Is it the Super League club owners organising the restructure - or is it Sky demanding changes?
Which ' independent ' panel has the jurisdiction?
Will a video and a report have to be furnished?

Criteria lol. They make it up as they go along

Remember the criteria regarding stadiums and what a joke that become when they just ignored it and 10 years later still no stadiums for certain clubs.

I dare say they wouldn't know where Wigan, Warrington or St Helens were either. Is that not the issue with image too when the top clubs come from small towns?

Doubt it's sky when the deal is only for 2 years.

A competition where teams are playing each other multiple times I don't think is good for any broadcaster.

The eleven-side league was known as National Division One and in 2009 changed from semi-professional clubs to fully professional.

So the established international game, that was exactly my point. They may have filled Twickenham on a regular basis but casual and TV viewers most certainly increased following the World Cup win.

So does the 2 year deal indicate that it is the last one Sky are offering?

Will the sport now have to find another willing,paying, broadcaster?

Will any restructure in rugby league last beyond 2 years?

Seem to be in a difficult situation with a World Cup fast approaching.

I hope plans are in place to welcome any new enthusiasts that may be found this year...

Don't know why people think going to 10 will be the savior of rl? Surely getting rid of clubs lowers attendances. Do people want to see the same match 3 times a season? People will maybe only pick 1. The quality argument doesn't stand either. Less teams equals less players equals less quality. If its money then the clubs need to look at how they can make themselves more money.

You just stated remembering how licensing failed. Those actions costs clubs, and still those clubs haven’t fulfilled their obligations. Yet as you say get away scot free, whilst others feed them.

Good points....

But 10 years ago the license application for Wakey was greeted by the RFL with the words [i"the stadium position is uncertain"[/i and for Cas [i"growth is reliant on a new stadium"[/i

Before that the RFL stupidly indicated that if Cas and Wakey wanted to be in Superleague they needed to find new stadiums, however they could not do this and the RFL suddenly realised they had nobody better to replace these clubs, to carry out the threat, and that was the real joke.

The RFL thought that somehow there were new clubs with money facilities and ambition ready to take these two clubs places....

There wasn't.

YES

2003 Season

Leeds.v.Bradford CC cup 71,000

Bradford.v.Leeds 22,000

Leeds.v.Bradfprd 23,000

Leeds.v. Bradford 21,000

Then they pulled each other for the play offs Bradford.v.Leeds 20,000

Fraid so....

2017

Saints.v.Wigan 23,000

Wigan.v.Saints 13,000

Saints.v.Wigan 15.000

2006

Cas.v.Wakey 8.000

Wakey.v. Cas 7,000

Wakey.v.Cas 11,000

2007

Hull.v.HKR 23,000

HKR.v.Hull 9,000

Hull,v,HKR 23,000

Big derbies maybe but for the smaller clubs? Don't know what the attendances for Wigan huddersfield/Hull kr/Salford. Happy to be proved wrong like.

The games between the top clubs, either by size or league position are the big games, followed by "derby" matches but, increasing the frequency of the derbies or the "big" games, actually devalues them.
In an ideal world, there would be 14 clubs in the top flight, all capable of beating each other but, to reduce from 12, because funding is tight, would be a HUGE mistake, not that this will prevent it from happening.
With greed at the top and a shrinking pot of TV cash, it's a matter of when and not if this change happens.

Yet again, the sport with out any long term plan is going to look after the very short term and sod the long term future of the game.

Just how many changes to the structure do we need and when was the last time that one of these changes had a positive impact on the game ?

Not according to the size of the crowds and the consequent revenues.

Read those paying crowds again and actually explain how their value is a negative for the game.

You were proved wrong, and why quote Wigan when they were evidence you are wrong

Random flick through the facts

2014 Warrington.v.Wigan 11,500

2014 Wigan.v.Warrington over 15,000 attended this return league game

2014 Wigan.v.Warrington again in the play offs only three weeks later erm 15,000

Huddersfield

leeds .v.Huddersfield 12.878

Huddersfield.v. Leeds 6381

Leeds.v. Huddersfield (cup) 8,133

Huddersfield.v. leeds yet again for a boring fourth time (play offs) 9,376 Bumper crowd, best of fartown's season

I rest my case M'Lud

Well you have seen (above) the crowds for "multiple times"...........

Try putting Toulouse, Ottawa and New York in for variety and watch the average crowds tumble.

The crowds we get are due to the close proximity of clubs, the rivalry and the M62 that links then all up.

So pop in London and even Newcastle and watch crowds tumble even further..........

Question for anyone, how is replacing M62 clubs for clubs many miles away "expansion"



never been able to figure out how Paul Faires Kent Invicta or Uncle Eric's pack expanded anything but travel costs?

Oh dear, you choose to deliberately miss the point.
Why not just take it to the extreme and have Wigan, Saints, Leeds, Wire and Hull FC in their very own league.?

We already have repeat fixtures 4,5 and sometimes 6 times in a season.

Less is more springs to mind.

You wouldn't want a Sunday Roast every day but, it's great once a week. It would be boring as hell and lose its flavour if you ate the same thing every night.

More importantly, will ANOTHER re structure bring ANY benefit, you know, like the last half dozen ??

A few months ago, you were advocating the inclusion of York, Newcastle and London

As none of Toulouse,Ottawa,and New York have ever been Super League, then the average crowds will never be known.
By limiting the clubs the crowds are then limited.
Never been able to figure out how,despite some crowd figures you quoted,the attendances will rise while the playing performance continues to Lag behind.
Should Ottawa,Toulouse or New York sign the better players,it may attract better attendances.
Never been able to figure out how the ageing fanbase is used as an example of how great the sport is when few clubs have decent stadia and there are fewer decent sponsors.The ageing fanbase may just stick to viewing on screen and not attending games.
What will your M62 clubs be doing if Sky pull out in 2 years time,say,for example the European Super League in soccer is to be covered by Sky? ( Yes I know the clubs have temporarily shelved the ESL )

Without current Covid restrictions or those planned for reopening, I would expect .....
Leigh v Wigan 10,000
Wigan v Leigh 14,000 - 15,000

from little old Leigh !!!

It's about the crowds isn't it it's not about me.

People can be purists about this all day long but the more paying customers the better so if a fixture is played several times in a season but several big crowds turn up to see them all that's lots of money in the bank ........... so go on what would you do?

Change it so that they only play each once? Why not take your argument to this extreme and have a 28 club league and clubs only play each other once and no cup or play off games are played to avoid duplication???

Go on then tell me how that will go





Tell me what the average crowd would likely be?

But you can't apparently do this. There should be an avoidance of duplication of fixtures according to fans on here........

Wigan.v.Leigh 20,000

Then that's it until next season.......

Yes but only before the kind of no away fans clubs you advocate from overseas, who ALSO have no care for player development, and ALSO have no TV deals.........

Scores of posts from you supporting such clubs, asking for us to give Les Catalans "time"...... an irrelevance when their policy is not to run any academy. When they did do that for a short while it was to meet the licensing criteria,

Newcastle and London develop players and people from those cities can buy TV subscriptions adding to the TV deal and player pool.

I believe that you are making stuff up, again.

Whilst accepting that ALL clubs should be doing more by way of development.
You haven't yet suggested how on earth Catalan could be forced to have "X" number of French players in their squad and why they should have to have this number, when other clubs most certainly dont have the same constraints put upon them.

They do seem to promote young French players into their squad from from somewhere though, which seems quite strange.

Their new academy facility looks superb too, something to rival any of their SL counterparts but, I'm sure that you will have seen this ?