I think from your posts that you haven't any experience of other than SL and most of your comments to pyeman's post could also be directed at SL clubs. If SL clubs are struggling with the Sky handouts they get then how do you think Championship clubs manage to keep going?

You talk about why should central funds be given to clubs who don't pay their bills which is exactly what happened when London Broncos became Harlequins, isn't it?

You need to get into the real world and stop knocking the good men (and women) who work damned hard to keep the game of rugby league going outside the comfort zone that is SL.

Ahh so you don't know then. Well you could just have said. I'm not desperate to know what this amount is. But you orignally posted CC and CC1 get SKY money. But you don't know the figures so you were just presuming this is the case.

No. It's not even what happened when London Broncos' (not the club) parent company liquidated, and the club played out the rest of the season as London Broncos. There was no money given to the club. By anyone. And certainly not by the RFL.

Still … however many times that is pointed out, they myth lives on: it's almost as if some fans want it to have been the case.

Give it a couple of years, it'll change to "when the RFL gave £73gazillion to Celtic Crusaders".

It's the flatcapper version of Creation theory, no matter how much you show it up for being bullsh*t they still won't let go of it.

£100k – subject to strings regarding a full time professioinal chief executive and marketing operation, iirc.

Apart from the money they get to appoint certain fulltime backroom staff what money do they get? how much money do championship clubs get that they can decide how it is spent? Why is the idea of putting more lower league games on sky ridiculous? last time i saw the figures they were getting about 60% of the viewing figures for saturday sl games, are you seriously telling me that sky cant make a profit with vieing figures like this? its far from there least viewed sporting entertainment.

Only a handful in of clubs in sl would actually need that 75k and it would do far more down in the lower leagues than it would in sl. how the hell do you know what that money will be spent on? and if that money is used to keep the club afloat in hard times then it is money well spent. You dont think better playing standards and more local players would result in more attending and more player sponsorship? how strange. And in a league where the cap is 300k 75 k or a proportion of it will make a differance, its the equivelent of a sl club being given several hundred thousand.

Plenty of sl clubs have run up debts but have had sky money to help pay them off, something which championship clubs do not get.

So I assume you were around when your club was bailed out via the so-called "merger"with Sheffield?

You reckon taking £75k out of the annual budget of all SL clubs wouldn't have an adverse impact on their finances?

Or are you suggesting that SL clubs should cut their cloth accordingly so they don't need the £75k but that the lower leagues shouldn't have to work in the same way?

or when Murphy took over at a dead club called Huddersfield, playing at a dump called Fartown before gates of a couple of hundred or when Bradford went belly up and clubs rallied to help, or Fax, or HKR or HullFC,

Its luvvin idiots like this that P off real fans of the game.

Thanks for that.

Out of interest, is all the 100k from the money SKY pay?

I'm asking that championship clubs get there fair share of tv monies, when we are talking about about something like 7% of the money thats very little compared to how many tune into see championship games on sky. When the next sky deal is negotiated i would like the extra money to be split 80% sl, 15% championship, 5% championship one and actually see all british rl teams (at a proffesional level) benefit from a product that they are all helping to sell.

Some on here seem dead set against doing anything to help the lower leagues for whatever reason, me i want the sport do everything it can to strengthen all clubs, its a sad endictmnet of our sport that such views are in the minority.

If Sky lost the rights to SL in 2010 (say to a free-to-air broadcaster) but retained the rights to games at levels below SL, how many people do you think would retain their Sky Sports subscriptions just so they could watch Championship and Championship One games?

SL brings the overwhelming majority of rugby league orientated subscribers to Sky, so it receives the overwhelming majority of the funds from the TV rights.