Oh dear.When Gateshead parachuted a squad of players from Australia into Super League people like yourself were very critical of them.
The incompetent and inept governing body,at that time,wanted to rescue a M62 club,so Gateshead were swallowed up by Hull FC.
You do recall your comments about the other code in Canada? Well Kurdi owns a union club and the much maligned Argyle has spent more,over the past 3/4 years on rugby league, than Kurdi has.

You will need another private conversation with Lenagan to gain the support for Thunder.With Mick Hogan being on Tyneside there may be a slight chance.There again,with the money invested into Bradford by the governing body there may be opposition.

The M62 folk really have given the sport the air of respectability.The decisions in 2020 continue to make the sport a laughing stock.

How will the attendances improve in 2021?

Someone suggesting something isn't really anything more than a personal opinion probably based on what they would like to see. For a better indication of where it could go, go back to Superleague's publicly announced and voted on plan to create a Superleague of 2x10 clubs with P&R between. The new SKY deal may well bring this back on the table.

]

Not about me at all, and your wrong anyway. Richardson may have had to use a lot of antipodeans to get started, but the club now has a full English player development system and a backer with a great track record. What Newcastle offer fits the bill in all ways especially "expansion" and "local player development" plus some more SKY Sports subs from the North East.

Put simply people scream expansion only when it involves pie in the SKY fantasies. When it includes all the things the game wants from an expansion club [i"people like you"[/i don't wanna know End of conversation.

You admit it then? about time.

Disagreeing with you does not make anyone a troll, starting multiple anti-expansion fantasy based threads does.

A good idea, if only we had the required pool of quality players and financial backers at the various clubs in order to make it happen.

Unfortunately, all we would probably get is what we have now, which is 2 or 3 clubs yo-yoing between the divisions on a regular basis, because the more financially stable clubs in SL1 would tie up the top level players in order to ensure their place in the elite league, while your 'mid-level' players would simply play out the annual promotion/relegation merry-go-round at the mid level clubs.

Ultimately, our choice appears to be a small elite league of high(ish) quality RL, supported by a feeder system below, or an over inflated, low quality top league - pretty much what we had become pre SL.

SL1 & 2 is merely a reduced SL and a reduced Championship, albeit under a new name.

SL2, Championship, 2nd division, there is no bloody difference.

All that this would be is a reduced top flight and a little bit of money for the 2nd tier but, just how long would it be, before SL1 wanted all of the money

Agree with all of that, some people are behaving as if it's "business as usual", not in RL, but life in general, it really isn't!

There is a big difference which you miss. But if you think it's "bloody crazy" then that's entierly up to you ..............

The proposal to go to SL1 and SL2 was all about Superleague taking control of the game. The actual "change" proposed was that 8 clubs split from the RFL and leave the championship to join 12 clubs in Superleague 1 & 2. At that time (couple of years back) there were 38 clubs in the whole league set up. Had eight Championship clubs broken ranks and joined the 12 then the vote would have been won 20 to 18. The championship clubs sided largely with the RFL. I don't know exactly why.

Superleague could have fully controled P & R and could have stopped the march of the phoney American club(s) had they won the vote. Superleague don't like how the RFL still have some power over SL clubs and their decisions. An example is the RFL allowed Les Catalans to sign Folau which Superleague were dead against, and were not allowed a vote on it. Another example is the RFL pushed TWP onto Superleague when Superleague did not want them one little bit.

There's a lot of unseen conflict, TWP are talking about getting back in Superleague once they agree a deal with a new owner whilst at the same time Superleague are pushing the RFL to work out a replacement for that 12th. place. This is another example of the conflicts going on.

Always been in favour of a London club being in Super League, the game needs a presence in the capital. Hopefully a settled one.

The North Anerican marketing team should be incentivised to get 9000 gates at London. (May be easier if they were closer to central London and not ground sharing with the enemy)

All the moans about Rugby league being a restricted and parochial game along the 110 mile long east to west M62 can be wiped out by a Superleague containing clubs 280 miles apart north to south on the M1/A1. A true national league.

But put this to the the moaners and they'll find any excuse to tell us why London and Newcastle should not be in Superleague. Both clubs easily fit the bill a far sight better than Salford. which is not to have a go at this fine club, but both the London and Newcastle clubs can take SL out of their Northern enclave.

Agree that big gates should be a target. But as someone who has lived in London, I think they need to be settled in a particular area. Living in West London, most people I knew actually couldn't be bothered going into the centre very often (except for work), preferring to drink and socialise locally at weekends rather than the West End ("for the tourists"icon_wink.gif, and there were a lot of people who would go to Brentford and QPR every week as it was easy to walk or hop on the bus a few stops.

When London Broncos were at The Valley (for just one season) they pulled in massive crowds - maybe South East London would be a good bet as there are fewer football teams to compete with.