Which is exactly why I believe the North American clubs would ditch our SL 'giants' very quickly, if the venture over there succeeds. And we would return to 'sqare one' over here, or what is left of it by then.

I don't know what the US TV stations play, but they will love to broadcast Toronto vs New York and New York vs Leeds, and New York vs Catalans, and New York vs Toulouse, and New York vs London. But they will have no interest in New York vs Leigh. That is why we must ensure that Leigh never sees the light of a Super League day ever again. And that is why we must promote Toulouse, Toronto, New York and London into Super League as soon as possible.

I know the current climate of trying to see your doctor is difficult, but you must insist on seeing him ,you really need urgent treatment. Or alternatively, you need to see a psychiatrist ASAP.

Like what? What constitutes "major" in your eyes? And given that probably half of the clubs in Super League (never mind most heartland clubs outside Super League) struggle to contribute anything notable, let alone major, why is the onus to do that only on expansion clubs? Shouldn't all clubs be contributing something major, or do you get a free pass if you are a club that happens to be within an arbritrary boundary?

If expansion clubs come into Super League and want to simply be a strong, competitive, sustainable club in its own right, why isn't that enough? It seems to be a standard that many of our heartland clubs haven't reached in more than 120 years of trying.


Yes they do.

This season, Manchester United have played five fixtures in the United States. Arsenal have played two games in Sydney, one in Beijing and one in Shanghai. Chelsea have played one in Shanghai and two in Singapore. Liverpool have played two in Hong Kong and three in Germany. Tottenham have played three games in the United States. Man City have played three in the US and one in Reykjavík. They do this annually because they see the market potential in these parts of the world.


Yes it does.

The NRL will kick-off with Canterbury, Souths, NZ Warriors and Melbourne playing in Perth. Perth is 2,500 miles from Sydney, and 3,300 miles from Auckland (roughly the same as Manchester to Toronto).


Yes it does.

Super Rugby in the southern hemisphere is a league of clubs from Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Argentina and Japan. Closer to home, the Pro 14 has clubs from Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Italy and South Africa, and there have been two fixtures from the Aviva Premiership played in the US.


The responsibility for promoting the game in Newcastle and Sheffield lies with Newcastle Thunder and Sheffield Eagles. They are the clubs active in that market, they are the ones who will reap the largest benefit of any work done in those markets, and the onus is on them to promote themselves to that market. Given that both of those clubs (in one guise or another) has been subject to a merger and given that one of those has played fixtures on a University playing field (and has had more grounds in the Super League era than the perrenial nomads in London), it is perhaps indicitive of the level of interest in that market.



That remains to be seen. I've said in an earlier post that there is room for RL to really carve our a niche in the North American market. I think that it's a risk worth taking, given that the risks of not pursing this opportunity are even greater.

You are right. Of course, neither will they have any interest in NY v Salford, Castleford, Wakefield, Hull KR, Widnes,Huddersfield, either. And, very soon would lose interest in NY v Saints, Wigan, Hull, Warrington, or Leeds. And, once the novelty of 'vive la France' had worn off, I would suggest they would quickly lose interest in NY v either of the Championship 'quality' French teams, either!

Catalans is not in the Championship. It is in Super League, after decisively defeating lowly Leigh in the MPG. It is unlikely to lose its place in Super League after recently acquiring David Mead, Michael McIlorum, Antoni Maria and Benjamin Jullien.

Toulouse is currently in the Championship, but is likely to be promoted to Super League soon. When that happens the Toulouse player roster, though heavily French, is likely to be strengthened in order to make the team competitive with the "Big Boys" of Super League.

I doubt that 95% of Americans would be able to tell you what country Catalans or Toulouse are actually in unless you add the suffix "France". Most of them would also struggle to place London.

Catalan never lost its SL place did they.

