No, there are three which represent the amateur game, which is different from the non-professional game. If every championship club gets a vote, why not every amateur club? Those Amateur clubs have as much right to that decision making process as the championship ones. Why not just give 3 votes to the championships aswell?

What significance does the grade carry now? Bradford are up a certain creek without a paddle and the proudly covet a 'B' licence.

It's a good job for Hull KR that it is a 14 team league. The RFL would never have allowed 2 teams from Hull into a 12 team league. Aren't we lucky?

According to records at Companies House ( thanks to lister of the Wire board ), Warrington's current turnover exceeds that of Bradford by more than £2m a year. Might that not be a reason for their financial solidity, over and above the need for a 'sugar daddy'? It's also not a bad idea to have cheaper season tickets if it brings people into the ground where they then spend money on beer, pies, burgers etc, rather than staying at home with the Sunday papers because they can't afford the admission price.

Good point, or it would have been had they blocked our promotion. There were only 12 teams when we made our SL debut in 2007.

That was under simple P&R though

I agree it was but let us not forget that winning the league below didn't make it certain that you were promoted Hudds are a testamant to that (No disrespect Hudds fans)

Like paying creditors 10p in the £ and selling your ground twice over?

I know.

Hardly simple when the RFL still made the final decision, but don't let the facts get in the way.

I really don't see what all the fuss is about.

Whilst some clubs are in a better state than others (largely because of big investors whose permanence is not guaranteed by any means) the game as a whole is in a financial mess. Is this question disputed any more?

Are we better off with 14 teams? I can't say what financial benefit the inclusion of additional sides offer but I've not seen much benefit on the field so far.

When we shifted over to the salary cap and tweaked the rules in order to promote junior development I had hoped we'd see an influx of high quality youngsters across the board by now. Of course, I didn't expect to see the kind of competition for international places the Australians perpetually seem to possess but I did think we'd be able to put together 13 players of a pretty high standard. Yes, we are able to field a decent pack but over the past ten years we've put out some of the worst back lines I've seen in years. And I won't even begin to mention the halves.

Ahhh your problem is you think everything would be fixed instantly. It's a common problem in RL.

We are starting to see a backline that can challenge that of the Aussies, maybe halves too (though this is dependant on the coach not picking the Leeds loose forward at stand off)

But of course, it the fix isn't instant effective we need to return to the system that's never worked. Ever.

I agree, we are now starting to see the products of encouraging better youth development. I can't see what benefit reducing the current number of SuperLeague clubs will bring in further encouraging that development. Even London Broncos now have some decent local talent entering their ranks, not too bad seeing as most of the rest of the league had nearly 100 years start on them.

Despite the efforts of the RFL & BARLA to foster closer relationships between the professional and amateur ranks (thanks mainly to Richard Lewis), there are still problems. Amateur clubs see their best young players getting cherry-picked, often en-masse, by pro clubs. Many of these players are then often discarded as not being "good enough" and all too often they are then lost completely to the game. There's no doubt that more needs to be done in relation to player development and retention (in the game as a whole) but I'm convinced that we've been heading in the right direction.

What we currently have may not be the best we can hope for but the solution does not lie in going backwards, we need to progress further. Reducing the number of Superleague teams is not the solution, it is a retrograde step, one that is designed to offer a short-term fix to what a small number of clubs see as a way to cover their own lack of effort and expertise in promoting the game.

Quote: Tre Cool "Neil Hudgell sounds like a moron.'" And Mcmanus? www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... ml&BID=480

Quote: Tre Cool "Neil Hudgell sounds like a moron.'" And Mcmanus? www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... ml&BID=480