They could have voted, some may be in favour of going to 12 from 14. I think they all think as I do that if they vote on this and it's agreed they'll have a hell of a hard time getting the RFL around the table to discuss marketing and finances or the lack there of in this case.

I'm actually undecided but the only angle I can see it from is that the clubs involved walked out not because of not wanting a particular league structure one way or another, but possibly because they also want the RFL's performance to be reviewed alongside any changes.

What you say in your first paragraph add's to that and only makes it seem like the RFL are only telling half a story.

But like you say, certain clubs aren't going to go against the RFL when their existence pretty much depends on them.

from reading other forums i would say that this is the crux of the argument. the rfl confirmed the vote would take place AFTER the world cup yet at the meeting they where asked to vote on it. the 6 clubs want the performance aspects discussing simultaneously and when they werent they walked

interesting to note that of the 8 remaining clubs, Salford, Bradford, Wakey, Cas & London are all in debt to the RFL. not sure what Saint's position is.............

I'd wager Salford and Saints would jump ship if it came down to it. If they did that's 8 of next season's likely top 9 in revolt!

From his twitter account the the Salford owner has said he has reservations around the RFL and Wood. But the format is only window dressing.

Doesn't sound as if the RFL had done their homework. They presumably decided to break the original agreement and force a vote because they thought they'd win - can't see any other reason at all - and then they didn't.

Another storming result for Nigel Wood.

I honestly believe that Nigel Wood spends longer deciding what to order off a takeaway menu than he does on decisions regarding RL. The guy is a grade A plank

The RFL have recuced the sport to a shambles on and off the field.
Off the field there is now a complete split between the progressive clubs who want a review of the whole governance of the sport and the RFL who want no such thing and to keep the sport and RFL management as it is.

Then there is the shambles over the International players ignoring a no alcohol ban and going out for a drinking session. It is obvious that McNamara is out of touch with his players, they don't have any respect for him or his intructions or no doubt his man management. McNamara made an utter mess of the Danny Brough playing for England situation and has handled the drinking session and Hock disastrously. Hock appearing on TV giving his version was a PR disaster for the sport. What affect all this will have on team morale doesn't bear thinking about.

That's two England coaches the RFL have appointed who have been an absolute disaster. Tony Smith led England to the most embarrassing World Cup ever, or so far, in 2008. No one could then quite believe it when they appointed McNamara. He proved at Bradford he was a very poor coach and the Bulls sacked (released) him to join England early. The Italy defeat was the latest in a line of miserable performances under McNamara. The RFL should have got rid a long time ago.

This why we need a complete review of the sport at the top and RFL level.
Where we go from here is anyone's guess.
First start will be resignations after the WC. Barwick will probably be the first.
Then hopefully others will follow.

How long does it take to say "one of everything on the menu"

a touch longer than it takes to say "3 8's"

It appears that Person at Hull is not for being bullied. Taken from the Hull fans forum tonight. Quote ="AirlieJo"Pearson has just said we have concerns with the way game is being run and we won't be pressured into a hurried vote. Says Gary Hetherington has had 17 years helping run game and time other clubs had a say and he won't get an apology Six of the competition's top clubs have grave concerns and another (St Helens) were not around to vote. Pick it up again after World Cup'" viewtopic.php?f=34&t=560007&tsmp=1382642210&start=30

It appears that Person at Hull is not for being bullied. Taken from the Hull fans forum tonight. Quote ="AirlieJo"Pearson has just said we have concerns with the way game is being run and we won't be pressured into a hurried vote. Says Gary Hetherington has had 17 years helping run game and time other clubs had a say and he won't get an apology Six of the competition's top clubs have grave concerns and another (St Helens) were not around to vote. Pick it up again after World Cup'" viewtopic.php?f=34&t=560007&tsmp=1382642210&start=30

Quote ="Rogues Gallery"It appears that Person at Hull is not for being bullied. Taken from the Hull fans forum tonight. viewtopic.php?f=34&t=560007&tsmp=1382642210&start=30'" So the Rebellion was in a minority last night. Nice of Hetherington to go to the media and tell that only 6 walked out pity he never mentioned Saints did not attend.

Quote ="Rogues Gallery"It appears that Person at Hull is not for being bullied. Taken from the Hull fans forum tonight. viewtopic.php?f=34&t=560007&tsmp=1382642210&start=30'" So the Rebellion was in a minority last night. Nice of Hetherington to go to the media and tell that only 6 walked out pity he never mentioned Saints did not attend.

