The report below states that 6 clubs (including Wire) have walked out of the discussions on the restructuring proposals from the RFL. www.loverugbyleague.com/news_136 ... eting.html The sticking point appears to be the commercial case that underpins the proposals (as well as governance). As i mentioned previously, the RFL have not published data to show what anticipated revenues will be generated in the new structure, or in business parlance a 'business plan'. I assume the governance issue is who sits on the committee that runs the new structure and what voting power they will have.

The report below states that 6 clubs (including Wire) have walked out of the discussions on the restructuring proposals from the RFL. www.loverugbyleague.com/news_136 ... eting.html The sticking point appears to be the commercial case that underpins the proposals (as well as governance). As i mentioned previously, the RFL have not published data to show what anticipated revenues will be generated in the new structure, or in business parlance a 'business plan'. I assume the governance issue is who sits on the committee that runs the new structure and what voting power they will have.

The 888 system is totally bonkers. As it is, we have regular season fixtures with half empty grounds, does it really seem likely that Wigan vs Batley is going to draw enough fans or television money to make the reorganisation of the league financially viable? There's not really enough money in the sport to support the 14 SL teams as it is, and the low turn out at televised games, particularly the first round of play offs or the CC quarters, should scream to the RFL that fans actually want fewer games with higher quality. Whatever gets said on here, it's the money fans bring in that really speaks to the desire for change and given how poor the attendances are for the play off system as it is, fans clearly aren't interested in a more convoluted system.

Can't we just have a 12 team SL, with the top team winning a more meaningful trophy, a top 4 or 5 play off at the end of it and 1 or 2 up/down promotion relegation? I don't see other successful sports with a messy structure to their sport like we're proposing.

Looking at today you can see an almighty split coming.....

In all honesty there isn't enough talent within the game to sustain 2 leagues of 12 teams without in 2 years time discussing on the forum how big the gulf is between club number 1 & club 24 . It will be very similar to what gets discussed on here every week at present & the more of our players that get tempted Down Under ,the worse the situation will get.

Are we wasting our time and should we simply accept the status quo?

If we consider how many spectator sports have improved their position in the long established pecking order, there are many if indeed any. Soccer in the USA and American Football over here have had their moments, yet in spite of the many millions invested, they're still minority sports. I don't know what established the pecking order, but it does seem very difficult to change.

If the 6 are worried about money just go join the RFU. Take you're selfish greed there.

This criticism of the 6 "rebel" clubs is really starting to irk me. From my understanding of the articles I've read, these clubs want a review of the governance and commercialism of the game alongside any discussion or colossal league restructuring. Now surely this is simply commonsense? Let's not forget that any restructuring here is massive. It will change the sport. If clubs aren't happily waving it through then they must have serious concerns. Already posters on here have highlighted issues with the RFL's proposal statement, a lack of evidence and information on commercial facets I think were the points raised. If we mere mortals can see issues then why is it so unreasonable to think professional clubs can too?

For too long the RFL have been conducting their own annual reviews and declaring themselves as 'excellent'. There's no accountability or transparency coming out of Red Hall. Off the top of my head, just some of the recent failures (IMO) from the RFL

Isn't it funny how Hetherington was all for a top-down review of the RFL in 2011 after the Crusaders debacle. Suddenly Leeds are the RFL's golden boys and he's happy to turn a blind eye. Also interesting to note that, alongside Leeds, none of the clubs 'saved' by the RFL have raised a peep...

For Hetherington to release a statement calling these 6 clubs "selfish" and "self-interested" is nothing short of disgusting.

*Edit* I don't want the 8:8:8 structure. I don't struggle to understand it, I just find it stupid and convoluted and completely unnecessary when there are simpler and more productive ways to improve RL.

Do you seriously believe the 6 clubs are worried about money and it's as simple as that? Moran, Lenegan, Davy, Pearson, these are rich men at profitable clubs.

LOL

Andy Gatcliffe made Warrington's position clear back in early August: www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/spo ... ney__RFL_/ I'm guessing since then the RFL haven't provided any answers to the questions he posed. Certainly the review document they issued didn't. They have also failed to deliver a taker of the naming rights to the World Cup despite it receiving exposure on free to view tv channel - the RFL is not fit for purpose.

Andy Gatcliffe made Warrington's position clear back in early August: www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/spo ... ney__RFL_/ I'm guessing since then the RFL haven't provided any answers to the questions he posed. Certainly the review document they issued didn't. They have also failed to deliver a taker of the naming rights to the World Cup despite it receiving exposure on free to view tv channel - the RFL is not fit for purpose.

Appreciate that Huddersfield are not currently profitable, but Davy is reportedly well off and has invested significantly into them.

Significantly is an understatement isn't it?.With a "being generous' 5k home supporters thers no way could they be anything other than bottom dwellers without his money

I trust the people who own these clubs to make better commercial decisions than Brian Barwick.

To be fair to the RLWC2013 team (whilst technically part of the RFL and reporting to Nigel Wood), they are a seperate team who have done a great job and never intended getting a headline sponsor. They told us this 18 months ago. They feel the World Cup is a big brand in its own right and works better through attracting a range of sponsors - which to be fair is exactly what they have done.