How about the full time-frame comparsion (1998-2012) as opposed to your selective 5 year one?

Super League
4 teams winning the GF
6 teams appearing in the GF
5 teams finishing top of the ladder

NRL
9 teams winning the GF
12 teams appearing in the GF
9 teams finishing top of the ladder

And the comparison suddenly becomes earth-shatteringly different

Who he?

Wigan, st's, hull fc, Warrington, Leeds, hull kr, les cats, hudds all spend full cap

Not sure how close to the cap the remaining sides are?

Still doesn't explain why you don't see the player movement that you see in NRL? When was the last time we saw a decent England player move from the big 4 to another club?

I accept that Melbourne and Manly have been consistently good recently though domination by those two is stretching your argument somewhat. St George Illawarra might disagree given their club won the GF in 2010 and finished top of the ladder in 2009 and 2010. The point the OP was making is that every NRL club believes they have a reasonable shot at the title and there's plenty of evidence to support that view, even if we only consider your selectively recent 5 year time frame for comparison purposes. The Bulldogs, Roosters and Eels have all finished 16th and bottom of the NRL ladder during the past 5 seasons - yet all three of those clubs have also reached the GF during the same period. Gold Coast Titans finished 3rd in 2009, 4th in 2010 and 16th and last in 2011. NZ Warriors Grand Finalists in 2011 and 14th in 2012.


I disagree with that figure. The only teams in with a very good shout of winning SL are Leeds, Wigan, Saints and Warrington - 4 out of 14 The issue now is to make those 40% pull their fingers out come playoff time and actually beat Leeds The issue we have now is a salary cap which is set at a level which is unsustainable for most, particularly in the current economic climate. Not only has it ensured a closed shop of only 4 genuinely competitive SL teams who are able to manage well enough financially to cope (mainly via the generosity or largess of their sugar daddy), but it's now becoming increasingly evident that several SL clubs will fall by the wayside or worse still - no longer exist. The whole financial model and structure on which SL membership is currently based is inherently flawed - franchising, new stadia criteria, salary cap, etc - the game cannot afford it. It requires urgent review and surgery ASAP. My view is that if the game continues on it's current path, there will be several clubs in SL liquidated within the next 5 years. Other struggling SL clubs who manage to survive will have to consider a return to a semi-professional existence.

I'm sympathetic to the views of the OP on this - as a first step in securing the financial viability of the game (significant decrease in Sport England handouts to the RFL notwithstanding) I'd be looking at reducing the salary cap to a level which is more sustainable and manageable for all - down to around £1 million per club - increased competitiveness will follow. I'm not concerned about the loss of a few players and a reduction in the quality of the SL product - that's been an ongoing process for several seasons anyhow - since at least 2006 - when SL clubs could no longer afford to prop up their squads with better quality overseas signings.

What is the point of maintaining the current flawed set-up? Is it because it suits your club Leeds and they'll be alright Jack? Not much point IMO if there are hardly any teams left to compete against.

There is no point maintaining the current system, there are flaws in it and changes we should make, but you will really need to explain your logic that thinks that putting on a lower quality product, and as such bringing in less money from sponsors and tv deals, and from turnstile takings and merchandise spends, and not investing in new facilities/stadia and re-introducing the uncertainty and instability of relegation is going to achieve the aims we have as a game?

I think we suffered early on from not being in the market for players in our first season in SL until after all the other teams had their squads signed up, consequently we spent too much on contracts which were too long with players that were not really worth the money they were being paid.

I watch A LOT of different sport and definitely no sport fans in any country in the world are as obsessed with what their counterparts from another country are doing as much as english RL fans are towards Australia....at least not in a way that is as so detrimental towards their own product.

When you try to control the market by imposing artificial rules & regulations you will initially find people trying to find ways around the rules, some legal, some illegal and some questionable practices somewhere between the two.
We've seen players' incomes being boosted with cars, houses or by their wives being employed in non-jobs at vastly inflated salaries and we've seen payments to players being deferred until the following season or later. So you think up more rules until eventually you've got it all buttoned down and think you've got a watertight system until the players realise that there's a whole world out there that doesn't have to abide by the rules you've made up for your tiny corner of it and they move off to try their hand at the sport in another country that will pay them more, or another sport altogether. Its a sort of sporting version of communism and it just doesn't work. Comparisons with the NRL are of limited help because RL in Australia is the national sport and here its a minority pastime.
I'd have some minimum criteria surrounding facilities and youth programs/reserve grade teams to prevent clubs simply throwing money at short term success to the detriment of the develpoment of the game but then I'd leave the rest of the spending to the club. If they made bad decisions and blew all their cash 'living the dream' like LUFC did they can suffer the consequences and someone else can take their place.

