Under discussion www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... 002211.ece

Under discussion www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... 002211.ece

I would personally get rid of both Harlequins and the Crusaders. Neither of these 2 'clubs' has much to offer our sport.

But of course the RFL won't do that as that would mean the public would perceive the game is a 'northern' sport with a team in France being allowed to join in as well.

If 2 clubs do go on the strength of what the RFL say it will be Salford and Castleford

Widnes and Fax should both get in if they were to cut 2 teams, they shouldn't drop back to 12.

They would have to got back to the top 5 or 6 then.

I would actually keep Crusaders and Quins. The welsh team are going to get a crowd of aroudn 10,000 for their first game. If they do better than last year, the move will be a great success. They have only had one year. If anyone is going to be out it will not be expansion clubs but Salford, Wakey, and Cas if they do not get the stadiums sorted.

i'd agree with that, we need to (painfully at times) expand our game if we are going to progress. French RL is flourishing after 5 yrs of catalans, welsh rl will, given time do the same.

Correct... it's a long term thing as well.

If Wales is succesful I would hope another team could be made again in Bridgend and one in newport, really start spreading it and getting more young clubs involved.

France could possibley have 3 teams competing for super league in the next 7-10 years IMO.

I am all for building up exisiting clubs and I love the heartlands teams, but why some people are under the impression its one or the other is beyond me. We can strengthen exisiting clubs while we expand, in many ways they will compliment each other.

We need more Catalans and Hull KR's. We also need the others to catch up to the likes of Wigan and Leeds. Cutting the number will not help us achieve this.

This is what makes me laugh, "if we dont get our stadiums built"

Why are Wigan any different to Cas, Wake and Salford? Infact they should be in an inferior position. they dont own the ground they play at and get turfed out when god almighty wants the pitch to be returfed or he fancies a game of tiddlywinks.

Should we all go play at grounds that we do not own if it will keep us in super dooper league? or Should we can keep our dignity, pride ect and try and make it on our own?

If we fail then so be it. it will not stop me from going to watch the team i love, whether it be Catalans away or York, i dont care. I just dont want every team to whimper to the RLF's desires to keep themselves in SL.

This is a professional sport run by AMATURES!!!!

Well said mate

it has been announced this week that sky viewing figures for SL are well below that of other sports. i dont know about other people but if wakefield were removed i would cancel the sky and put the £50 a month elsewhere.

i am sure sky know who their viewers are and losing a few thousand £50 s is not going to appeal to them.

as for expansion of the game it simply is not working. the only area it may possibly work is cumbria where the game is actually played at school and amateur levels.

30 years in london and its really gone nowhere. and personally expect RL to struggle in wales too. largely because there is very little interest in the game there.

plonking a team of australians in milton keynes or wherever is not expansion, if there is no demand or desire for RL

I cant see how the Crusaders where kept alive or why, if there is the slightest chance of them being kicked out in two years time.

first I have heard about poor viewing figures for Sky games.

The FACT is we play in a terrific stadium and you don't. I'm sorry if that upsets you in any way, but it is an issue that needs sorting. Stadia is clearly a massive area in which a club can grow in all other areas. Juts look at Arsenal since the move! That could happen to some of our teams but on a smaller scale.

It's not about making it on your own or not. We, Hull and Hudds had the option to move in with a football club in top class stadiums. Why would anyone turn that down?

The point is that if clubs can get new stadiums, more fans will turn up and more money will come in, and money is massive in sport!

Oh and just to fill you in, we now have a great deal on the stadium we play at. It costs us less to play at the DW than it costs other clubs to run their stadiums apparently. Events like the 2008 play-off game v Bradford will not be happening in future.

My comment about Cas was not directly from me, but it is just judging what the RFL will do. IMO they would rather keep expansion clubs than clubs who to them had promised stadiums and not delivered.

