So the talk of Mergers is insane?

What about all the Mergers that happened in the Australian Competition?

Clubs that should Merge in the UK?

If we stick to the same, nothing will change, simple.

Wakefield/Castleford/Featherstone = West Wildcats
Huddersfield/Halifax = Calderdale Giants
Bradford/Keighley = Bradford Bulls
Dewsbury/Batley = Dewsbury Bulldogs
Salford/Swinton/Oldham/Rochdale = Manchester City Reds
Warrington/Widnes = Warrington Wolves
St Helens/Leigh = St Helens
Leeds Rhinos/Hunslet Hawks = Leeds Rhinos
Hull FC/Hull KR = East Rovers
London Broncos/London Skolars = London Broncos
Catalan Dragons = Catalan Dragons
Wigan Warriors = Wigan Warriors
Barrow/Whitehaven/Workington = Cumbrian Raiders
Sheffield/Doncaster = South Eagles
York/Gateshead = North Thunder

Not sure if any ones mentioned it but the NRL for any player would be awesome, but the sharks are in a massive massive mess, the club is shockingly run. No major sponsor, only had 3000 members last season (up to 10k this year but not great), the drugs saga! now thats a mess. I was Watkins i would join any NRL club other than the sharks. I think any player thinking of going to the shire should let things play out first before moving.

I would like to think GH & Leeds would let any of our players go with the clubs blessing but in the same breath would give our lads soild industry advice.

I know Sam. They wouldn't like it, but it's time to think outside the Box in a lot of cases.

Why would they be so stupid to do that? Leeds have developed the player, put the time into the player, paid the resources to develop that player, covered his welfare with all the early injuries he had. So why should Leeds just say "ok Kallum just leave if you want with our blessing"?

That's not what I said at all. I didn't say GH should take it up the Ass from NRL clubs. I would fully expect GH to get the best out of it he can, But if any of our lads get the chance to play In the best comp our sport has to offer by a mile, then I would be gutted as a Leeds fan to think GH and Leeds are so self serving as to want to stop our players been the best they can be.

For me that totally goes against the principles that our SL success is built on.

No it doesn't at all. Leeds is a business first and foremast, as all the clubs are. You don't give away assets of any business just to serve a moral high ground.

I suspect if Leeds were to let watkins go it would be on the basis of a like for like replacement coming in or a transfer fee sufficient to fund such a move. He has the protetcion of a long contract here.

The NRL haven't been keeping away from SL players up to now because they couldn't afford them.
Just having a higher salary cap isn't going to mean that they are going to try to capture more SL players.

Obviously, what attracts NRL interest is quality.
And even that doesn't mean they'll want to cream off all SL's best talent, the NRL does enjoy a large talent pool of its own and a thriving feed-in system.

It's too early to panic.

It is possible that it isn't a time when people want to move away from their families....

On the knee-jerking, if he wants to go then I don't think the club should stop him. It needn't be about money, it would be a great opportunity for him and I'd wish him lots of luck. Could be good news for England RL if it worked out too. Bad news for Leeds, but that's sport.

I also wouldn't re-structure our whole league. We're once again hearing a rumour (and no more) of one player leaving and beginning to respond as if to an imagined mass-exodus. We brought the salary cap in to stop clubs bankrupting themselves. Kallum Watkins moving to the NRL wouldn't make SL any richer.

I don't think that its any coincidence that when the exchange rate was favourable and the salary cap matched there were lots of aussies over here, and not so many brits over there, and that when the opposite is true the converse happens. I think even the most hardened NRL supporter would be able to see that the top players in SL could do a good job in the NRL. I think its reasonable to think that our best players can improve when exposed to a more intense competition week in week out. However, until it became financially viable for a player to up sticks and move to the other side of the world, it was rare. Now, a player can go over at their peak, and earn more in the NRL, and come back a better player. It may lead to SL being a feeder competition, but I doubt it. However, come internationals I would like to think that an increased exposure to their opposition and the level they're capable of playing at would improve England / GBs chances

What do you mean no it doesn't? I said for me? Thats my opinion.

I never suggested Leeds give away their assets. What you don't do in business is block peoples career advancements for your own gain be that as an individual or a business as it Leads to resentment.

Which is against the principles that got us where we are, which from the stands seems like a club who treat each other like family, with honest, respect and integrity.

If Watkins mind has been made up that he wants to play in the NRL(and who could blame him) GH and Leeds don't have many choices. Digging their feet in would be suicide. Treat him well, GH gets the best deal and who knows? we might just get him back further down the track , a better player than the one we sent(all be it a little older)That's just my opinion.

This kind of approach might well see Leeds advise Watkins away from the Sharks, as I've said that club is a big time mess.

I fail to see how removing several of the best English players from the Super League competition to the NRL would do anything but regress Englands chances rather than improving them.

Yes, you may have two or three players who have improved in the NRL, but these are players who will only be available for end of season competitions. However, the other players that make up the rest of the International squad would be playing in a competion that would have further diminished in quality due to players leaving it, thus reducing the quality of the other England players.

After the Harris case, are "first refusal" clauses still possible?

Gotcha, I think sports clubs are in a difficult situation regarding players. They are employees and human beings, so regarding them as "assets" in a financial/economic sense is tricky. They're certainly not fixed assets.

They are employees. So they're not really yours to "give away." They do have enforcible employment contracts, but most businesses are selective about how they enforce those. The responsibility to act in the interests of your employee doesn't go away with RL players any more than with any other.

If he really wants to go, and he's prepared to handle the situation amicably, then is it really wise to force him to stay?