The RFL saw to that

The difference with Toronto vs Fev or Leigh, is that they add substantial costs to all of the other visiting clubs and may affect hoe the pro competitions can run ie SL, Challenge Cup, Playoffs etc

If the only added value that they bring is going into their own pocket, why make every other club in the comp just that little bit poorer.

Of course, if there are broadcasting revenues and they open the door to some better quality sponsorship then, that would be totally different.

I don't necessarily disagree, but this idea that any expansion club has to "bring something substantial" to the league, IMO, sets them up to fail and is simply a method for some to say that expansion doesn't / cannot work because not only is this "something substantial" never specified, it's usually completely unattainable. That esspecially the case when people suggest that the only measure of "what a club brings" is away fans - a source of revenue that is only worth around £20 per head per year to each club.

If we're going to start holding Catalans or any other club to certain standards, it's only right that we hold heartland clubs to similar standards - every club should be showing growth, not just the usual handful.

Yep, it was the RFL that told the Leigh players to lose their heads and their bottle during the MPG.

Was referring more in the past

Sorry Bramley but, I disagree here.

IF we are going to "invite" clubs from N.America to compete in a European (UK +1) Competition, there has to be a benefit to the competition and this has to be more than a Brexit style crossed finger sign.

What if, we have the Red Hall "dream" of 3 /4 N. American clubs + 2 FRench clubs and 5/6 English clubs and the thing goes pop ?
Dropping half of the current SL clubs and with little chance of them being invited back, would likely see some of them go out of business and if the North American experiment fails OR is so successful that they want their own league, there would be nothing to come back to.
Also, part of supporting any club is going to watch them play and whilst I fully appreciate that for the "expansion" clubs, away games are not even a possibility (bar an odd one or two).
I think that you will find that over a period of time, many fans will find something else to do with their time.
Maybe they will watch some Championship games or maybe another sport but, it would be a gamble for the sport.
Once the gloss wears off, you will be left with supporters drifting away from the sport and we should be working hard to retain ALL supporters and attract new ones.

The real issue here is that NOBODY is either being open about what the port is trying to achieve.
We just have a possibility that N America may be a new horizon but, can you imagine ANY other sport gambling its future on crossed fingers.

Of course IF there was an established comp over there and someone came along with a sack full of cash, wanting to set up a "Cross Atlantic Super League" this would be huge positive but, the current situation is miles and miles away from this scenario.

They do say "be careful what you wish for".

A sensible post at last. I hope your post gets through to the expansion extremist on here.

I'm not clear on what part you're disagreeing with? That all clubs should be held to high standards? That all clubs should be delivering growth?

I've made no secret that I think there are risks with the North American venture - and I agree that there needs to be a degree of caution with how this is pursued. I think where we differ in opinion (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that I see expansion as something that needs to pushed harder given that I don't see the growth that the sport needs in the heartlands. I don't see the heartlands clubs reaching new audiences, and I don't think that they can improve the package that we offer to commercial partners and broadcasters. I know that opinion isn't popular with certain posters (whose only contribution to the debate is to happily clap along to their favourite posts like a seal and throw insults at ones they don't agree with), but those same posters don't seem to be able to come up with an argument to refute that suggestion. If they had workable suggestions as to how clubs along the M62 could tap into new markets and bring audiences that sponsors want to pay to reach, I'd happily listen to them and I'd have no issue whatsoever with that.

But the clubs they can demonstrate that. expansion is (in my view) the best opportunity that we have to halt the regression that this sport is currently experiencing and the regression that is (in my view) a much bigger threat to the existence of our clubs than the risks of inviting clubs from elsewhere in the world to compete with us.

I don't agree that we should be holding up French, Canadian or any other clubs to some vague and unspecified standard of "offering something" because it puts any expansion club behind the 8-ball before we've even started - unless we're also going to hold the heartlands clubs to similar standards, in which case what we have is effectively franchising. Yes, expansion into new countries opens up new TV markets and commercial markets for us, but I get the feeling that whatever benefits expansion brings, it won't be enough for many on here.