Us, Wigan, Warrington, Widnes & Leeds apparently

There is a general opinion that clubs who have financial issues would not be in favour as it could further imbalance the league and potentially push them towards relegation.
Therefore no suprise with Bradford (who represented them?), Wakefield (and Ms Hetherington does not like Koucash),
London, Castleford and Hull KR.
Suprised with Hull who are in the position to benefit from getting such a player.

I'm a little suprised if those are the clubs which voted. I cant imagine both Hull clubs and Huddersfield would take much more convincing. I believe Bradford were represented by Robbie Hunter-Paul, therefore when their new man takes over he may change the Bulls stance.

2 of the 9 who voted against will be relegated at the end of the year so the voting dynamics will have narrowed to 5/7.

Just read the same thing myself, I cant imagine it will take too long before we see this implemented.

This will eventually get through its all just a matter of getting rid of the dead wood. Wakey, London or the Bulls. St Helens must be in one bad financially way if they voted against. SL has been run by the poor clubs for too long. Time for the ones with ambition and backing to take it over.

Saints aren't in a bad financial way. We are, from a financial perspective, one of the strongest clubs in the league, we need to clear our stadium overheads, but we should be posting profits within the next two years. That aside, mcmanus isn't short of a few bob (he rejected koukashs rumoured offer of saints I'll put it that way). Our chairman just believes in "sustainable growth" and that clubs should get more from central funding then they spend on salaries.

Or put another way he wants to be a big fish in a small pond.

I can understand the self-interest of some clubs ( though the governance structure that permits this is a disgrace), but the lack of ambition from others (Saints, Hull) is an embarrassment to the game.

At first I thought Koukash was a bit of a clown, and I felt sorry for Salford fans, thinking he was showing you up. It turns out he's willing to put forward some new ideas, and it that shakes up the status quo then it could be a good thing. I fear for the future of the sport at the minute; regression and small-minded self-interest isn't going to help, and won't lead to the sport's future success.

I can't say I'm aware of any rumour as mentioned in your post.
It did seem that Both Dr K and your chairman were at the point of rlExchanging Pleasantriesrl at one point but not only do they disagree on rlThe TV Dealrl but your chairman also went all loquacious about the rlpromotion/relegation decisionrl

I can only conclude that they do disagree and I just wonder how it is I read forums which hint at Dr K being,ahem,'mouthy'.

Should be fun tomorrow night.As long as they both agree on the Red Devils being worthy winners

Quote: Red-Devils-PAW "I can't say I'm aware of any rumour as mentioned in your post. It did seem that Both Dr K and your chairman were at the point of rlExchanging Pleasantriesrl at one point but not only do they disagree on rlThe TV Dealrl but your chairman also went all loquacious about the rlpromotion/relegation decisionrl I can only conclude that they do disagree and I just wonder how it is I read forums which hint at Dr K being,ahem,'mouthy'. Should be fun tomorrow night.As long as they both agree on the Red Devils being worthy winners It's one of those perpetual rumours that like to follow saints fans around. I've heard it enough times to have the no smoke without fire philosophy, but I'm still skeptical about it all. All stems from here - www.sportsanswerbank.com/Sports- ... 24402.html It was then revealed it was led by our recently sacked chief exec Sean maguire - who had a "local rece horse owner" as the major backer. After it was revealed McManus was the one who "introduced" koukash to rugby league, people put 2 and 2 together. They are (or at least were!) good friends, who obviously have differing views in the direction of the sport! To the suggestion eamon wouldn't be able to compete financially: whilst he's not in the same league of wealth as koukash, he knows the magical bank trick of making money disappear and reappear whenever it suits him. I'd certainly say he's in the top 3/4 wealthiest owners in the league - he's just very prudent with it, and doesn't throw it about which means other fans underestimate him a bit imo. But he's put up £700,000+ a year to support the club through our move to LP, (as well as at least part fund said move) and not blinked an eye lid about it, and during that time all our directors loans (some dating back to the early 90s) magically disappeared as well - he does alright Also, I'm sure both would agree, let the best team win

