I do find it amusing how people always crow on about SL clubs having an advantage when they clearly forget that the NRL sides have a far larger salary cap and therefore can attract better players. If Leeds had a salary cap similar to Manly, imagine the players they'd have (as well as other top SL clubs).

They'd have exactly the same squad quality, but they'd be paying them more. A larger salary cap won't increase the number of top quality players we produce or, to any great extent, the number of players coming over from Aus.

Your forgetting Australia just produce better players.

Nonsense.

Paying a player more money won't make them a better player. But being able to offer other players more money will either attract them to your club or retain them (i.e. we've just seen some players leave to union and the NRL).

I'm not saying I want the cap to increase (it would create a huge gulf in class between top and bottom, as the better clubs will attract the better players from the less successful clubs). But to say they'd have exactly the same squad is ludicrous.

And? This is club rugby, not rep rugby. If you've got a bigger wallet, you can bring in better players even if you can't produce as many.

Regarding Leeds World Club Challenge victory, is 2 SL games really an adequate preparation for such a game? May be Leeds need 10 SL games in preparation to get their defence bob on . After all SL is by far inferior to the NRL, so we keep being told. Unlike a few people on this topic, the Manly coach has no excuses www.therhinos.co.uk/news/18747.php Well Done Leeds

Regarding Leeds World Club Challenge victory, is 2 SL games really an adequate preparation for such a game? May be Leeds need 10 SL games in preparation to get their defence bob on . After all SL is by far inferior to the NRL, so we keep being told. Unlike a few people on this topic, the Manly coach has no excuses www.therhinos.co.uk/news/18747.php Well Done Leeds

No they dont. Its a myth, they dont play at WCC intensity week on week. They have games which arent intense and arent at a high quality, they have games which are pretty poor. They have good teams and they have bad teams, they have games where they dont have to try as hard. They just dont have as many of them as we do.

There isnt a massive difference between the best teams in the NRL and the best teams in SL, in a one off match any of Leeds, St's, Wigan, Wire could beat any of the top NRL teams.

Yes they have good teams, Melbourne, Wests, etc.

Yes they have bad teams, as I've already alluded to, Sharks, Titans et al.

But you won't get me to believe out top clubs are on a par with the Aussies, in fact.







You are Nigel Wood, and I claim my £5 .

Indeed, NRL clubs play at an NRL intensity level week in, week out which is higher than pre-season warm-up fixtures including the WCC.


This is correct to a degree, notwithstanding the superior differences in quality, intensity and competition apparent in the NRL in comparison to SL. Good teams and bad teams in the NRL are transient in nature due to the intense competition. Nine different clubs have been NRL champions in the past 14 seasons. 12 different clubs have made the Grand Final in the same period. Of the 4 teams that haven't, they've all qualified for the play-offs at one stage or another. A bad NRL team one season can be a good team and Grand Finalists or Champions a year or two later. Roosters went from wooden spooners in 2009 to Grand Finalists in 2010. Wests Tigers won the comp the first time they qualified for the play-offs. Penrith went from wooden spooners in 2001, 3rd from bottom in 2002 to champions in 2003. Titans finished 3rd in 2009, 4th in 2010 and wooden spooners in 2011.


But only if those fixtures are played in the UK under the current format and at a time corresponding to pre-season warm-up games for NRL teams. Should the WCC be expanded on a home and away basis with an on-season or off-season level playing field format applying equally to both, the results will be an embarrassment for the SL clubs on a scale of 1997 all over again.

The other top clubs would also spend up to the cap, so the real top quality players would be just as evenly split as they are now. Being able to cream off some of the better players from the lower clubs would certainly increase squad depth, but it wouldn't make a significant difference to the quality of the first 17 the top sides are putting out.

So, in the game actually played, the Super League team won but in the games played in your imagination the NRL teams win? It’s really difficult to win an argument when you are arguing against facts with opinions isn’t it

So the rich get richer and the poor please themselves. The less successful clubs already get "cherry picked" and you are advocating creaming off more players.
That may held a faux WCC, but will not help the domestic game.

Er, I think you need to read my post(s) again. I'm advocating no such thing.