I see the RFL have just published some great financial results (sic) - these are the people you want to decide how the game finances are divided up and negotiate the next TV deal.

I would assume Elstone like his SL general manager predecessors will take a lead in the relationship with Sky.

That is not your stated preference - Elstone will do as the majority of SL chairman want e.g. Leneghan, McManus, Moran etc. this is something you are strongly against.

I didn't state a preference on it, but quoting a loss for "the RFL" as if they were ever solely negotiating Sky deals is misleading anyway.

The clubs always have input and indeed a vote but that input has previously been properly tempered by a grown up in the room who keeps at the very least an eye out for the wider interests of the sport compared to club bosses who as we know mostly value security and as much money as possible.

If you like though we can play the "I see club X have just announced some great financial results" game forever if that's how we're deciding our negotiators. In the end we'll find Gary Hetherington and Adam Pearson in a room with Sky as everyone else will have been ruled out. That would probably work out ok actually as long as our two negotiators didn't come to blows.

Yes, an international music company.

So the last deal was tempered by GH and you thought that was a good move, despite you saying it was a terrible deal handled very badly. Personally I think its a good move that the clubs are taking ownership of the deal and the distribution of the monies, they after all are the very people the TV companies are paying for.

The RFL like the FA need to concentrate on growing the international and grass roots element of the game and trying to do something about the CC which has become an irrelevance with the exception of one game in August.

I know you have a bit of a reputation for just making stuff up but could you point me in the direction of anywhere where I said any of the above?

Seriously, this ain't gonna work if you build straw giants all over the place.

No straw men here - just a challenge to your postings

So you didn't say that GH was a tempering view in and amongst the SL chairman - a man who was taking a broader view of the game?

Did you not say the last SL deal was poorly negotiated i.e. take it or leave it?

Are you saying GH had little influence on the last take it or leave it deal - because either he was the tempering voice or he wasn't, which is it?

Latest news from Elstone
Expect an announcement of change within the next 2 weeks
He confirmed that any changes cannot affect what happens this season.
He added: “The format is established and we have to accept the consequence of whatever happens in the Qualifiers. That will dictate what division clubs are competing in in 2019.”

Looks like we are going to see the end of the Super 8`s with a one up and one down from SL.
Only GH opposed the proposal from all the other SL clubs and I think it got through on a 78% majority vote.
The next thing we will see is Bradford Bulls promoted win or lose to the Championship next year which will be good for the game no doubt.

Hetherington needs to quit, his position is untenable. He has embarrassed this club with his comments, and throwing the teddy out the cot for not getting his way. To be the only top flight club with this stance, shows how out of touch he is with the modern game. Really needs to go hide behind a rock now, and keep his mouth shut. As fans all we can hope is that we as a club, as a result of him, are not alienated by the other clubs.

If Hetherington has lost the debate, why should the other clubs care?

In the end there will only be one winner and that is the club with the most money, Wigan, Saints and Warrington are having their day of glory, it won't last long, these three teams their gates are falling, they don't own their grounds their way of raising money is to take a larger slice of the pie from Sky, the reason why they did not raise the number of teams in SL to either 14 or 15 is because the pie would be spread thinner, hence the loop games play a team three times in the season, who is betting that these three teams end up with playing Leeds three times , simply because of the number of supporters they take to away matches. No disrespect to the likes of Salford and Widnes, but how many supporters do they take on their away travels.
I don't agree with what has Happened, I don't agree with what GH was proposing, I would have liked to have seen SL grow to 15 teams, one relegated and the top 4 play to go to the GF, unfortunately the Chairman are not clever people they think of tomorrow not 5 years down the line. Trust me there are some thick chairman in SL. One meeting I was in one Chairman was looking to sell their super league franchise to another club who play in the championship, move everything to this club, candidly I would not employ these chairman to run my firm if they was the last people on this earth. They cant run a business how can they try run a sport

This loop fixture thing ? If there are say 4-5 teams who are most fancied to win SL before the season starts ,will they all get the same Loop fixtures or will some get easier or harder ones ?

I'm not sure if I'm remember correctly but I think in the past they've done the loop fixtures based on the previous year's finishing positions - splitting the teams into 2 group of 6 (1st/3rd/5th/7th/9th/11th and 2nd/4th/6th/8th/10th/12th) and then each team playing the 6 teams from the other group so you get a similar set of easier/harder fixture. Of course, this year you'd probably have to count the top 4 in the middle 8s as finishing 9th to 12th.