The best compromise re club, player and country is to put a limit on the number of games any individual player can play in.

Or have an elite squad of 42 players chosen by the England Coach at the beginning of the season who are signed to central contracts and restricted to 20 games a season.

Then have a draft of those players with 3 players going to each club and their salary is taken off the club's salary cap.

Would distribute the better players around the league more fairly equalling a more competitive league.

You've got to be kidding!! Can you really see see any club giving up their rights to a player? E.g. club X invests in its youth policy and develops, lets say, 5 home-grown stars (behaviour which the RL are trying to foster), it puts them of long contracts (as you would). They are selected for England at the start of one season, so how's that work then? The club potentially lose them all in the draft!!!! And, if they get to keep any, they lose their services for 7 games.

but the idea is to progress the game as a whole,not to think about the well being of the clubs that have held the sport back for a hundred years.

The issue isnt the amount of clubs, its the amount each club contributes to the league. It again comes down to the effort clubs put in to youth development and also the need for expansion.

There is a limit to the amount of players we can take from the heartlands, if we are to have more clubs, then we need more players. We have a very strong heartland where there isnt a great deal of potential for growth in the amateur game. If you look at the amateur game in west yorkshire, cumbria, the areas around Hull and Wigan, you will see a very very strong amateur scene, as strong as any amateur sport in the country.

A huge amount of our players come from these areas, and there isnt a huge amount more than can be squeezed out of there. We need a more national amateur game, and more pro and semi-pro clubs throughout the country to provide pathways to the top for them.

we need to look at the make up of the league rather than the number, in the future there is no reason not to believe this country cant sustain 14 even 20 teams, but we need to get more clubs, in more areas at EVERY level of the game.

If we could replace 2 or 3 heartland teams, with 2 or 3 clubs like quins (from a solely youth development point of view) who have invested and worked with the amateur game to build a whole new pool of players then we can grow the size of the league

as for limiting the amount of players playing, fine, limit it across the board, every player can play a maximum of 22 games across all competitions per season.

why is the LEAGUE more important than the sport to you?

id like to know where you thought thats what i had said?

It's easy to say, but what exactly do you mean by 'progress the game as a whole'?

I like that, similar to NFL, you get more teams playing against top sides, the localness will improve crowds for teams like Leigh and Widnes. Everyone's a winner. Can't see any flaws to that.