I know from talking to some of the professional players who are in favour of a smaller Super League that they believe it would have a significant impact in improving the domestic game and therefore reducing the gap in quality between Super League and the NRL. With less professional places for players in the Super League competition would be increased for places and the top players playing against top players week in, week out.

Furthermore players dropping down would strengthen the Championship and it would filter down right to the amateur levels, improving the quality of the sport at all levels.

I understand where some are coming from with regards to the financial aspect of playing less games however a stronger international game is key to growing the sport and therefore increasing it's financial muscle. This would outweigh any lost incoming through playing slightly less Super League fixtures.

Not saying it would on either accoumt , just pointing out why the NRL operates differently , and why we will never be able to work that way

Like to bet that all the Im alright Jacks who assume their club would be in a reduced league would soon change their tunes if they were under threat.
Anyhow how can the game be perceived by the general public to be progressing if they see a reduction in competing teams.

The public perception would be that the number of top flight clubs has reduced.

Do the ' public ' have a perception of RL at all?