We often complain about the lack of publicity and column inches for RL, the late release of team sheets does not help.

In Rugby union teams are named at least 24 hours before a game, giving the press more material to work with. How annoying must it be for a sportsdesk to preview a game and then find that cloak and dagger operations by a club led them up the garden path and one of the players their write up focused on was never going to play.

It's the same for both teams so I don't see why we shouldn't do it. Occasionally someone will pick up a late injury and miss out, that is unavoidable but as long as teams are not abusing the system and deliberately misleading everyone no action would be necessary.

On a related note, it is ridiculous that coaches in the Championship do not know which dual registration players they might be up again, it should most certainly be mandatory to name the dual reg players being used 48 hours in advance, with no changes permissable. Dual Reg is already an advantage to the team receiving the players, why should they then be able to spring it on the opposition with an hours notice.

As things stand Superleague teams have to release a 19 man squad 48 hours before a match.

Sounds like an undercover local rag writer with a chip on his shoulder to me this.

I'd like to see it. It gets on my nerves when you pay out a load of money, drive for hours get to the game and find out Sam Tomkins or O'Loughlin aren't playing.

Also the press/publicity reasons.

Absolutely.

Team sheets inevitably would be open to change in the 24 hours before kick off if a player goes down ill or injured so it would be little better than the existing system of squad lists. Anyone who thinks this is what's holding back RL from getting decent media coverage is delusional. As you say it sounds like someone who just wants to make an easy job even easier.

So we already provide squads earlier than RU, as was pointed out upthread.

How often has this happened? How many hacks have been "annoyed"?



Do you even know why the squads have to be published in advance?

Leeds squad published 2.27 pm today rlhttps://www.therhinos.co.uk/news/22986.phprl

Castleford squad published today rlhttps://www.castigers.com/article.php?id No timestamp on the page but it's been available all afternoon.

So both 19 man squads are known well over 48 hours in advance as required. No problem as far as I can see, unless you want the coaches to have to second guess weather and pitch conditions two days ahead?

Then don't support a one man team.

Releasing team news before the game will not help with the publicity of the game.

Admittedly, for internationals it does, but can you tell me that announcing whether Jon Wilkin or Lance Hohaia is going to cause media interest to skyrocket?

Indeed, as it is at the moment should be perfect. 48 hours allows journalists to speculate but sadly, I don't think any editors would devote column inches to such discussions.

So what happens if for example Wigan name their 17 on Thursday to play Hull & O'Loughlin is named in the team, only for you to get to the ground on Friday night to find out he's pulled out injured?

running the rlfans fantasy rugby league we have noticed inconsistencies in the reporting of team sheets & scorers, I would have thought a good plan for the RFL would be to have the official teams online pretty much straight after the game, in order to give a place the media can get consistent information.

Ok not many people think it's a good idea.

What about the second point though, it should be known 24 hours before kick off which dual registration players you are facing, and if one has to pull out he's replaced from the host club's squad rather than drafting in another dual reg.

As things stand the sport accepts that there is a degree of second guessing what the team will be, especially at Championship level where no squads are named at the 48 hour stage, but when the number of dual reg players could be as many as five it gives an unfair advantage to the club benefitting from dual registration.