I am heartened by the measure of reasoned and articulate responses to the OP and also please poster recognise the dangers of reducing the number of teams and that it doesn't equal a quick fix.

Someone has mention this but I think we should re-introduce tours. It'll be hard to sell it to the insular Aussies but I think short tours both ways would be tremendous for the game.

Over here, 3 tests, 3 consecutive Saturday afternoons with the BBC having initial rights and Sky secondary rights. A club match the weekend before the test and three midweek club matches. No suspension of SL fixtures BUT players removed from their Super League clubs for GB duty (yes, I use GB deliberately) for the three weeks. Similarly, when we tour over there clubs lose their players for the 5 week duration (inc travel).

The benefits would be that
- More players would be exposed to test rugby
- More players given 1st team opportunities when internationals on duty
- Equalising the comp as better teams lose more players to international duty
- Exposure of our international game on terrestrial TV
- Swell the league coffers with, hopefully, large attendances like those of the 1990s

It's basically the RFU model from the 6 nations and it works.

I agree that attendance-wise overall it's a break-even situation. An extra 348 if you exclude Saints, Widnes & Salford for the reasons you highlighted above. As I stated earlier, Huddersfield allocated 2000 season tickets at £50 each in one of the stands behind the sticks which may explain their increased attendances.

I've seen as many claim that SL attendances are on the increase as those claiming they are on the decline. As always, the truth lies somewhere in the middle



Perhaps we can thank all those Stobart lorries for maintaining the attendance levels, eh?

It's not in the middle at all, and far from break even. The truth is:
Increase = 107,406 or 7.82%

A significant increase at any time, let alone in the middle of a recession and with the distraction of the Olympics in the UK.

Why would we exclude those?

Going further, good quality stadia are a part of the match day experience. As the alternatives to attending games improve (i.e. for TV coverage, going HD, adding better analysis etc) then the in-person match day experience must increase in quality too. It's worth noting that even an organisation like the NFL realises they have to keep on top of this with league requirements such as wi-fi in all stadia being mandated.

The issues would come from the owners/coaches if they had to definately be without several first teamers for up to 3-5 SL games. As well as the risk results-wise with missing your best players, any SL game played on the same weekend as a GB-AUS Test Match with up to possibly 6-7 first-teamers missing would most likely see a decent dip in attendence and therefore income for the club.

I accept club chairmen would moan. But most club chairmen are small time idiots holding the game back or dragging it down.

Peter Hood was a club chairman. Should we invest the future of our sport to someone like him?

Do the RFU club chairmen complain about losing their international players for the six nations? or do they realise that the 6 nations is really what makes the whole sport and, therefore their club, blossom.

How depressing that the best comment on this thread is about RU. Spot on though G1.

Club RU has nothing on club RL but they do internationals so much better which gives them better exposure (not just TV but the written press) which leads to bigger sponsors which ends up bringing more money into the game.

For too long we have focused on SL, and yes its great. But many non RL fans simply dont care. RU do the opposite and it works. Dont ask me why, but it does.

Bring back tours!

Don't the RFU hold centralised contracts for some players still, which feed into club finances by taking on a chunk of wage?
I agree, though, that it all sounds a positive step in the right direction.

What about the idea of Divisions as in American sports? Instead of Super League one and Super League two, have East and West (or something similar) with cross divisional matches. This could also provide a basis for an 'all star' game.

I like all this.

But it's never going to happen because both SL and the NRL... club chairmen, TV companies involved in both will never agree to their respective domestic competitions being disrupted in such a way.

Our switch to summer rugby killed the tours therefore the only solution to re-introducing tours (mini or extended) is for us to switch back to a [uwinter season[/u. That's the only way we'll attract the Aussies and Kiwis to tour here during our mid-season and vice-versa.

some good points all round. one thing stands out though and that is something has to change

a very simple solution for a tour would be, for once every 8 years, either SL, or the NRL start and finish the season one month earlier. If, for instance, last year had been a GB tour to Australia, SL could have started 8th of jan, or even as early with the traditional boxing day games (which would give a couple of rest weeks within the season, finishing the season on the 10th of september instead of the 8th of Oct, we could have had the bulk of squad in Aus by the 6th of sept, with the GF players coming the week after.

10th of sept is SL GF,
21st Sept GB (minus GF finalists) v one of the clubs which didnt qualify for the NRL play-offs,
24th GB V Samoa (in Samoa)
28th GB v one of the clubs eliminated from the first round of the NRL play-offs
1st Oct GB v PNG (in PNG)
5th oct GB V one of the eliminated Semi-finalists
9th Oct NRL Grand Final on stand alone weekend
12th Oct GB v Indiginous All Stars
16th Oct GB v Fiji (in Fiji)
21st Oc GB v A Pac Island select side

28th four nations starts, finishing 19th Nov

no competition would need to be disrupted, no players taken from teams still playing.

A very good point but the bigger £££££££ in the RU plus their players contracts getting boosted by the RFU coffers soften that blow.
Plus the extra ££££within their sport allows them to carry much bigger squads i'd lke to see how they'd react to our budgets and income streams but its a fair point overall.