What they'll do is find an excuse not to promote a club from the Championship. Yes, I know that Toronto have been 'guaranteed' promotion if they qualify, but I think w all know on here what a guarantee in RL's worth!

The Derby apart Leeds always give us our biggest crowd one year when the club really promoted the first game of the season against Leeds it gave us a stadium record even last weeks Thursday night game pulled in over 8,000

Firstly, Widnes being replaced by London was done in a open and fair fashion. There was no need for a "conspiracy" theory debate because the rues were in place......what asked was this time around, with SL in charge of their own comp and not the RFL, would they consider not relegating Leeds. FWIW, London currently attract 2,306 fewer fans to home games than Widnes did last year.......losing leeds would add another digit to the front of that number!

Leeds are responsible for 11% of the total attendance of Super League. When they visit London, they are the 3rd biggest draw (after Wigan and Saints) and are one of only 3 current SL sides who average in excess of 4k in the capital based on the years 1996-2014.

The average attendance for a London v Leeds game in that period is 4,130. Widnes attendances in the Capital are somewhat smaller, with an average gate of 3,034.....or 27% fewer fans and below the total London Broncos average figure for that period, which is 3,538.

Now, whilst it's just my opinion that away fans shouldn't be a key in deciding if teams are good or bad for the competition, if we are to remain in the public consciousness, an 11% drop in attendances is neither going to boost our awareness ratings or please TV executives......if Leeds finish bottom of the pile and are replaced by Toronto, do you believe that it won't impact on the SKY's (or any other domestic broadcaster who is interested) offer?

I don't honestly believe that Leeds will finish bottom, but the longer their plight remains in doubt, the more twitchy the SL chairmen will be getting and a period of "certainty" for both clubs and TV execs may be the order of the day.

Perversely, Widnes were one of the real success stories of the last licencing era.......I'd have them in a 16 side SL, along with Toulouse, Toronto and Bradford......

Yes I do believe we need 14 or 16 teams then we wold not have to play the same teams over and over again maybe that’s why fans stop going fed up with the same teams

I also believe that should Leeds finish bottom, they will be replaced in an open and fair fashion. I don't see the RFL or SL (whoever makes the rules in respect of league structure) changing one up and one down for this season. I do believe that the RFL will be disappointed if Leeds were relegated, but I cannot see SL being expanded in 2020 just to save them. It's difficult enough for the 12 SL clubs to balance the books as it is, with the Sky money. Having to share tv revenue by a further two clubs, is the reason I believe it won't happen.

Whether Leeds finishing bottom would cause Sky any loss of sleep, I don't honestly know. The bottom line for Sky, I agree, is viewing figures, but I'm not sure whether no Leeds fixtures would have such a bearing on viewing figures. I for one tend to watch as many games as I can, regardless of who is playing, to get the best out of my subscription. Happen there will be others who do similar, and those who pick and choose. I can't see Sky being too bothered who plays as long as their schedules are filled. Regardless of all this, if the viewing figures for RL are already seen to be falling with Sky, then negotiations for our next deal are going to be really tough. This, ultimately, is what I see SL chairmen getting twitchy about, whether Leeds stay in SL, or not.

I don't believe that Leeds will finish bottom, either, and I would prefer a 15 team SL. Playing home and away = 28 games, plus magic weekend for 29. A bye would have to be used, but the NRL have shown it's doable. Many have stated the repeating of fixtures between the same teams isn't ideal, and I'm one of them. Expanding SL would help, but I cannot see it happening.

On franchising, I'm not a fan. I've always been an advocate of P&R, although the days of four teams being relegated were just nuts. One up one down seems fair to give Championship clubs with ambition the opportunity to give it go in SL. With my team, I cannot say that more talent came through our academy to first team during franchising than in P&R, and clubs still had cash flow issues under both systems. Our thoughts are only conjecture, and who knows how SL will evolve (who would have imagined two leagues breaking up into three?) in the future.

You can’t have Magic Weekend with an odd number of teams in the league.

Like CMG I’d go with a 16 team licensed league of the current 12 plus Toronto, Toulouse, Bradford and Widnes.
To reduce fixtures with the aim to increase quality of have a team plays every other team once and then the teams from their half of the table a second time. This would give 23 league games including Magic Weekend. Top 8 playoff system.
Frees up space for our players to recover after games (like in the NRL) and gives space for mid-season internationals.

You can. It just means you have to have a second "extra fixture" (possibly on the road) and that one team won't be able to play at the event (so will have two on the road games)

Toronto, Tolouse, Bradford and Widnes would contribute nothing to an expanded SL.

WE all hate Leeds! Well I don’t never have. If Leeds Finnish bottom then they get relegate, natural justice, end of.

However anyone who doesn’t think that wouldn't be a disaster for the game and it’s finances is an idiot.

Biggest club, most money, most fans, big city, brilliant stadium - if we had a legion of similar clubs waiting to replace them then fine but we don’t. The nearest would be a resurgent Bradford but they are still a mile off.

I pray they stay up not just for selfish reasons but because they are a major part of the game as indeed are all the heartland clubs but this lot keep the rest of our turnstiles ticking.

Put simply I want Leeds to find form before they visit us in a few weeks and bring thousands with the, no denying we need the money as does everyone else.

Agreed, we need a strong Leeds, certainly more than we need London.

Agree with that. Leeds getting relegated is hilarious as a concept, but frightening in reality. As one of my favourite sayings goes, "it's all fun and games until someone loses an eye".

Hence why I said Leeds won't to down it would be suicidal for the game in general,
Also prompting Toronto will only apply financial strains on the poorer clubs which make them work harder to commit to the match program, I wonder if we get a club brave enough to say it won't travel and fore go the two points as some may have to go there twice in the season

Why would promoting Toronto apply strain to other clubs? Don't they pay for travel?

No club should have to travel 8000 miles for a league fixture it's ridiculous.