LSV, Doncaster, and Wrexham could be Nigel's preferred options.

You mean like the Halliwell Jones & Langtree Park?

At least one game has to be in London, either at Wembley or the Olympic Stadium. And at least one game has to be in Manchester in my opinion. Man City's ground is the obvious choice.
As mentioned, it's a shame Elland Road is so god awful to actually sit in because it can get a good crowd.
I know it's dependent on whether these stadiums are available, it's just my wish list. I understand why we went with the 20/25k stadiums in the past but I think we can, and need to, aim higher. Obviously we aren't going to get England football or Union crowds but I think we could get around 45/50k in Wembley/Olympic, 40k at Man City and 30k at Elland Road.

Why did you miss off the ( BUT MUCH BIGGER ) BIT? , as in 30,000 capacity

Selective quoting is very tiresome

Hull, Huddersfield & Wigan or take a chance & have the 3rd test and hopefully the decider at the Etihad, if they'll have us

You didn't say "30,000" though, did you?

Both stadiums I mentioned are larger and better than LSV. LSV is an average stadium at best.

Compared to what?

Is the Halliwell Jones ' Much Bigger ' than the LSV?

As for average, well you are entitled to your opinion

Etihad, Wembley, Hull, Huddersfield ,Wigan, Elland Road and Headingley are the stadiums I would be requesting to tender to hold a game.

Ideally picking Wembley game 1, Another game 2, Etihad game 3

Oldham, Workington and Hemel, for all the interest the "media" will have on the games,

Exeter RU, Womens version of Mo & Ron Ball game get more coverage than RL in the media.

But the millions put into the game since 1996 has been wisely spent hasn't it. The game went for small and succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.

Wire and Saints new grounds seen as adequate for international matches and attendances.

This game really knows how to develop into the big stage.

it shows how badly the rfl have run the game for decades that no-one had the foresight to invest in an rfl owned stadium. Pathetic sums it up

Yes, because what we really need is a national RL stadium that can be used for three games a year.

Only an absolute moron or a troll would suggest that what the sport needs to do is spend millions on a stadium it doesn't need. You're not an absolute moron are you galliant?

yeah, because everyone who has a different opinion to you must be a moron or a troll

Id love to take a game to Wembley i just dont think you'd get the numbers needed to break even let alone make a healthy profit.

If superleagues magic weekend is a success with a good turn out from the locals, then i'd consider taking the first test to Newcastle instead of Hull