I'm not, but given the experience of salford, london and Gateshead I don't see a new team bettering current teams and therefore don't throw these to the wolves (pardon the pun) on a fantasy trip.

A better bet would be to look at Widnes /Leigh, Bradford and possibly revisit Cumbria. With Cumbria it needs somebody up there with a vision that the fans of the area might latch on to rather than the RFL suggesting mergers which will then be resisted.

The debate around the impossible problem has been around for decades, literally.

The salary cap is still relevant IMHO. If you just let nature take its course, yes Leeds might be competitive but you're looking at a 4-5 team Super League.

If you want more fans across the game, each side must be competitive. There is no magic formula to increase revenues significantly by traditional means.

Like I've said before, the game simply cannot afford in-fighting and a lack of vision. How do you fix that? United governing body for a start, and I've suggested a closer link with the Australian game too.
It is in everyone's best interest to make the international programme meaningful again, and let's face it we've been off the pace for as long as most of us can remember.

The game won't die in any case, but it can decline a fair bit still. We're already starting to look like a feeder competition for the NRL.

The clubs have voted unanimously for the cap to remain as it is.

Sensible outcome. No need to "Dumb down" the competition artificially. If the club owners don't want to (or can't) spend the cap then that's fine. Leeds have already said they will not operate up to the cap next year.

The biggest mistake in terms of cap has been the removal of the 50% of Turnover limit. RL needs clubs that grow their revenue to develop financial independence and improve their position to invest in grass roots and youth, as well as strengthen the negotiating hand for the future TV deals. It's clear with all the exceptions granted, those that run the game recognise the cap limit is too low in real terms.

I was taking to a former Fax fan yesterday. Says when super league was introduced Fax were told to merge or fold, to accommodate the French team at the time. The game thus lost a massive heartland area.
Absolutely crazy imho. Think we need to stop looking at Toronto etc as the future, and go back yo grass roots...

Unanimously is interesting, considering that last week it was 6-5 in favour of lowering it.

Highly likely that the Yorkshire clubs were won around by the threat of the league splitting and then being left in the bottom half, where there was less money?

The way this unfolded, especially with Wire waving their wallet about in the middle of it, with the signing of Inglis, certainly strongly suggests this?

how come they did neither then?

Has GH said that or did he mean it would be hard for most clubs to operate on the full cap?

I'm sure I saw it on a twitter post from Peter Smith, perhaps in the article itself. Seemed to be "quoting the club".

I suspect this is why he eventually folded on the Cap limit topic, didn't really matter if he knew he couldn't drag everyone else down to his level...

Halifax Blue Soxs were amongst the original teams in Super League other teams that have since slipped into lower divisions are Oldham Bears, Sheffield Eagles and Workington Town plus Paris folded.

You don't half talk some cra@

If you don't think the unveiling of Inglis at that particular time wasn't a statement of sorts, to certain people within our game, then you are very naive.