I agree. I went to 20/20 cricket game at Trent Bridge this week. The ground was pretty much full, it was full of families and folk of all ages groups. The pre match was busy with lots to watch on the pitch, with lots of music, pre recored interviews with the captains on the big screen and other cricket news (the day India were bowled out for 78). Surely there is a media group that could produce similar short 'programmes' that could be put out at every game, prior to kickoff.

During the game there was lots of entertainment in the form of short bursts of music and replays on the screen. They had the 'flex (muscleman) cam, the dance cam, the bongo (drums) cam etc, where the crowd can interact with the entertainment. It was slick and fun. Again, the ground was nearly full.
I appreciate that cricket is not RL, but there is lots to learn in order to boost crowds and the sport as a whole. It reminded me of the Bulls (Bullmania) at the start of SL and that, in addition to the rugby our sport must be entertaining in order to bring families in. Lots of work to be done. The sport need to be focussed on being more professional and much more entertaining.

Fair enough on investment and governance, I do however think the fans will be back next season.......

To an extent Bradford have "Been there and done that" with a matchday experience that was more productive early on, before it ended up being dropped.

I love the 20 20 cricket as a novelty, but it's too soon to call it a success, we have to see whether their early crowds hold up or decline.....

We also have to see how our own new rules appeal to the fans next season when they return. I think the new rules sharpen the games up......

Think we need to reinvent with new competitions. This is what cricket does very well. What about addition cup competitions an Eastern and Western Cup as an early season competition. Could all be played as evening games. Combine this with the 2 SL leagues of 10 mid season internationals and magic weekend.

Sounds quite good if it throws up plenty of SL1 club.v..SL2 club matches?

Don't get this sl1 and sl2 stuff. All it is is a rebranding SL and championship whilst getting rid of 4 teams. Need more advertising and things on pre match

Advertising and pre-match is fine but more radical change is needed. The SL1 and SL 2 is effectively making 20 full time teams and spreading the money a bit more. Relies on Sky buying in and the top current SL teams not just thinking of themselves. May need an increase in Salary cap also to open opp for more investment from wealthier clubs. Could lead to higher standard in both divisions and be more attractive to NRL players particularly if cap is raised.

That's all fine and dandy but there isn't enough quality players to fill 20 full time teams, there will be at least half of the SL2 getting mullered week in week out,
there is no different to what we have now, what your asking for is some players to fore go the their jobs to risk playing full time and are the clubs willing to pay out decent wages too and risk the future of the club.

I don't think it's 20 full time teams at all?

It's 20 clubs coming under the juridstiction of Superleague in which tier one will be professional and tier two will allow any ambitious club's rich owner to spend his money too. so a few pro in tier 2 most semi-pro.....

This does two things, it leaves the RFL with no more than 16 clubs (probably less if some fold) so the "tail cannot wag the dog" on game wide votes, it also leaves the top ten clubs taking most of the SKY money so they can maintain current levels of Superleague salaries.

It may also support maintaining support levels in a way through a full round of loop fixtures. Whatever anyone personally thinks of them if they maximise the attendances and satisfy SKY's thirst to show say Warrington.v. St.Helens twice rather than Leigh.v.Wakefield at all, then he who pays the piper calls the tune.

Those who don't like it I understand, but you will need to come in with a bigger offer than SKY yourself if you prefer a 14 club 26 round league.......

I opened my piggy bank last week and I am nowhere near it...........

I can see the logic of SL having more clubs under it's umbrella and as you say, this will strengthen their hand when it's time to vote on certain issues.
However, the bottom line is that, there simply isn't enough brass coming into the game and none of the proposed changes make it any more likely.
Whatever the new second tier is called, it's still the second tier and with (very) little money likely to go to the clubs in that division, what we really have here is a method of trying to split the Sky monies into 10, rather than 12.
SL needs to be very careful with this move.
With Sky's hunger to only want "big" games, they could create a very repetitive fixture program, which, rather than generate interest, may have the opposite effect.
It may not be the ideal example but the Scottish Premier League went with 10 clubs, only to find that it wasn't enough and then increased to 12 and it seems ridiculous that when most people complain about "loop" fixtures, we're going to have 2 divisions where clubs play each other a minimum of 3 times (plus cup and play offs), which necessarily means an imbalance in fixtures and it wont be long before "insert name" complain about having had to play someone twice away from home and only once at home and with the new league supposed to be even more competitive, this will surely have an effect on play off places etc.
Lets' face it, if there was enough cash, a 14 club or maybe a 12 club SL, with a balanced fixture program would be the ideal but 10 leave us with all the bits that fans dont like and just how long will it be until there is a further cut in Sky monies and we go to 8 clubs.
A final not of caution is the last major restructure, the 3 x 8 "every minute matters" nonsense.

Be careful what you wish for.

Don't worry. I will, excellent post......