I think most pro sports would struggle if the TV cas was pulled, not just RL.
How would going semi pro prevent the "brain drain" to union, surely if there wasn't a living to be made from our game, then significant numbers would try the 15 a side version ?

I think the new branding should have just been London Rugby League.

Erm... it wouldn't, it may cause it, as I suggested in my earlier post.

Still not happy with just "London...", it's too vague.

Just a quick return to the original topic. There's a demolition crew on site at the Willows. I spoke to one of them, and he told me the whole site will be cleared in the next four weeks. The Shed has gone already. So, if we are moving back there, as the OP says the board are considering, we'll need special dispensation from the RFL to play in hard hats.

Remember the pre-Super League kerfuffle over teams such as Calder, Cumbria, Manchester, Hull, South Yorkshire and Cheshire?

Yep !

At least Salford will be in the position that at least an RU club will have paid for most of the development of those young RL talent.

Yes, and I wasn't convinced.

Which is most important - that the game survives or that players go to play RU?

For me it's that the game survives. Players will do what players have always done, and TBH I doubt if there are more than a dozen players across SL who would jump ship or be poached - the RFU isn't the most financially sound of ships either, it just has richer sugar daddies.

I think you're mistaking the RFU for the Aviva premiership....the RFU is a pretty profitable organisation.

Back on thread.....Salfords chairman has said that there's nothing to see here........same way that the then Bradford Bulls chairman announced on Jan 25th that the RFL buying oddslum secured the bulls future in SL.....

Union produces its own players you know to play its own game,the majority of rl players simply could'nt cut it in union,there isn't a problem with player drain to union.

There is room for professional rl in the world,its just unfortunate that that only adds up to ten clubs at the most

JC, I dont think what you are saying is correct.
Platers are being "poached" by union, Joel Tomkins, Chris Ashton, Sonny Bill etc
Also, where does the mythical 10 pro teams come from.
The number of pro clubs that can be sustained isn't finite, it is dependent upon on the success of the individual clubs raising sponsorship revenue, together with the RFL's ability to secure a decent TV deal, plus the bums on seats etc.
If we keep reducing the number of teams this will accelerate the decline in the number of players that are attracted to the sport (as a means of earning a living)
The key is to find ways of expanding the game

A handfull of players.....none of whom caused the game to implode.....players will go where the cash is...always have done, always will



Given that Hudds and London are 100% reliant on benefactors to stay afloat, Salfords apparent "wobble", what's going on at odslum, wakeys recent run in with admin.....10 clubs is a fair statement


It's ALL about the TV deal.......wihout it, you'd have a pro wigan and Leeds with a few other part time clubs...

Possibly.....but it does seem that 13 English teams are having trouble getting quality english players....325 is all they need......how many anzacs are currntly registered in the English SL clubs?


It is 100% the responsibility of the RFL/SKYTV to fund the "expansion" if they want it.....same way the storm is funded in the NRL.

Problem with developing English talent is as soon as you do rich clubs with flexible salary caps snap them up. How many players from hudds, salford, cas etc have been signed up by top 5 clubs? Hardly creates an incentive to invest in developing players. We are just starting to see the fruits of our jnr labours at HKR and sure enough the vultures are circling.

Who are they then? Who are these youngsters being pinched by the top 5?

And how many players have HKR signed from other clubs? how many other clubs youngsters have HKR pinched?

A few as we are paying more than some clubs can. I see FC are signing Holdsworth, another example of the salary cap evening up the comp, not!

The point is that without a strong and diverse professional game, the uptake amoungst young kids may not be there.
There has to be something to aim for and the smaller that we make the target ie only 10 pro teams ??, the more likely it is that kids will be attracted to other sports.

Players move, its a fact of life, its not like Holdsworth is ome youngster plucked from obscurity and trained and developed by Salford, he is a 28 year old who has played for St George and Canterbury.

Im not sure why that has anything to do with the SC.

I asked if you had some examples of young British players trained by the smaller clubs and taken by the bigger ones. I asked this because i think you will find that for every Luke Ambler going from Salford to Leeds there is a Jodie Broughton, or Ashley Gibson going the other way. For every Jay Pitts leaving Wakefield for Leeds, There is a Peter Fox and Lee Smith going to Wakefield. For every Scott Taylor there is a Josh Hodgeson or Craig Hall.

I think you'll find that for every Scott Taylor, there is an Evarn Tuimavave!

i think what jb down under is really saying is 'im so jealous hull fc have got a chairman who is willing to stop at nothing and aim for the top, not just to beat his poorer neighbours!'

We obviously look at things differently because i dont see a strong league and most deffinately not a diverse league.
The whole comp is a joke at the moment,cheap tickets to make attendances look good,to many blowout scores,a massive lack of intensity to the point were the likes of leeds can under perform for most of the season and still be favourites to lift trophies.

Good luck to him, as I said be has quickly cottoned on to the fact if you want to challenge don't worry too much about a salary cap.

Yes, things always take on a different perspective, depending from where you look at them.
At the moment, in certain quarters, there is a clamour for reducing the number of teams in the top flight and whilst these things should be open to review, one does have to question the motives of some who are asking for the reduction for purely selfish reasons.
If the big boys really think that the comp will benefit from fewer numbers, why the hell did they agree to increase the league by 2 teams just a few seasons ago, particularly when the
Crusaders team was largely made up of second rate antipodeans.
Although the trip over to Wrexham was enjoyable, their inclusion was a backward step for the league - instead of fast tracking them into SL, they should have built more solid foundations.
Regarding spectator numbers and cheap tickets, there are 2 reasons for this: increasing a clubs fanbase (which certainly can work), but more likely this is to try and tick a box on a franchise application.
The very fact that we now have a Grand Final and play offs, does mean that teams dont need to try and win every week.
Teams at the top can afford to manage their squads to ensure that they peak at the back end of the season and if they drop an odd 2 points here and there it is not critical. This in itself could be rectified by reverting to the old top 5 play offs, where there was significant advantage in finishing 1st or 2nd.