Quote: jeffvickers "Town Populations (2001 census) Current League Standings Super League 1. Leeds 750,700 2. Sheffield 551,800 3. Doncaster 302,402 4. Bradford 293,717 5. Borough of Haringey (Skolars) 255,500 6. Warrington 202,700 7. York 197,800 8. Borough of Richmond (Broncos) 187,500 9. Oxford 150,200 10. Huddersfield 146,234 11. Hull 128,050 12. Hull KR 128,050 13. Perpignan 120,100 (2009) 14. Cheltenham (Gloucestershire All-Golds) 115,600 Championship 1. Oldham 103,544 2. St. Helens 102,629 3. Rochdale 95,796 4. Halifax 82,056 5. Wigan 81,203 6. Hemel Hempstead 81,143 7. Gateshead 78,403 8. Wakefield 76,886 9. Salford 72,750 10. Barrow 69,087 11. Hunslet 59,877 12. Widnes 58,300 13. Dewsbury 54,341 14. Keighley 51,429 Championship One 1. Batley 49,448 2. Leigh 43,006 3. Crusaders (Wrexham) 42,576 4. Swinton 41,347 5. Castleford 37,713 6. Whitehaven 25,032 7. Workington 24,295 8. Neath (South Wales) 19,258 9. Featherstone 15,244'" Salford city's population in 2001 was 217200 according to the 2011 census it's risen upto 233900. www.salford.gov.uk/census2011.htm

Quote: jeffvickers "Town Populations (2001 census) Current League Standings Super League 1. Leeds 750,700 2. Sheffield 551,800 3. Doncaster 302,402 4. Bradford 293,717 5. Borough of Haringey (Skolars) 255,500 6. Warrington 202,700 7. York 197,800 8. Borough of Richmond (Broncos) 187,500 9. Oxford 150,200 10. Huddersfield 146,234 11. Hull 128,050 12. Hull KR 128,050 13. Perpignan 120,100 (2009) 14. Cheltenham (Gloucestershire All-Golds) 115,600 Championship 1. Oldham 103,544 2. St. Helens 102,629 3. Rochdale 95,796 4. Halifax 82,056 5. Wigan 81,203 6. Hemel Hempstead 81,143 7. Gateshead 78,403 8. Wakefield 76,886 9. Salford 72,750 10. Barrow 69,087 11. Hunslet 59,877 12. Widnes 58,300 13. Dewsbury 54,341 14. Keighley 51,429 Championship One 1. Batley 49,448 2. Leigh 43,006 3. Crusaders (Wrexham) 42,576 4. Swinton 41,347 5. Castleford 37,713 6. Whitehaven 25,032 7. Workington 24,295 8. Neath (South Wales) 19,258 9. Featherstone 15,244'" Salford city's population in 2001 was 217200 according to the 2011 census it's risen upto 233900. www.salford.gov.uk/census2011.htm

Why? I'm not ashamed of our crowds at the moment? We're getting the attendances that the current team deserves, you don't get 10000+ sell outs watching bottom of the table teams.

I'd be more worried of I was a Huddersfield fan, 2nd in the league only 1 point of top, a fiver a ticket for the Catalan game and still only manage to attract 5000. Put this way if Salford were in their position we'd attract a lot lot more than 5000.

The population of the town of Doncaster is 67,000 , its a little disingenuous to use "boroughs" of London for one clubs and artificial "metropolitan areas" for others...if you used the same rules for everyone Hull would have a population of 600,000 and Wigan and Leigh 318,000...and why split the City of Hull straight down the middle...you really think that is indicative..???

Prevents or allows?

I do agree, Cas Tigers stadium is awful, dirty and not a good advert for the league at all in regards to its look. If it were down to atmosphere though we'd be high up there. I pray for the day we can build a new stadium.

Pros since licensing....

Huddersfield are pushing on on field. I also see what they do off field with kids in the area and in years to come believe their fan base will drastically improve.

Catalan although on a dip at the moment are a clear show that licensing is working. They're pushing further up the table each year.

Hull KR are also the same along with Wakefield who are slowly but surely getting more consistent and pushing for regular top 8 places.

Widnes would have been the same as Cas; a regulation yoyo team without licensing.

I'm not too informed about how performance is assessed and developed within the RFL, but I do think it is fair to say that they have failed to realise the potential of this sport and continue to do so.

Tinkering with the product is not going to solve the wider or most pressing issues which we have with Rugby League in this country.

Fundamentally, there isn't anything wrong with the product. I know that the current play off system and the abolition of promotion and relegation are areas in which a lot of people would like to see a change, but I'm not sure you can pin the attendance/media coverage/financial problems on either of these points.

