1996 and SKY paid for a Superleague. The Superleague clubs formed a governing body and opened an office in Leeds. From 1996 to 2015 there was always friction between the two factions RFL.v.Superleague. In 2006 the RFL pushed Superleague to allow Les Catalans in.

The RFL negotiated the last TV deal and gave a big share of the money to the Championships and that deeply angered the top superleague clubs. The top Superleague clubs then decided to break away from the RFL which led to many RFL redundancies and Red Hall being marked down to close.

The next TV deal will be negotiated between Superleague clubs and SKY. The RFL will have no say at all. The superleague clubs never wanted the likes of Toulouse TWP or Catalans. they wanted Bradford Leigh and Widnes. You say [i"I thought they simply wanted to "market their own league themselves and when the time comes, "negotiate their own tv rights"[/i

Yes your right they want to "negotiate their own TV rights" and they want to choose who gets the money this time, they want to choose who is in their league, and they want English clubs and the RFL are now powerless to stop them.

So work out from those factual events what Superleague 2022 will look like?

Didn't Rovers employ someone accused if child grooming too??

I'm thinking the NRL. They can sell it as a redeemed guy if it all works out in SL.

NRL clubs wanted him it was just the NRL wouldn't approve it but I think they will once his done a year in the game keeping his head down.

He didn't go on any massive rant. On behalf of his fellow English Superleague Ltd. Chairmen, in his capacity of legal advisor, he made a public statement condemning the signing of Folau by the guest club Catalan Dragons, an act which aped guest club Toronto signing SBW.

The point here is that the English clubs want TWP and Catalans to spend those hundreds of thousands they have wasted on two clapped out old NRL players on junior development in Canada and France. They don't see why they should run academies and develop young players whilst these two (laughably called) expansion clubs clown about signing past it stars.

your own club develop wonderful players, yet you cannot grasp that these overseas clubs are rightly resented for mucking about and wasting £Hundreds of thousands on publicity stunts.

The elephant in the room is that every club in the ESL and NRL has Pacific Islands players, and maybe 60% of them have a fundamental christian background.
None of them will talk about it, but most would support Folau.
I've seen comments in posts followed by my christian relatives where Pacific Islanders are saying that it is basic racism that leads to denying them the right to have their christian beliefs (not in those words - a lot more angry than that).

[i:38v490rn"Elstone said the Super League board "accepts the legalities" around :38v490rn[ithe Rugby Football League's decision to register Folau[/i:38v490rn:38v490rn. But he added: "The board has voted unanimously to put in place measures that ensure the Super League has:38v490rn greater authority

More "evidence" of the friction between the RFL and the SL over who is running Superleague, more "evidence" of the RFL being elbowed aside.

Wonder what constitutes a "controversial" signing? If Elstones pal Leneghan signs somebody one suspects its will always be deemed less controversial than other clubs.

They have just caused themselves and the game a huge problem with this knee-jerk reaction. Next time a thug (of which there appear to have been a few in recent years) is to be signed will they veto the signing? If not, can you imagine the negative press reaction? Cornered themselves. There’ll be no players left soon when stories or past mismemeanours are dragged up. Will it apply to administrators too? If not, why not? Coaches? The list goes on.

Hudgell would have to be the insular, hypocritical guy in Hull.

SKD anyone?

I cant understand why people are up in arms about trying to limit controversial signings. Especially people who keep saying "but we have wife beaters drink drivers etc in super league!"

Can we not just see what the rules are before we get hysterical?

We'd have never heard a word about this if the Australian Rugby Union hadn't wanted to weasel their way out of paying Folau more money than they could afford so they backgrounded their tame media cronies to do a hatchet job on him.
Most of the League players who went to Union in Australia got duded when Union decided they were finished with them, but Folau took them to the cleaners.

Strangely enough ,if it was suggested that Folau's inability to be able to accept homosexuality was a mental health issue he would suddenly become much more deserving of tolerance to his views. Maybe even a victim.

...well I'm officially done with this thread

Smart move, 9 pages too long.

It's all about moral standards which being pushed to the limit, the signing has endorsed that you can virtually get away with murder and still be allowed to earn a decent living

It's a valid point. Hardaker could be deemed a controversial signing for example.

Signed by Wigan with Lenegan as chairman, and has broken the law many times.

Ben Cockayne before him. I expect Hudgell to sack SKD sometime to day, IF he has any morals

I know full well who signed him, but going forward would he be deemed controversial? Would SKD? Would Ben Barba? Would Joel Monaghan? Greg Bird?

They broke the law. Has Folau ever broken the law that you are aware of?

I'm not sure why so many are angry about SKD, was found not guilty. On this basis you can say dont sign someone becasue they have been accused in the past! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... Peris.html

I'm not sure why so many are angry about SKD, was found not guilty. On this basis you can say dont sign someone becasue they have been accused in the past! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... Peris.html

lol

Every SL club signs players from the NRL who are past their prime.

Reality check. SL cannot compete financially anymore to sign players from the NRL in their prime.

So you're suggesting the Folau signing is ok, but the Zak one isn't?

Well what's the chances the rules are never revealed to the public.

Interestingly Robert Elstone has an interview broadcast on inside super League tonight. From the tidbits I seen he confirms while all clubs are against what falou said. Not all clubs were against Catalan being allowed to sign him.

If you read his post properly you will see he isn't suggesting anything, you on the other hand are.