as well, and currently 14 English clubs meet the new criteria for inclusion in Superleague post 2021. Those are the facts of the matter.

Meanwhile at League Express Towers and RL Weekly heights these giants of the RL press have gone a bit quiet on their to date unstinting support for the Transatlantic dream. They would do well to start to discuss and champion this element of apparent resurgence in the English game.....

Because the TV deal sells subscriptions to English fans. English fans love Hull.v.HKR, they love Leeds.v.Bradford. they love Wigan.v.Leigh, they love Hull.v.HKR, they love Warrington.v. Widnes they love Castleford.v.Wakefield......... That's 12 clubs English fans adore, and key games they look forward to. They also like the idea of expansion so London.v.Newcastle looks to be a great fixture for TV don't you think??

You called me "Myopic" in an earlier post, I think with respect it's you that can't see the future, and it ain't Ottawa.v.Toronto, New York,v,Boston, or Toulouse.v.Catalans, unless they can find any SL quality players and overseas TV deals? Can you see any?? you have better eyesight than me???

Why are you bringing me into this again as I was happy to agree to disagree and leave it alone? I'm only replying as I didn't call you 'myopic' as I would never be so disrespectful - I said that while you made some good points, some of your [uarguments[/u were rather unbalanced/myopic. If you took that the wrong way then I apologise.

Mr Woods is a minor shareholder at Bradford and not on the board, never mind the club's chairman. And I suspect Mr Campbell at Featherstone might argue with your list......

You may have some figures for this but, do you think that Sky's priorities lay with generating advertising revenue or selling subscriptions.
It's a strange situation but, IF there were millions of people watching Sky but, getting the service at a "discounted rate" via a dodgy Sky box, it would still be worth it for companies to pay Sky for advertising and it's quite possible that the number of subscriptions isn't the b-all and end-all.

If you want to sell your products or services via a TV network, you wouldn't be bothered whether the people taking note had paid Sky or not.

Of course, Sky would much prefer that everyone watching their channels was paying full whack but, second prize is heavy demand from advertisers and in relation to your post, is these adverts were reaching the public in N. America and those people were spending big on those products, everyone's a winner. The same applies in France or, any other country.

It would be interesting to know if there is an appetite for the sport in any of the non playing countries or the smaller playing nations and perhaps those places should be where we try and expand the game

Interesting times indeed, unfortunately none of us know how it will play out. However I do think it will be bad for the game if your prediction of a 10 team Super league comes to fruition.

You have no need to apologise I didn't take anything personally so nor should you. But you chose to enter the debate and you said:-

[i“It obviously isnt a necessity to feature English clubs. Sky shows a lot of international sport; NFL for example which dominates the Sunday evening schedule and has plenty of advertising between plays, so it obviously isnt a necessity to feature English clubs”. [/i

Far from being a "myopic" view, my counter view is it is a factual reality borne out by Adam Pearson's statement on this. It is most necessary to feature English clubs to get Subscriptions SKY don't get from abroad, and have English eyeballs on advertisments set up to stimulate the English market. SKY MUST have 9 English clubs in SL and that doesn't mean we must have three overseas clubs beyond this. Clearly SKY would be happier with the whole of Superleague being English. why would we not offer them that? You can OF COURSE choose if you wish to reply or if you want to leave it alone it's your choice to take, but not to impose on me the idea I can't reply to you.

I wish to correct your view so the debate can be advanced. SKY don't want overseas clubs. No SKY no game.

1. That is what I constantly read from people in the know and not dreaming of a Transatlantic game. They tell us us SKY's priorities are, and Adam Pearson confirms, at least nine English clubs in the deal. It doesn't take a negotiating genius to work out if they want at least nine just make the whole of Superleague English - don't put in phoney overseas clubs that are sure to dilute the deal.

2. I think we do try and expand the game anywhere they want to play it, albeit we have little resources to do this beyond "encouragement". We are actually very busy trying to keep alive ourselves something that is constantly ignored in the expansion debate.

I have for 3 years since Perez appeared asked what people think will happen to the game here if NY, Wolfpack, Ottawa, Vancouver, Boston and Montreal replace Salford, Hull.K.R. Castleford, Wakefield, London and Huddersfield as professional clubs. You could be the first to answer me rather than stare at me as though I am mad. As your very open minded and thoughtful I'd be interested in your views??.

What would be bad for the game is the game going Trans-European. The very first time the clubs sit down with SKY as regards 2022 onwards the elephant in the room will be "substitution".
Note I do not say "Expansion" what "expanded" when TWP replaced London?? NOTHING

SKY have already said there is no deal if there aren't nine English clubs, what they haven't publicly said is that the more English clubs the better the deal. As above if the chair of the SKY/SL meeting on behalf of SKY says [i"of course we would prefer English clubs, but we can live with nine"[/i will Lenegan still push for the inclusion of Catalans, Toulouse and Toronto (forget for now the pipe dreams and stick with the reality)???

