I don't believe everything but i could see the rfl doing it, there are a great many disgruntled fans watching our game, one wrong move from the RFL can see crowds drop by more.


DM when you start listening to reason and facts i will respond to you whilst you post utter drivel i will leave you alone.

From The Superleague Press Launch:


Nigel Wood said: "These are significant decisions which would not be made without detailed dialogue with all of the game's stakeholders.

"The important thing is 2010 is the year by which we begin to shape the competition for the 2012 television contract w[ihether it's the look of the competition in number of clubs[/i, or length of the season, or where the high spots are.

"All of these issues will begin to be worked through during the course of 2010 after consulting all the game's stakeholders. Everything is up for discussion."

moving back to 12 clubs would be a massive backward step. and relegating 3 SL clubs at once too much of a shock from which the game might not be able to handle

1 club at a time and give the other laggards a chance to sort themselves out

you see!

you can speak sense when you try hard

So in that case the first two clubs to go would be Quins and Crusaders. I base this on the criteria that they don't own their grounds, have the least support, produced the least number of players, one was saved from administration only when clubs such as Wakey voted to save them about 5 years ago etc etc. Kind of blows your expansion logic doesn't it.

NOTE: Crusaders and Quins fans don't bite my head off the above is not aimed at you!

I'm not suggesting that we don't have a TV contract or the money that comes from it, what I'm saying is that clubs should not exist based largely on the money they receive from a TV contract.

Clubs should have a business model which allows them to function and prosper without being overly reliant upon TV income or the philanthropic nature of a wealthy supporter. Under those circumstances if the worst that were to happen and no TV deal could be agreed or their sugar daddy were to pull out they would still survive almost entirely intact.

Once again I'm not suggesting that clubs shouldn't utilise the TV money or a benefactor's money only that they shouldn't hock the family silver and put the whole existence of the club at risk on the basis of a wing and a prayer.

There are plenty of examples, especially in football at the moment, where wealthy backers have not been what they were supposed to be or have chosen to pull out, leaving the club in dire straits. Rugby league would not be immune from this sort of jeopardy.

Fair enough. Hopefully it may just be a warning shot to some clubs rather than a serious proposal, but if it's not then it would just prove what I already suspect of Nigel Wood's "leadership" as Chief Exec.

Quins have produced plenty of players, they have as many academy products in their squad and fewer overseas players than Wakefield

Crusaders are yet to play a game at their new stadium, they have already sold their first match out, and they also own their stadium.

by all means show dally up for the idiot he is, but try and stick to the facts rather than just making things up

28 January 2010 will go down in the record books as a momentous day in history.

Dally has not only made 1 sensible point - he's made 2...

and in the same post as well!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wonders will never cease

I think he opted for the lobotomy.

On a similar note, won't Quins have something like 3 Antipodeans compared to Wakey's 8 or 9 on Saturday?