Quote: Red-Devils-PAW "I can't say I'm aware of any rumour as mentioned in your post. It did seem that Both Dr K and your chairman were at the point of rlExchanging Pleasantriesrl at one point but not only do they disagree on rlThe TV Dealrl but your chairman also went all loquacious about the rlpromotion/relegation decisionrl I can only conclude that they do disagree and I just wonder how it is I read forums which hint at Dr K being,ahem,'mouthy'. Should be fun tomorrow night.As long as they both agree on the Red Devils being worthy winners It's one of those perpetual rumours that like to follow saints fans around. I've heard it enough times to have the no smoke without fire philosophy, but I'm still skeptical about it all. All stems from here - www.sportsanswerbank.com/Sports- ... 24402.html It was then revealed it was led by our recently sacked chief exec Sean maguire - who had a "local rece horse owner" as the major backer. After it was revealed McManus was the one who "introduced" koukash to rugby league, people put 2 and 2 together. They are (or at least were!) good friends, who obviously have differing views in the direction of the sport! To the suggestion eamon wouldn't be able to compete financially: whilst he's not in the same league of wealth as koukash, he knows the magical bank trick of making money disappear and reappear whenever it suits him. I'd certainly say he's in the top 3/4 wealthiest owners in the league - he's just very prudent with it, and doesn't throw it about which means other fans underestimate him a bit imo. But he's put up £700,000+ a year to support the club through our move to LP, (as well as at least part fund said move) and not blinked an eye lid about it, and during that time all our directors loans (some dating back to the early 90s) magically disappeared as well - he does alright Also, I'm sure both would agree, let the best team win

Lets not forget that Salford are a million miles behind the rest of the established top clubs with regard to infrastructure, youth development, fan base etc...
We have an owner who wants to get us to the top and quick.
Yes, people keep throwing the evolution card at him, but ffs how long have Wigan/Saints/Leeds been throwing money that they had at youth development?
We've not had a pot to in for the last 30 years.
The rest of the league are scared of him and what he might do.
Good on him I say. If he keeps asking the questions eventually he will get the right answers.
I'm bringing 5 Wanderers tomorrow night to see what standing on a terrace and supping ale is like again.
S.A.L.F.O.R.D

it was the correct decision.
Can't blame the Dr. for trying though

I can see there being a Union raid by the doc now.

For years, the RFL has been obsessed with prudency. Some might say rightly so, as so many clubs have been to the brink of extinction. In my opinion, that scenario will continue until, at some point, one or more clubs may become extinct.

There have been two major lines of policy. The first has been to control the salary spending of the clubs, while the second has been the aim of increasing participation, the basis of the Sport England funding which was cut back two years ago because the targets had not been achieved.

The two things go hand in hand. I believe that increased participation results from competition at the highest level. As it stands, we can all have a good punt at the top six and the bottom six. That's because the outcomes of many matches are relatively predictable. Imagine if there were 14 (or 12)clubs where the outcome of their matches was not so predictable? Where almost every match in Super League was highly competitive and the winner not decided until late into the match?

Those matches would become very attractive. Not only to the diehard fans, but to many on the fringes. Attendances would boom and the urge to take some part in such a great sport would increase participation. Sport England's support would be assured, but more importantly, turnstile revenue would be assured, providing the funding for the necessary increases to the players funding.

To get there, we need to take bold steps to introduce more funding into the game at the outset, through release of the salary cap and the attraction of more businessmen like Marwan Koukash.

If we don't change, we will continue to limp along the bottom of the sporting pond. It will only be by accepting innovative suggestions that we will learn to swim.

Many years ago I regarded my first love, rugby league, as a professional sport run by amateurs, while rugby union was an amateur (?) sport run by professionals. The only thing that has changed in all that time is that Union players are now openly paid.

Quote: tank123 "This will eventually get through its all just a matter of getting rid of the dead wood. Wakey, London or the Bulls. St Helens must be in one bad financially way if they voted against. SL has been run by the poor clubs for too long. Time for the ones with ambition and backing to take it over.'" As long as this man is on the board at Saints we will have no trouble with money, trust me. www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-0 ... rader.html

Quote: tank123 "This will eventually get through its all just a matter of getting rid of the dead wood. Wakey, London or the Bulls. St Helens must be in one bad financially way if they voted against. SL has been run by the poor clubs for too long. Time for the ones with ambition and backing to take it over.'" As long as this man is on the board at Saints we will have no trouble with money, trust me. www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-0 ... rader.html