I think the new branding should have just been London Rugby League.

Erm... it wouldn't, it may cause it, as I suggested in my earlier post.

Still not happy with just "London...", it's too vague.

Just a quick return to the original topic. There's a demolition crew on site at the Willows. I spoke to one of them, and he told me the whole site will be cleared in the next four weeks. The Shed has gone already. So, if we are moving back there, as the OP says the board are considering, we'll need special dispensation from the RFL to play in hard hats.

Remember the pre-Super League kerfuffle over teams such as Calder, Cumbria, Manchester, Hull, South Yorkshire and Cheshire?

Yep !

At least Salford will be in the position that at least an RU club will have paid for most of the development of those young RL talent.

Yes, and I wasn't convinced.

Which is most important - that the game survives or that players go to play RU?

For me it's that the game survives. Players will do what players have always done, and TBH I doubt if there are more than a dozen players across SL who would jump ship or be poached - the RFU isn't the most financially sound of ships either, it just has richer sugar daddies.

I think you're mistaking the RFU for the Aviva premiership....the RFU is a pretty profitable organisation.

Back on thread.....Salfords chairman has said that there's nothing to see here........same way that the then Bradford Bulls chairman announced on Jan 25th that the RFL buying oddslum secured the bulls future in SL.....

Union produces its own players you know to play its own game,the majority of rl players simply could'nt cut it in union,there isn't a problem with player drain to union.

There is room for professional rl in the world,its just unfortunate that that only adds up to ten clubs at the most

JC, I dont think what you are saying is correct.
Platers are being "poached" by union, Joel Tomkins, Chris Ashton, Sonny Bill etc
Also, where does the mythical 10 pro teams come from.
The number of pro clubs that can be sustained isn't finite, it is dependent upon on the success of the individual clubs raising sponsorship revenue, together with the RFL's ability to secure a decent TV deal, plus the bums on seats etc.
If we keep reducing the number of teams this will accelerate the decline in the number of players that are attracted to the sport (as a means of earning a living)
The key is to find ways of expanding the game

A handfull of players.....none of whom caused the game to implode.....players will go where the cash is...always have done, always will



Given that Hudds and London are 100% reliant on benefactors to stay afloat, Salfords apparent "wobble", what's going on at odslum, wakeys recent run in with admin.....10 clubs is a fair statement


It's ALL about the TV deal.......wihout it, you'd have a pro wigan and Leeds with a few other part time clubs...

Possibly.....but it does seem that 13 English teams are having trouble getting quality english players....325 is all they need......how many anzacs are currntly registered in the English SL clubs?


It is 100% the responsibility of the RFL/SKYTV to fund the "expansion" if they want it.....same way the storm is funded in the NRL.

Problem with developing English talent is as soon as you do rich clubs with flexible salary caps snap them up. How many players from hudds, salford, cas etc have been signed up by top 5 clubs? Hardly creates an incentive to invest in developing players. We are just starting to see the fruits of our jnr labours at HKR and sure enough the vultures are circling.