Cas Tigers are about 2.5 million in debt owned mainly to directors and mostly Jack Fulton the chief benefactor. This does'nt include 2012's accounts (which I'm expecting to be bad). If 3 clubs are well in the black presumably Wigan, Leeds and Warrington this leaves the other 11 with debt's averaging 6.2 million each. This cannot be right can it ?

And that's the problem. At a quick guess I'd say there's prob only Leeds, Wigan, Hull FC, Wire and Saints who get a 10,000 average. Plus it's the extras the really knock the income up. The corporates, the hospitality, the club sponsors, the merchandising and the non-matchday income. Which is something that a lot of clubs are appalling at bringing in.

most definately - a good example been Wakefield. Losses of 1.2 million for 2011 due mainly to ground improvements.

So not exactly the height of reckless spending then?

Issues I have with article is show us the details, show is how it compares to other sorts for fair comparison of the reality of prof sport and tell us which clubs are at risk due to their debts. But then easier to kick the game, add to the public perception of a failing code and sensationalise the real issues with words like abyss.

No - nothing reckless. The improvements had to be made to satisfy the RFL and the licence.

And Bradford, plus Cats are only a few hundred off.

Super League clubs are facing combined debts of £68.5m, a BBC Inside Out investigation alleges. Compared to the combined debt in Football of £2.4 BILLION, and with annual losses of £130m in the Football championships, £68.5 million is a drop in the ocean. READ MORE ON THIS STORY....

Super League clubs are facing combined debts of £68.5m, a BBC Inside Out investigation alleges. Compared to the combined debt in Football of £2.4 BILLION, and with annual losses of £130m in the Football championships, £68.5 million is a drop in the ocean. READ MORE ON THIS STORY....

Which two sl clubs are charitable trusts ?

rlOne journalist thinks that the media is once again having a 'love in' with rugby unionrl.



rlLooks like he's forgot this BBC documentary which was favorable towards rugby league and not favorable towards footballrl. This documentary 'Lord Sugar Tackles Football' lasts an hour and was broadcast nationally. Meanwhile 'Inside Out' is on for half an hour and has squashed in one other topic along side our beloved rugby league.



Does the great British public only exist in the Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and the north west regions?

Wonderful [islight consultation[/i eh?



Rugby League does get a very fair crack of the whip. This is very bad journalism from you!

In all honesty in the cold light of day other than RL fans (who on the whole love to knock the sport and not build it up) who the hell will take the slightest bit of interest in this programme? It might be a tool for the Beeb to use in their next round of TV rights negotiations, but cant see many others being bothered.

Potential sponsors if they are affected will I am sure do their due dilligence and make their minds up accordingly.

I suspect that the levels of debts are affected by the sugar daddies at each club. Hull for example have made losses since the Heatheringtons departed the scene, but this will be written off over the long term. London are supported by a rich benefactor, who admittedly could walk away at a moments notice and leave them high and dry. Its a problem most sports clubs of any level have, yet it is one that always seems to be resolved.
Wire are used as an example, but lets face it that could be considered to be a house of cards as well. If Moran goes (no sign of that happening I know) who will take the club on.

Lets all start building the game up and stop knocking it for the sake of knocking it. The RFL are announcing new partners at the moment and have a World Cup which should bring in some good publicity. (Though I fear another cock up there with the venues chosen for games) But thats for then not now in the build up to the start of a new season.

Game should grow a thicker skin. Fed up of people who see concerns or criticism as "running the game down". Call it that if you like, but if a player wasn't performing and got shouted at by his coach we wouldn't be happy if his response was to say "stop running me down, talk me up!".

The sport is massively underperforming, it's administrators are a bunch of clowns and the more people make this point the better as far as I'm concerned. Great sport, let down by incompetent leaders.

Without the beeb providing any detail on the breakdown the headline figure strikes me as somewhat tabloid journalism... The total figure feels wrong (almost 5m per club) so has surely been inflated by long term sustainable development debts such as those from building new stadiums. Also the total number includes at least a 20% fudge factor since it is based on the accounts of only 11 clubs.

I'd be interested to hear how they have justified the headline if anyone watches it (am down south and probably won't be bothered to be sucked in by their headline and seek it out on the iplayer)

I've already posted in the Wire forum as to why I think this is shoddy journalism.

However, I have a burning question that I hope someone can answer: two clubs apparently have significant debts, that mean that the others (nine clubs) have an average of £3m debt each. So nine clubs have £27m between them, meaning the other two have £41m?!?! Who are these clubs, are how are they structured to allow them to carry so much debt without folding??

Its just a cheap shot at RL, timed to impact on the start of the season.
As mentioned by another poster, you wont "rugger" mentioned in a bad light, not ever.
Is it the old school tie that prevents them getting a bad press or, the threat of the 6 nations being moved from the Beeb.