On the ten club thing is appears everyone gets to play each other 3 times. It appears if it's an English league everyone gets 3 derbies. I suppose that we would be merely following Scottish soccer? We already do the repeat fixtures thing where some clubs play each other 3 times? However the ten club thing could have just been invented as a short term tactic to freeze Toronto and the French out so I concede SL could still stay at 12 - we shall see.

You had already replied so I was confused why I was getting a second reply? Anyway all I’d like to add to my point on NFL is that the rights are not free. I’m sure they are not nearly as much as Superleague but Sky outbid BT for them so they won’t have been cheap and I can guarantee they will be more next time (which is soon I think).

I’m fully aware that NFL markets itself on much more than just the action on the field and RL would struggle to come anywhere near that currently. However, my point is simply that there is a precedent for sports without English teams to be successful here and turn Sky’s head. Elstone/Super League seem to have no interest in pursuing this avenue though so my point is fairly irrelevant.

It's a very good point and apologies for me misunderstanding it, I felt it was important to be clear as I understood it, that as we stand we offer just an English League - and yes IF we could offer an international game then we may get rights from all over - and as Eric Perez himself indicated NATV deals in particular can be very big.

1. On the issue of developing the game in North America success in doing that - which could have come from Perez being highly successful with grid iron players being converted to professional RL players could have seen a home grown Toronto Wolfpack and led us onto home grown SL clubs in New York, Boston, Ottawa and Montreal.

2. At that point Perez predicted a big TV deal, probably even more so with six clubs so let's add Jacksonville for balance. Imagine that - a half European half North America league!!!

3. The only problem then is where do we go on the TV deal(s) after that? Does North America add Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Halifax Nova Scotia, Los Angeles, Vancouver and Calgary to their existing six clubs, [ubreak away[/u and capture a massive double the size and more NATV deal? They can then buy up the best players from our clubs here here whilst they further develop their own player development systems.

4. And then we die.

5. I was rightly pulled on this argument by a chap who said if North America can make Rugby League huge there and we can't, then we have to suck it up, for the good of the game itself.

6. But from where I am standing North America has failed to produce a single pro player or a cent from a TV deal, and the French can't get TV deals and just want to buy all their players from here.

7. AND SO as we are the ones who CAN make a success of RL in the Northern Hemisphere by getting a TV deal and producing quality players then Superleague needs to be an English league and the Americans and French should stand aside and let us make the best of the game here.

8. Because the bottom line is the more you bring in overseas clubs that cannot develop players or find a paying TV deal and get rid of clubs that [uDO produce players and get TV deals[/u (that's how it's working Catalans up Widnes down, TWP up London down) the more you destroy the player development system and the more you lose your value to English broadcasters. Nobody then wins and RL is lost altogether...... Superleague won't work with just six English clubs. Nobody then wins.

9. This is why I don't feel I am myopic quite the reverse "foreseeing"?

TWP, only 18 players available, SBW not fit for another three weeks and TWP asking for cap dispensation... brilliant this expansion lark.

Quote ="IR80"TWP, only 18 players available, SBW not fit for another three weeks and TWP asking for cap dispensation... brilliant this expansion lark.'" it's just makes you laugh the bull they come out with what club can survive on 18 players I can see them struggling all season, resting SBW just in case he pulls something https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... nto-action

Quote ="IR80"TWP, only 18 players available, SBW not fit for another three weeks and TWP asking for cap dispensation... brilliant this expansion lark.'" it's just makes you laugh the bull they come out with what club can survive on 18 players I can see them struggling all season, resting SBW just in case he pulls something https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... nto-action

Quote ="snowie"it's just makes you laugh the bull they come out with what club can survive on 18 players I can see them struggling all season, resting SBW just in case he pulls something https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... nto-action'" You conveniently forget the issues that English clubs had when they struggled to field a team and they have had how long to build a team? Dual reg ring a bell?

Quote ="snowie"it's just makes you laugh the bull they come out with what club can survive on 18 players I can see them struggling all season, resting SBW just in case he pulls something https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... nto-action'" You conveniently forget the issues that English clubs had when they struggled to field a team and they have had how long to build a team? Dual reg ring a bell?

Nope, no bells ringing, can you give an example of a SL side that couldn't or struggled to field a team?

Quote ="snowie"it's just makes you laugh the bull they come out with what club can survive on 18 players I can see them struggling all season, resting SBW just in case he pulls something https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... nto-action'" Looking it up it appears 29 different players had a game for TWP last season, five have left, three have come in and I make that 27........ How do they get to 18 from that???

Quote ="snowie"it's just makes you laugh the bull they come out with what club can survive on 18 players I can see them struggling all season, resting SBW just in case he pulls something https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... nto-action'" Looking it up it appears 29 different players had a game for TWP last season, five have left, three have come in and I make that 27........ How do they get to 18 from that???

Championship teams, iirc Fev had quite a few issues and are the beneficiaries of dual reg.