How would you know? You haven't been reading my posts. I'm trying to have a discussion with someone that ignores points that contradict their argument. If you didn't ignore them, there wouldn't be repetition. Think about it.

People like me? Who are people like me? Stereotyping is pretty poor. What have Crusaders got to do with this argument? And what do you know about my opinions on them? Is this your attempt to derail the argument so you don't have to address your other points?

What other people argue is irrelevant to this. You have argued it both ways and you can't do that. You can't argue that less people being able to watch Championship rugby on TV is both positive and negative for the same reason, which is exactly what you have done. It's a contradiction.

If it got more RL on TV, I'd be happy for it.

YOU mentioned football , not ME , and 9 league games isn't enough

This isn't about SL , this is about the clubs in the Championship , my comment about the sport being split is that your only concern is the SL aspect , you have no interest in the Championship clubs perspective , but you won't admit it , I on the other hand will happily admit I couldn't give a monkeys about SL or it's clubs , and certainly would'n't try to tell them how to run their clubs

You suggested I am only concerned about Leigh , when I have told you that also is not true and given you examples why

I have also suggested it may happen , but personally don't think it will

If the SL clubs want something , they will usually get it , they are the power behind professional RL in this country , but they would probably have to pay for it , and they don't like paying for anything , in fact most cannot afford to pay for anything , so it won't happen IMO

Wellsy , as you now seem to be adopting the Smokey tactics of dissection and ignoring the points made , not to mention drifting the subject , I'll leave it there , as I said

It won't happen , and if it did , I along with many more wouldn't be there to see it

I've addressed every single one of your points through dissecting your post.

These sort of threads amuse me, because you always get someone having a go because "someone is telling someone else what to do and how to feel" when all I've actually done is question people. The irony being, the people that are complaining about being told what to do and how to feel are the ones that are telling me (and apparently SL fans as a stereotypical collective) what to do and how to feel. Hypocritical much?

OK then Wellsey, how many spectators turn up (and actually pay) to watch SL club Academy/U20s (whatever it is now) games?

You and your man

What's that got to do with anything? Feeder clubs aren't academy teams.

So what exactly would they be if they aren't the Super League 'parent' wishing to blood the kids?

Exhibit A posted by Wellsey13 on 2nd October"The dual-registration system only allows for a certain amount of players to be loaned out IIRC. If the entire academy were in a feeder team, then it would help all of their development."[/i

We've moved on from the 2nd October (my name only has one 'e' in it by the way).

Rooster has explained how feeder clubs in Australia work, and that way seems a better proposal.

There are players in the match day squad and there are the youngsters. People seem to forget the players in the middle, and these are the players that are missing out on valuable competitive game time which affects their development. There are plenty of players that come through the academy but aren't ready for the big time (or just simply can't get in). If they stay in stagnation for too long, they end up as another one of the "could have beens".

In that case, send them on a season-long loan to a Championship club without a clause to recall them at a whim.

Or better still Matt , they could dump an overhere pension topper upper and actually play these players IN SL , couldn't they

Far too radical a suggestion while the Sky money is still rolling in.