I think this is a fair indicator of how SL will be formed in the future. New York and Boston next in a few years time. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/42323086 I still think we will be forced to form a Manchester team with Salford.

I think this is a fair indicator of how SL will be formed in the future. New York and Boston next in a few years time. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/42323086 I still think we will be forced to form a Manchester team with Salford.

Salford won't be around in 2 years time.

Hopefully your £500,000 parachute payment will get you back promoted next year.

Cheers, That was the money all SL clubs agreed to prior to the 8s?

They had to put something in place to protect the possibilty of Catalans being relegated! After all they are part of the expansionist movement. Obviously East Hull doesn't carry the same weight in their eyes.

Maybe they'll benefit from it at the end of next season?

So we actually got this on top of the £800k

I don't know about the £800k, but each SL club agreed, and chipped in 40 odd grand which would go to the club who was relegated.

Unless its classed as a "one off payment"

Hull KR received 500k for getting to wembley,didn't help them a season later!

Quote ="WYSIWYG"I think this is a fair indicator of how SL will be formed in the future. New York and Boston next in a few years time. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/42323086 I still think we will be forced to form a Manchester team with Salford.'" I doubt we will see SL as the forefront for New York and Boston unless Concorde is reinstated.Logistical impossibilty under current structures.Then again they could all play their games in Jersey.

Quote ="WYSIWYG"I think this is a fair indicator of how SL will be formed in the future. New York and Boston next in a few years time. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/42323086 I still think we will be forced to form a Manchester team with Salford.'" I doubt we will see SL as the forefront for New York and Boston unless Concorde is reinstated.Logistical impossibilty under current structures.Then again they could all play their games in Jersey.

And your point is





Welcome back

Each Super League club agreed in 2016 to pay a relegated SL club £45,000 each, out of Super League club money. Leigh also voted for it, despite not ever wishing to facilitate it.

However, Leigh would be spending at full salary cap 2017 irrespective of any or no parachute payment. If we are to be promoted back to Super League , it would have had zero bearing on that process.

have you got the years wrong Harold??

Yes I have Mo, thank you memory not what it was.. Edited but monetary values correct



=#4040FF[iEach Super League club agreed early 2017 to pay a relegated SL club £45,000 each, out of Super League club money. Leigh also voted for it, despite not ever wishing to facilitate it.

However, Leigh would be spending at full salary cap 2018 irrespective of any or no parachute payment. If we are to be promoted back to Super League , it would have had zero bearing on that process.[/i

Back on topic.

If Perez wanted to take the Toronto v Toulouse game 'on the road' and Toronto are serious about developing and growing the sport in Canada then they should have taken the match to Quebec.

Think about it.

Bless.....

Perez makes it look as though he is pulling the RFLs strings. It looks to me and no doubt many others that Torontos structure is nowhere near ready for SL, to be unable to plan a proper season (11 away games on the trot is a farce) would make the game look a joke at the top level

Would say the value is in having the rest of the games at home on the trot. First half of the season is going to be very interesting,sure they would have done the math though.

Yeah, clearly been done for their own benefit - don't particularly have an issue with expansion, but this is not the way I like to see it being done

I agree, but our game does have to expand further and we'll end up biting our lips a few times why the process evolves.

As long as the money generated through these ventures is invested back into our game, with investment in youth and the lower tiers, I don't have an issue.

What concerns me is as you say, we don't let them have free reign at the cost of our own game.

If they are somewhere in the mix half way through the season, then they must have a distinct advantage staying in Toronto while all other clubs travel over for 11/12 games. Similarly Toulouse being able to opt out of the challenge cup is another example of the tail wagging the dog.

I too am all for expansion, but not at the expense of a heartland club, hence the provision of the £500 parachute payment.

I'll get back to You around January 2020. ,
DEAR MR Ik Weet Niets

I take it your funding the venture still?

Seems pretty clear to me 2019 will see a return to licensing and I base that opinion on both Toronto and Toulouse stadia upgrades to meet SL licensing criteria.

Regardless of finishing positions in the middle 8's in 2018,clubs who meet the criteria will be offered SL licenses,Toronto and Toulouse both nailed on for that already as the expected criteria is in motion.

The questions are? What will the SL stucture be? Who will forfeit? Who will be reinstated?

All speculation of course,but it seems to me promotion to SL in 2019 will be on criteria not merit.