Quote ="Rogues Gallery"It appears that Person at Hull is not for being bullied. Taken from the Hull fans forum tonight. viewtopic.php?f=34&t=560007&tsmp=1382642210&start=30'" Picking it up after the World Cup is the best thing to do. Can't help wondering if that was the plan when the RFL allegedly agreed to postpone the vote, and then suddenly - mysteriously - changed their minds this week (and even then couldn't win it). What a shower, and how unsurprising that Hetherington is their leader.

Quote ="Rogues Gallery"It appears that Person at Hull is not for being bullied. Taken from the Hull fans forum tonight. viewtopic.php?f=34&t=560007&tsmp=1382642210&start=30'" Picking it up after the World Cup is the best thing to do. Can't help wondering if that was the plan when the RFL allegedly agreed to postpone the vote, and then suddenly - mysteriously - changed their minds this week (and even then couldn't win it). What a shower, and how unsurprising that Hetherington is their leader.

Was it?
Saints would make it 7 and that would be including the RFL chairman.

The way it was put to us last night by Hetherington it was 8-6 but he did not tell us that Saints never turned up. Seems to me they were the ones not wanting to negotiate.

We all know its not a minority even the Salford owner has reservations on the RFL and Wood.

Even if it's a minority, it's a pretty significant one: 6 out of last season's top 8 (with Saints apparently undecided).

More than enough to ensure nothing gets done, I'd imagine.

More and more i think about it the more it looks like that IL and the others wanted to vote not just on the new format but on the way the game is run. Given that 8 clubs have issues around that (Saints and Salford) would mean the structure would get through but also that the RFL board would be kicked out.

Clearly neither side has enough of a majority to press their interests through. Hetherington and Wood obviously tried this week, and failed (hence their angry kneejerk reactions in the press). So now, maybe, it's a game of who blinks first.

Seems unlikely that IL's faction will get much support from those clubs whom the RFL have by the short and curlies (Bradford and London), while the two Hetheringtons will not turn until there is no other option because whatever interest they are protecting is obviously important to them. But what about Saints, Cas, Salford, Widnes? Not sure how much intellect is at work in Widnes, but the first three might at some point realise that it will ultimately serve SL's purpose best if all parties agree to sit down and discuss in full the many concerns the leading SL clubs have about the game rather than just the bits Nigel Wood wants to talk about.

Saints are key for me. They hold the swaying vote. If they join the six, that'd be all this years play off teams bar Leeds. Reckon Salford would join the seven if Saints switch. Like a deck of cards.

Cas neither someone's just posted on our board, and Bradford not having a vote. So if true, it goes from being a minority of 6 against, to a minority of 5 in favour (and even then nobody seems sure about Salford/Koukash).

Worth noting that their Chief Exec has Hetherington links.

Duly noted, and with interest.

So we can write Widnes off for the time being.

Hetherington looked sick enough at the GF, gawd knows what he looks like now!

Just pinched this off TotalRL. Sounds more and more like some kind of unsophisticated pseudo-Mafia is attempting to run the RFL if this is the pathetic approach they bring to issues as enormously important as this.

[i"Pearson said that the meeting was called at short notice and the clubs weren't expecting the restructure to be on the agenda as all had agreed it should be delayed until after the WC. McManus was away, the Castleford CEO was 'very ill', Bradford had no vote as the new owners haven't been ratified yet, and it was clear that Heatherington had the Leeds, Wakey, and Widnes votes in his pocket.

It was a dead-set ambush attempt and the 6 who walked out were having no part of it. Kath Hetherington appears to have been representing Wakey in some way, although it's not clear how. James Rule, a very close friend and confidant of the above 2 was representing Widnes. And in case you missed it, Pearson wasn't alone with his concerns. There were 6 clubs who felt they were being set up.

Even if you want to dismiss these concerns as paranoia it seems inappropriate at best to spring a vote on such an important issue at a meeting where it wasn't on the circulated agenda and 3 clubs (Saints, Bradford, Castleford) weren't in a position to to make a decisive vote - one not being able to vote at all."[/i

Do Hetherington and Wood seriously think they are going to either bully or con (or both) 6 of the most influential clubs in the game by methods like these? Looks like they tried, had their bluff called and were found badly wanting. What a pair of numbskulls.

Seems like a desperate measure to me. And how anyone can say that it is the 6 clubs that are putting the game in danger is beyond me

Will be the most interesting off-season for years