Ok. So which did you think was the expansion side?

Which one do you think ?

I think you knew damn well it was Quins, but thought you would indulge in some pathetic pointscoring and have an irrelevant dig at Quins for no real reason, by using your usually tactic of being deliberately confused which for some reason you think is clever but to everyone else makes you look like an idiot who has problems with very basic concepts.

Try this one...

Imagine it's down to you to decide on the 10 clubs, but you have the caveat that you can't include your own team. Be honest with yourself - you'll find it's as hard to do as putting a stamp on an envelope crooked.

FWIW, I'd go with the top 10 teams next season, and then create a meaningful Championship 1, 2 (and 3?) structure, with P&R back in place (1 up, 1 down) assuming the promotion team meets (clear and transparent) criteria for the league above.

Main reason this won't happen (soon) is the TV implications. The other problem is that 18 games isn't enough to generate sufficient income, so there'd need to be some other competition or variant (such as playing each other 3 times). Remember when we had a variant in that we played some clubs twice and some three times, with the structure being decided on previous season league positions?

Depends on which expansion you mean , SL or RL ?

So your solution to there not being enough quality players to go around is to reduce the amount of training facilities and outlets for the talent at the highest level?

Ridiculous.

14 clubs is enough for the current franchise system as it stands, I repeat other than ourselves (who have been in administration and had to field youngsters and journeymen all season) and Crusaders (New expansion team) who has really been whipping boys?

Yes the league may be divided by the top 6 who are clearly outstripping the lowlier clubs at the moment, but the youngsters coming through at these clubs that you would so casually dismiss, benefit enormously by playing against the top clubs and players. They then go on to be the England stars of the future. The licensing system should iron out quite a lot of these problems if we give it time to work properly.

All your doing by creating this 2 tier system is further damaging clubs that are trying to catch up with the top 6, and its totally counter productive for the sport.

Keep as a 14 tier league and shut the door on everybody else.

[list=[/listThe one big flaw in your argument is Hull, if you merge the teams you could possibly have an empty stadium.
The mistake that a lot of people make is to thing that the majority of supporters come to watch Rugby league, they dont they come to watch (insert your clubs name) take away that club & they wont always look for another club to go to, There is a small core of us who are Rugby league anoracks the who go to watch different teams or watch the NRL every week but most dont they are followers of a club not the game.
Loose clubs you will loose supporters as well as players & put the game back another 20 years.
My only change to the present system is to make it compulsary to spend the full cap or withdraw from Super league, If teams meet the criteria they should be promoted to the league but lodge at least two years running costs into the RFL to be monitored by them.

Absolutely terrible idea. It'd only be feasible for 5 or 6 teams to spend the salary cap. The other teams would spend the cap, try and make up for it through either a) cutting their academy/marketing etc... expenditure or b) just trying to make up through increasing revenue, but failing and end up in liquidation. Surely Crusaders/Wakefield have shown us th

we should have a 26 team comp. Play each team once. Think of all the English players we would have to choose from! Ok we might have to go back to being part time players but its a small price to pay!

Stupid idea, I despair sometimes.

You dont do much ' fishing ' do you ?

What the crusaders have taught us is that the RFL should have been a lot more open with fans by stating that they were brought in as an expansion side, & they should have made more effort to ensure that the finances were up & in place, not that the backers were prepared to put up the cash.(Hence the suggestion that the cash be deposited up front).
If there are only 4 or 5 sides that can spend up to the cap then the game is in deep poo anyway, then the only way is to reduce the cap or scrap it but then we are back to the same four clubs dominating the game (Oh! thats were we were twenty years ago).
My preference is for all the idiots to leave the game as it is & stop this idiotic drive to have mega sides in 30,000 all seater stadia. There is nothing wrong with Wakefield or Castlefords grounds they dont have problems getting a reasonable crowd in. Clubs like Featherstone, Batley & Whitehaven to name but three are being penalised for being small towns as long as they can fund a side then that is all that should matter. It is the game on the pitch that matters & developing more & more young kids to come into the game that is were the money should go.

I disagree. Most will agree that Cas is a hotbed of RL talent and has been for decades. If you believe that has nothing to do with Cas being a top flight club you are naive.
If there was no top flight club in Cas/Wakefield/Featherstone a lot of these kids' heroes would be Leeds Utd players & they'd choose soccer over RL.

If they introduced P&R i'd genuinely be up for a 10 team league, but with franchising no.

Watcing the goal posts shift just as Widnes get back in the top tier again and watching them cry YET AGAIN would be worth it on it's own though



-------------------------------------
On a separate fantasy note

Home and Away and 9 games 'on tour'
1.Edinburgh(Murrayfield)
2.Cardiff(Millennium Stadium)
3.London(Twickenham)
4.Paris(Stade de France)
5.Barcelona(Olympic Stadium)
6.Dublin(Lansdowne Road)
7.Midlands(Ricoh Arena)
8.N.Ireland(Windsor Park)
9.Newcastle(St James Park)

All those games similar to Magic, 2 days all games, 3 one day 2 the next

Cloud cuckoo land but i'd love it if we were that popular we could implement that and make money out of it.

That goes above and way, way, way beyond cloud cuckoo land HY

I honestly wonder what's wrong with people at times, it's got to the point where I am bereft of words...

Harlequins
London Skolars
Hemel Stags
West London Sharks
South London Storm
Greenwich Admirals
Hainault Bulldogs
Hammersmith
Elmbridge Eagles
Camden Cobras

It would be fantastic for the sport if all those clubs could grow.

More chance of Hull City signing Ronaldo.Neither set of fans would entertain the idea.

No it doesnt.

Having been shown up(again!) is this the point you start pretending you were trolling?

No it's a serious question , I'm not pretending anything ?

Quins are RL expansion , Catalans SL expansion , simple really , that's probably why you didn't get it , if it isn't complicated and confusing , you don't understand it

I would have thought Catalans were obviously one of the 6 clubs who were suceeding. It seems I didnt dumb it down enough again for you. It's my fault really, I constantly give you too much credit. Maybe it isnt all an act. Maybe you are this stupid.

Maybe I am , but it is confusing , are Bradford and Huddersfield in that group as well ?

So why dont we have more teams at SL level then? why not 20? 40? Why limit the amount of training facilities and talent at the highest level at all and just have every team playing at SL level? You havent made any argument showing why 14 is better than 12 but not worse than 16/20/100

So out of 14 we have two clubs who are whipping boys, one of them a team who has been at the elite level for 14 years but this shows 14 is the right amount? How many whipping boys does there need to be for there to be too many? 3? 6?

But again, this doesnt address the reason why 14 is the optimum number? and your argument works both ways. Yes it is a good thing that players are exposed to a higher level because it makes them better, but conversely the top players are being exposed to players below their level which lowers their intensity and makes them worse players. Kallum Watkins hasnt improved by being part of a team which has just won 56-0, Joe Arundel wont improve by playing against teams so clearly superior and losing 56-0. Both will have improved by playing in a close, tight, intense game which finished 8-10 between two fairly evenly matched teams. But Castleford couldnt repeat that performance because they havent got the depth to compete in two games like that back-to-back. The lose a few players and what they bring in simply isnt good enough. And they cant get the depth they need to compete because we 12 clubs all fighting for the same players from the same areas.

Whereas if we were to bring the number of clubs down to 10 or 12, then the club which survived in the WMDC would have more youngsters to pick from, be able to pick more of the highest quality, put out a team which could compete week in week out rather than every so often. This would result in more games, of a higher intensity exposing the best players to a high quality game making them better players and improving the quality of the league.