Other codes in the UK, including other high profile Rugby Union competitions, also witness a few teams dominate the competition.
* The Aviva Premiership has only been won by 7 clubs in its 25 year history, with three clubs winning 21 of those 25 seasons, Leicester (9 titles), Bath and Wasps (6 each). A core of clubs still always place well.
* The Premier League - 20 clubs, still dominated by a Big 4 or 5. 5 winners in 20 years, Man U with 12 of those.
* French Top 14 RU - 14 clubs, only 5 clubs in the 16 years of professionalism, with 2 clubs winning 11 of the 16 titles (Toulouse with 6, Stade Francais with 5).

Players will obviously take up the game for the love of it, and achieve as much as they can, but large offers from other competitions would be very tempting, especially if faced with a pay cut due to a reduced salary cap. Players will also seek to maximise earnings during their player career.

Guys like Jason Robinson, Andy Farrell, Henry Paul, Iestyn Harris, even Vainikolo and Hape were a big loss to RL at the time. The increased earnings in RU would have been one factor in their switch (among a number, admittedly). Current players like Chris Ashton, Kyle Eastmond, Joel Tomkins, Owen Farrell and George Ford would all be excellent additions to SL and the national team - the first 2 would be certain starters. Super League will miss 10 star players that could boost the competition's standards and appeal.

There is also evidence of competitions losing good players to competitions with a higher salary cap In recent times.

* NRL lost a number of players to big deals in SH Rugby (Sailor, Rogers, Tuqiri, Tahu, Folau), the Top 14 (Gasnier, Gower, SBW) and Top League (Craig Wing), and to Super League (over the 2000s).
* Wales RU has seen 8 current test players move to France.
* Super League - to Aviva Premiership, see above. Even so, 4 Aviva Premiership clubs successfully lobbied for a recent cap increase, Leicester's coach Richard Cockerill most vocally complaining about big spending Top 14 and Japan Top League clubs poaching players.
* Southern Hemisphere RU (especially South Africa) - many.

I don't want to divert the thread from its initial point about the importance of money but some of those players listed there were no loss to the game. Chris Ashton was a defensive liability and his future in the Wigan first team was not assured. Andy Farrell, Shontayne Hape and Leslie Vainikolo were all the wrong side of 30 and all had significant knee problems. It was good business to get rid of them and short term blindness by RU to sign them.

As for Owen Farrell, he has absolutely nothing to offer the game of RL outside of his goal kicking. He is slow, run averse, and cannot make a break. Any decent BARLA stand off would be a better propsect for RL than him. He is not even much of a prospect in RU, if England want to consistently compete with the Southern hemisphere, even given the recent result against the all blacks.

Vainikolo was 27-28 when he went to union. Hape was a couple of years younger.

well done, I would class this as the most incorrect post I have read on here for a long time!

Vainikolo was 27 when he left, Hape was also 27.
Farrell was also a week before his 30th birthday before he left. So in fact, non of them were the wrong side of 30, unless you of course mean the younger side.

Also, short term blindness of RU to sign Farrell. Are you trying to make me laugh. So short term blindness that he is now England assistant coach, and going on tour with the Lions. They have in Farrell one of the best up and coming coaches, and someone who should NEVER have been lost to the game of Rugby League. They also lured his son away from the game of league and created a bridge between the two codes, which could see many players leave League to join Union through his knowledge of League and position in Union. Joel Tomkins anyone. Already been talked about as a England centre. There is the potential for many more to follow this path. How on earth is that short term blindness from Union, its a blooming master stroke!

Owen Farrell who you just brush aside as a nothing player is one of the most promising players I have seen in Union for a long time. The thing which you so criminally miss out of you're assessment of him is his mental strength. Nothing seems to bother him, or get him outside of his comfort zone, which in front of that many people is half of the battle of being a great player. That is totally ignoring you're poor summary of the player as he is not run averse. His ability to take the right option, be it through his excellent passing game or kicking is also impressive for someone of his age and experience.

To say Owen Farrell has nothing to offer league is just pure and utter drivel. I wouldn't say Sinfield is quick, or a running HB but he seems to do okay at Stand Off, although Owen may well be seen as a LF if he was still in league.

We also lose people like Shaun Edwards to Union. These Ex-Players should be in our game coaching our young players, but we cannot afford to pay them like union can.

you could have a rich ex player pump 15 million into a club like us