Take Rugby Union as an example, this attracts a huge audience of people from all over the world. I don't believe that anyone can argue that the actual product, the game of Rugby itself, is of a quality and standard which merits an audience so much bigger than Rugby League. There is a minority of Rugby Union fans who have played or understand the game to a level where they can appreciate ruck/maul/lineout/scrum plays for what they are, to the majority of fans aren't able to identify good technical displays in these areas. So what attracts them to the game? What attracts them to part with significant sums of money to go to Test Matches or Finals in huge numbers? It has to be down to the marketing of the product.

The RFL have failed, are failing and will continue to fail in this department. We have a fantastic product which does not need to change, the people responsible who run the game does.

According to wikipedia In 2001 Leeds' main urban subdivision had a population of 443,247 not 750,700

Couldn't agree more. Sometimes I think the people running the game have more of a flat cap vision for the game than the southern media!

The fact we can't attract a decent sponsor for SL is a disgrace and in itself should be enough to see heads roll.

We have a great product with terrible management.

We have a good on-field product, but are terrible at almost everything off the pitch. Poor stadia, poor marketing, poor attitudes, poor community involvement, poor management and poor media engagement. Some of it is the RFL at governing body level, but an awful lot of the problems are lower down the system.

The stadia is a difficult issue due to the high costs involved, however I would say that if clubs had invested in their stadium and facilities 30 years ago when there was a bit more money floating around, then there wouldn't be such big problems today.

The marketing from clubs is awful. Just awful. And it's not all about money, half the time it seems like clubs simply can't be d to try and attract new fans.

The attitudes at most clubs stinks. It's a mix flat-capped tery, a slavish obsession with "the past" when everything was apparently brilliant, and amateurism. The lack of clubs willing to attend best practice seminars for instance.

There is so much more clubs could be doing in their local communities. Clubs seem to think sending a couple of players to a local amateur a couple of times a season is enough. It's not, nowhere near. Engage with the community, get regularly into schools, colleges, universities etc. We often bemoan the fact that many RL clubs are based in small towns yet the clubs still don't properly engage with their local area.

The management of many RL clubs is terrible, based either on 1 mans ego, or being run like an amateur club on steroids. Clubs are in desperate need of professional management. I think this would avoid many other problems.

There are things the RFL could do to help, but I'm of the belief the main problems in the game can be solved by the clubs themselves.
There is of course then the amateur game, which in Yorkshire at least is often a disincentive to engage with rugby league for most people.

What's that then - 1983. OK then - where was this money that was floating around in 1983? Sky weren't even around then. Have you just dreamt that "fact"?

It's a regional sport which struggles to get national sponsorship and media attention. Ironically we got plenty of media attention back 40 year ago when a cloth cap commentator with a broad Northern accent catapulted our game into the national consciousness. It's never gone beyond that and I don't see any spark in smouldering embers that's going to change that anytime soon. This is our lot. Possibly? Or am I being a bit gloomy here? Maybe.

I didn't realise you wanted an exact date, I apologise for not specifying an exact year when it's not necessary or the point whatsoever. Congratulations on spectacularly missing it.
The years when RL clubs were spending money left, right and centre on player transfers or on union players and almost completely neglected their facilities and stadiums. Leading to the appalling state at some, and the enforced move of other clubs.

they aren't

So why the changes Smokey? Who's changing the game? Who's got the overriding votes?

No-one has voted yet and the proposal was that unpopular the split has moved to an end of season promotion competition which still may not end up being implemented.

The Dual Reg thing is the RFL trying to make SL more like NRL. In the NRL if you need match practice, you get thrown into the lower comp. The RFL were/are trying to emulate the NRL by using the lower league sides to the SL sides advantage for getting players fit or for players out of form.

We need to to reduce the amount of games. The problem with money is because of the current economic climate. Once that improves, so will the finances of the clubs and the RFL.

The RFL need to stick with licensing and only consider bringing more teams in when it can be proven that the competition sustain them and they can sustain themselves. Pick the most viable 12 clubs, put them in SL and keep it that way until the competition can sustain more clubs.

P&R had it's chance before and during SL era and it was a failure. Why do we need to bring it back? Licensing is only in it's infancy and needs to be persevered with. If we change now, I can guarantee within 5 years time, we'll find something else wrong and want to change the structure again. We need to give ideas time to bed in and grow not give up on them if they aren't an instant success.

We are trying to get all clubs to invest in youth and the seeds of that are starting to come to fruition at most clubs. By bringing back P&R, clubs are going to put more emphasis and money on staying in the top league rather than their youth structures which in turn will weaken the international game even more so than it is now.