Personally I want to see Cas and Wakey do a Warrington and get a new stadium and win cups. I want every club to be at that standard.

me too, i was under the impression we had comparatively good figures, but with a demographic of less affluent people ( not surprising) but the companies that appeal to this demographic (supermarkets, alcohol etc) have the most cash right now, so where's the problem?

what is the big deal about stadia, who really wants them? the paying supporters? i remember being at central park when the survey was being done about moving to robin park and the vast majority as i recall were dead against it and were very happy where they were.

moving in with a premiership football team has pros and cons, the pros is that the facilities are superb, however the cons are that you become at the mercy of the football association. if they were to announce tomorrow that premiership teams can not groundshare where would that leave the RL clubs?

thankfully the governing body in football are not the zealots we have in RL

Regardless of what the fans said then! Attendances have gone up, with less success!

Same with all other teams really! Big increases. Wakey and Cas would do the same as warrington IMO.

It can only be good for the game.

just as important - why aren't there 5 wigan players in the captains photo

why dont you want a modern stadium? they benefit everyone.
and who cares what the FA say? Wigan have a longterm lease so if the FA made some rule as you say wigan football club would either have to build themselves or Wigan RL a new stadium. I imagine the same is true at Hull and Huddersfield

Oh dear....61 posts in and you've shown you have no grasp of what is going on outside the M62 Corridor


Yes,,,,,,FulhamCrusaderBroncoQuins have terrible crowds......thank you for stating the obvious, but in every other aspect of the game, League is getting stronger every year. As for your quip about Australians........check out which team has still got "quota" spots spare....oh, and 3 current England internationals on their books, 2 of them Cockney.
The development of young players does not happen overnight and for Tony Clubb and LMS to have broken into the international set up is a sure sign that RL in London is working.
On the subject of crowds....before you decide to use that as your only yard stick.......there are some fans of traditional Heartland clubs that could do with looking at their own clubs average before lambasting Harlequins RL. Sometimes I think some flat cappers are glad that Catalan, Celtic and Quins are in SL......it distracts people from their own clubs short comings.

going back to 12 teams would be a massive backwards step IMO. Apart from Celtic the other 13 teams last season were 'competitive' and that can only improve as the 14 team league develops.

I used to hate the 12 team, play some teams 3 times, others twice, format as it was boring seeing the same teams over and over again.

if they want to cut pointless games they can start with axing the magic weekend

Let's give the system a chance to work before we change it. For it to work, I hope the franchise guidelines are followed which could see some 'big' clubs lose their licence before Quins or Crusaders.

That doesn't save 2.4 million to be divvied up to reduce debts

What bothers me is this quote from Nigel Wood "We are close to finalising the criteria that will determine which clubs will be awarded a Super League licence from the 2012 season onwards,".

Now, I thought that for 2012 we were using the already published 10 point criteria, which has not yet been used.

What is the point of publishing a list of criteria, which the clubs will presumeably use as the basis for their operations (in order to meet with the RFL's requirements) only for the RFL to say (with 12 months to go until the new round of bids) all that's going to change! WTF!

How can any club plan on that basis? How on earth can targets be met if, as the deadlines are rapidly approaching, the RFL change the targets? These are not things which can be changed much in five minutes, it takes planning and organisation and time and money.

The move to cut clubs from 14 to 12 would be disasterous. The game just isn't strong enough to be losing top level clubs and isolating more of it's supporters from top flight rugby.

Anything devised by Nigel 'Blue Sox' Wood is likely to flounder at the firts, but the RFL have been market leaders in making their brand look ridiculous to the average sports fan, whilst alienating core support.

To lose the likes of Cas to any pipe dream would be a crime, particularly if it is to sustain the cowbouy outfit in Wales which has been a painful lesson in poor planning, decision making and politics.

Cutting the league would be stupid, going back to having 4 or more derbies just ruins them. If nothing major changes come fanchise renewal time, i would drop Salford for Widnes. There are probably too many West yorks clubs, but they are performing on the pitch so it would be unfair to drop them, IMO

I agree with it, get rid of them.

Cut Salford and Wakefield now without even thining about it, they offer nothing. Crusaders have to prove their viability of they should go to.

I suspect any new criteria will support the package that Sky wants to show.