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 ?

[url=http://loverugbyleague.com/blogpost_568-media-s-love-in-with-union-continues-as-bbc-sticks-the-boot-in.htmlOne journalist thinks that the media is once again having a 'love in' with rugby union[/url.



[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0113f7hLooks like he's forgot this BBC documentary which was favorable towards rugby league and not favorable towards football[/url. 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.

Or is it that Union is better than League from every possible aspect?

Including the level of debt at certain clubs !!!!!

did anyone notice this story about Wasps when we were being put through the mill in Dec ?
[url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2257719/Hard-Wasps-fail-pay-players-run-Christmas.htmlhard up wasp fail to pay players[/url
the coment 'Wasps are far from the only Aviva Premiership club suffering financially' is telling' but no BBC hack would want to end his burgeoning career by taking on the greys at Twickers with a bad publicity story ..
[url=http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/chiefs_aim_for_financial_parity_through_share_purchase/chiefs aim for finacial parity[/url
' Despite this financial disadvantage, Exeter has posted a profit for the second year running and is one of only four Aviva Premiership clubs to not be operating in debt.'
in 2007/2008 Rugby Premiership clubs were reporting an annual combined loss of 10M a year . Like in SL there are clubs like Gloucester & Leicester that report a surplus , and the RFU are always keen to promote that.
trouble is with a bumper BT deal ( 152M ) for Heineken Cup games there is more money around to offset these debts than in SL.