Valid point, I should have said something along the lines of in comparison with the UK and the percentage of players compared with other sports in that country. But I do believe their wealth of talent and depth is the difference on why we can't follow in suit like Aus.



That's exactly it. I really like Cas, especially the Jungle, great atmosphere, real RL ground. I just feel out of the rest of the teams which are on the corridor, themselves and Salford have brought the least to the competition IMO. Good point about Salford's signings, have to agree with the odd shock here and there too, but for me they will be in and around 8th but not much higher. Different catchment area to others of Greater Manchester but from going to school in Salford, RL wasn't even played and you hardly even heard a mention of the club anywhere. This for me is down to the club's hierarchy and no-one else. I understand with City and United a stones throw away, Manc is a tough nut for a RL club to crack but maybe things will change with the new stadium at Barton?



Again I have to agree to an extent, that RL will never be as big as football. But I do believe we have to product to be bigger than RU and that for me should be a long term goal. Unfortunately, until the game becomes far more competitive internationally, I don't believe we will be able to compete. That's a totally different debate again...



Definitely SL is more competitive now than ever, but no way over here can a team be wooden spoonists then make a GF the next year which the NRL has. That's the point I was trying to get across. If the league and the talent keeps developing at the current pace I believe we won't be too far from this, but then again I still think that 14 teams is too many for SL over here currently.

Wakey for me have to go, not financially stable, poor support, tipped to finish bottom this year, plus they are in a already densely populated RL region so offering nothing in terms of expansion for the game.

To the short-sighted, absent-minded cretin who typed that;
I seem to recall a team that played at Wilderspool that were in exactly the same position, until the local council bailed the club out. If that council had'nt have done so, then that club would have been like Widnes and Halifax.

Get a solid foundation in the lower leagues (this is the RL backbone) and for gods sake, bring back promotion and relagation, and give the promoted teams a chance that way. I have no doubt that Featherstone could have held their own in SL last season.

Agree that the Super League has changed the face of RL completely but since the franchise system was introduced it has suceeded only in promoting Crusaders to the top tier years before they were ready. The process in my view is a veil which the RFL use in an attempt to expand the game. If you look at Crusaders finances it clearly doesn't work. The whole idea was to make sure we had the right clubs with the right financial set up in SL. With Crus and possibly Wakey starting the season on -4 this doesn't reflect well on the clubs nor on the RFL.

Just because two clubs are having serious problems soon after franchising was introduced doesn't mean that is the direct result of franchising. Who's to say that without franchising we wouldn't have had more clubs struggling? In fact, go back through recent and older history and RL clubs suffering off the field problems is par for the course. Again, ourselves being no exception prior to the stability and security we now enjoy thanks to a) being well run, b) the new stadium and c) Simon Moran (in that order).

The idea of franchising wasn't just about finances. It was about forcing clubs to think about their long term futures in all areas of their business: facilities, player production and development etc. All promotion and relegation did was to encourage short term spending.

Franchising has only just started - we haven't completed the first term yet, so let's give it a bit more of a chance before giving up on it?

Agree with your thoughts about out club Seb, our clubs success and the move to the HJ has been fantastic and shows what can be done. Finance is a large part of the process and without a crystal ball
no one could have predicted what would have happened to the Crusaders. I believe they have become the attention of a process which is short-sighted and slanted outside of the heartland area for no other reason than just that. Widnes (despite their problems before the last franchise announcement) should have been included as they had successfully filled the criteria in all aspects except one which they couldn't change.

Several flaws to your post.

Even if you cut the number of Super League clubs to 10, you'll just end up with the same number of Aussies at each club. Meaning less opportunity for the young English players, and many of the overseas players do add to our competition we just need to strike the right balance. Also, a vibrant Rugby League scene needs as many professional teams as possible, providing encuragement and chances for young players to establish themselves. Finally, once many of the pre-2008 players start to move on the number of overseas players will reduce.

Typical elitist comment, that shouldn't be appearing on a forum one of the games great underachieving clubs!!!!!

I saw an article a while back in 1 of the papers, with the following idea;

Two 10 team leagues, Lancashire and yaaarrrkshire, with Catalan, Crusaders & London being divided.

You would play each team in your league twice, and each team in the opposing league once, therefore still having a 27 game season. At the end of the season, the top 4 from each league goes into a play-off system.

This idea would promote a few clubs with alot of history back into top flight RL, and would generate more local derbies within the season.

Sky could even then expand a little, replacing the thursday night game with a superleague game !!!!

Any thoughts on this idea?

Nail on the head there.

Our board really should come with a Sally Cinnamon health warning, that many people get caught out...

RL is not big enough or rich enough to sustain two full time divisions. Nor is it rich enough to sustain two divisions (one FT one PT) close enough financially so that clubs can swap places easily. In addition, it appears that precious few clubs are run anything like responsibly. Franchising helps to keep clubs in check and I don't see there's any other sensible alternative. As SEB notes, it's to save clubs from themselves. Now, the way it's been dealt with is hardly ideal but that's another argument.

As for this utter drivel that all the RFL cares about is expansion and doesn't care about the heartlands; get real. Yes, expansion is an important aspect but the RFL are acutely aware of the value of the established clubs and their importance to the game as a whole. All this crap about 'we should have a team based in Cumbria' or 'I'd like to see Featherston given a shot'. Why? Because they've been there a hundred years? Leigh are an excellent example of a heartland club that got promoted and died on their . Everything about them was a joke in Superleague from the stadium, to the team, to the nonsense with the squad numbers (Darren Abram...sigh). And why? Because they had about 3 months to prepare!!!

Similarly, widnes - for years they've been banging on and on and on about their history. Well, for years, that's all they had. Now, having been given 3 years to get their house in order, they are seen as automatics for promotion and most would say that will make a really good stab at SL.

Franchsing is here to stay.