In a franchise/salary cap sport. These scorelines were meant to be a thing of the past.

Quote: William Eve "Oh dear One for the archives William...www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... tive-ever-

Quote: William Eve "Oh dear One for the archives William...www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... tive-ever-

Funny how you had nothing to say last week when the games were high quality and exciting. Are you seriously claiming to be a rugby league fan?

398 points scored today in 6 games

Unlike the NRL, the Eels have started already.

He's not a rugby league fan. He's a naughty boy!

That's four for four on the old predictions list by my count - I may be stretching the definition of a 'big win' in Hull's case though.

Seeing the cricket scores Wigan and Hudds posted just reaffirms the point that 14 teams is just too much - teams aren't even in the same class. One-offs like Friday are nice from a media and journalistic point of view. The RFL and Sky can sit back and toot the horn that this is the best and closest SL to date, but it's just not the case sadly.

Yes, some might expect that, but they'd be wrong. If there's been any evening out at all ( arguable ) then its been painfully slow. If levelling salaries is supposed to acheive this, then how come we usually see the same names at the top of the amateur ( i.e. cap of ZERO) game?

It also costs the game lost talent...and not the small list of obvious 'names' that go to NRL or RU, but the far more insidious loss of of future players before they ever pick up a ball - kids who don't see RL as something to have a go at, because it doesn't look like a big glamorous sport.

People still claim, stupidly, that the only alternative is a couple ( or even one ) dominant club and bankruptcy, but that's nonsense. There are plenty alternatives to just raising or scrapping the cap. The main thing is to have very tight squad limits for those on 'star' wages so that a very rich club can't stuff the bench and reserves with players who should be in someone else's first team. But other than that, if you're lucky, or clever, or successful enough to have the money, I'd like to see you spend it. On star players - the one thing that's guaranteed to raise the game's profile far more than these miracle "marketing campaigns" people seem to think is the only missing piece. Sign a Dan Carter, or SBW, or heck, even Johnny Wilkinson, and you'd get 100 times the profile boost than you could ever buy from a PR agency.

Totally agree. There remain various pairings capable of generating a big game with a big atmosphere, but these are the minority of fixtures. Rugby League, like all sports, is at its best when the game 'matters'. Wigan vs Saints, Hull vs KR, etc. always 'matter', history makes sure of that, but for the rest, the competition structure has to provide the sense of meaning. Its not quite right just now. On the one hand, the top eight system has unfortunately taken some pressure off the top sides to finish high, and on the other I don't believe either that it acheives the aim of giving the lower clubs something 'to play for', because I don't think a side finishing in 8th place realistically thinks it means more than one or maybe two more games. Stretching it to 8 was a tacit admission that a bunch of clubs were never going to get a sniff at top five, and lack of relegation makes that an awfully long list of clubs who's second half of the season would be, essentially, friendlies. We need to take a step back and ask why we really need so many playoff spots. Can we fix these ever-uncompetitive sides or do we need a smaller elite league? Or something else? Whatever the answer, an 8 team playoff isn't it.

As a sport RL does not develop enough players at top level and the altering of the junior level structure this season does not help matters. As part of their license all SL clubs should have had to field U15s, U16s, U18s and U20s teams.

I don't agree with peoples idea that reducing the number of teams will create a closer competition. Even if we reduced it to 8 teams, we're still going to get a team that finishes bottom and gets beaten every week as the 7 other teams are better than them. Parramatta finished bottom of the NRL last season, they got humiliated at the weekend again, do you think the NRL are considering reducing the number of teams there?

If we want to bring back competitive league games, bring back P&R and reduce the dilute play-off system to 6.

Yep, I make it that in 2003 there were 91 overseas players in SL. In 2013 I make it that there are 89. Which doesn't sound that good until you factor in there are now 2 additional teams. And that will only go down as the current exemptions return/retire.