One point to be considered is the potential financial value of a second french team in television terms. As it stands, the Dragons have brought French TV to the table, but French TV are paying close to zilch for the rights. If having a second (or third) French team in SL means that the French broadcasters are willing to pay, then it may (I stress may) be worth bringing more French teams on board. In the NRL, the most valuable team for the competition are the NZ Warriors because Sky NZ pay for the NRL comp and wouldn't do if the Warriors weren't playing. The Dragons have made the comp more glamourous to Sky, but a second french team (with poss exception of Paris) would make little difference to Sky. In summary, Sky pay approx £1.2 million per club per season for Super League. Quite simply if a French broadcaster can be persuaded to spend £3 million for French rights for 2 French teams, then a second French team would be a good idea. If they'll put up £5million for 3 clubs, even better. But without that kind of cash, SL will have to stick with just one French side.
On a separate, but related question. Do the Quins add anything to the amount of money Sky are willing to spend?
The simple answer is... probably.
I say that because Sky Sports have (privately) always insisted that there is a London side in the competition. Sky aint a charity, so they must have done sufficient research to find out that they can sell more subscriptions to the south of England on the basis of a London club.
Personally, I'm an expansionista by inclination. I tire of supporters of traditional clubs with poor crowds and facilities who want to claim a place at the top table because of history rather than potential. (By the way, we rarely hear from Widnes/Cas/Wakey/Fev fans, that clubs such as Swinton or Oldham deserve a SL place despite their equally glorious history).
But expansionistas must be realistic. If the numbers don't add up, there should be no further expansion. TO and PSG would be fantastic additions, but as the old phrase goes, "Show us the money".

Because nobody wants it, you're not quite getting this are you?

or if you look at it from the other side. If they tell the clubs before hand everything they will be judged on, you are basically telling them which application to submit and you would end up with 20 identical applications.


And it has been constantly, and abundantly clear, that the final decision rests with the RFL Board. It always has, was and will be down to them. There has been no time in the history of the game where this hasnt been the case. the only thing that has changed is the clubs which can now put themselves forward for consideration



the categories are used to separate the clubs which are fairly disparate. If 5 clubs got A, 5 B, and 10 C then the As and Bs are through and the best 4 from the Cs would be picked by the RFL.

If 10 got As and 6 Bs and 4 Cs, then the 10 As would be through and the RFL would pick the best 4 that had scored a B. The Cs wouldnt even be considered

its just a broader look before the fine tooth comb, it was also a fairly minor part of the process that unfortunately some latched on to

but why doesn;t anyone want it? Didn't the CC games on Grandstand used to get 1million+ viewers? I know production costs to do live sport aren;t cheap but even so there isn;t a massive amount of quality sport on FTA TV these days so why wouldn;t a TV company want the second most viewed sport in the country?

its not a case of does an itv company want the rights to SL its more a case of they can't afford the rights to SL.sky sports owns SL.a FTA channel will never be allowed near SL.can you imagine the potential lost advertizing revenue to BSKYB if SL games were being watched by more people nationwide on FTA-TV than are watching premier league football on BSKYB.

well if they want exclusivity they should be paying a damn site more money!

Did teh TV rights go to open tender last time or was the deal with Sky done without bids?