news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 394564.stm Jamie Peacock would like super league to be reduced to 10 teams. Im not convinced this is a good idea, although can see some benefits it would bring, such as an increase in revenue and salary cap for clubs to help stop the flow of RL players defecting to union for more cash If super league was to go to 10 teams, my 10 would be as follows with a tough call but the Bulls just missing out in favour of Huddersfield Leeds Wigan Saints Warrington South Wales Toulouse Huddersfield Crusaders Hull Catalans

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 394564.stm Jamie Peacock would like super league to be reduced to 10 teams. Im not convinced this is a good idea, although can see some benefits it would bring, such as an increase in revenue and salary cap for clubs to help stop the flow of RL players defecting to union for more cash If super league was to go to 10 teams, my 10 would be as follows with a tough call but the Bulls just missing out in favour of Huddersfield Leeds Wigan Saints Warrington South Wales Toulouse Huddersfield Crusaders Hull Catalans

Is it because he wouldn't have to take off his shoes and socks to count them?

The game going on right now is the strongest case for not bringing in any more elite level expansion clubs for a good long while

You think one poor performance, by one team, is a strong case to stop expanding the game

I enjoyed it

Maybe it's me. Maybe i've been starved of rugby league for the last 4 months. Great defensive effort by both teams. I have been holding the sofa down all day today - stuffing my face with junk food. Time to hit the beers. I may have knocked a few weeks off my life but i've had a lovely day.

Who's next? Ah, Cas and Wakey. Good stuff. Where's that pack of John Smiths .........................?

The 14 teams that we have now is too many. The game in Europe simply can't provide enough elite level players and you can see that in the number of poor quality games that we see between certain sides and the number of overseas players at certain clubs.

Ten is probably too few but the league should never have been expanded from 12 teams three years ago

Once all the so-called "youth policy" and home-gown strategies come to fruition we will have enough players. Widnes have already produced at least 20 top class players apparently - that's why they're coming up to SL. I've already logged their names into my "Access to Super League" factfile for reproduction in 4 years time when all those players will be much sought after first grade players.

stupid idea, didnt think peacock had head injury. must have coming up with this idea.

The difficulty is that if we don't include other European clubs then we cannot expect to have a competetive Northern Hemisphere. It is only by opening up elite rugby league we can realise a network that yawnion currently has. This however is a long term strategy of which we will only see the results in five to ten years. A more competetive northern hemisphere will enable us to compete with Australia and New Zealand, which we currently, and sadly, cannot do.

But they aren't here now, so why are we devaluing the competition by having poor teams and badly run clubs in what is supposed to be our "flagship" product?

There are a lot of players in this league who are not elite standard. If we are having to bring over Australians who can't get a game in the NRL (and every club has been guilty of it), then it demonstrates that the talent pool in this country is not large enough for the number of clubs that we have.

One of our biggest problems when it comes to international rugby is that they players are not conditioned to 'week in, week out' intensity. Eddie and Stevo can bang on about "how it gets closer every year" but the league is not competitive enough. It is not good for the sport when teams can still win a game whilst playing in second or third gear.

Because you'd only have four clubs left.

I'd rather have ten teams than fourteen, the dross that play in Super league at the moment should be clear to everyone

Four divisions of twelve would be my ideal situation, with P+R between all the divisions

I'd say more than that personally. I think you could take six-seven clubs as "elite" clubs. On that basis, a 10-12 team system seems the best compromise between holding up standards and having a commercially viable competition.

At the moment, we have 14 teams and an eight team play-off system purely because it "kept enough people happy". That's not the way to run a sport.

Totally agree with that bit.