pop along and have your say and join group ! www.facebook.com/groups/368708236535465/

pop along and have your say and join group ! www.facebook.com/groups/368708236535465/

I was expecting something like this to come along.

I've joined it for what its worth.

somebodys got to try something because them at red hall dont listen to the paying punters !

It's no good saying this isn't working and that isn't working but you need to say why and what should be done instead. Anyone can moan about everything g the RFL do. This place is full of 'em.

Put a proper argument and credible alternatives forward and you'll get the interest of people who matter rather than a load of bleating sheep.

The RFL is in Yorkshire so a load of bleating sheep probably would get their attention

While I agree with that to an extent, the fact remains that the RFL should expect to be criticised and questioned over what it does and given its appalling track record it can't expect to hide from public scrutiny - an example would be the secret loan to Bradford Bulls by the RFL and the obvious questions of conflict of interest and the integrity of the competition which come out of that.

As well as getting them to perform better we need them to explain their behaviour. As far as I am aware they have issued no explanation of the loan - if they have I'd love to see it. They are now proposing to play Bradford's players' wages - I don't think they've done this for other clubs? Is this because they are biased towards Bradford (which is why they supported them financially in the past via the loan), or is it simply because they want to keep their tenant in business so they can keep paying the rent on Odsal? These are questions the RFL needs to address, with no obvious answers that will not invite further criticism of the RFL.

We also need them to admit to their mistakes (such as the licensing of a number of clubs which have gone bust soon after being given a clean bill of health by the RFL).

Yes the process needs to be constructive but the only way the RFL will learn from their errors is if they are open about them and tell us what they are going to do to stop it from happening again - the silence on the licensing process is deafening.

I was going to say something similar. Who, or what would replace the RFL, and even so, how do you gain effective control of a sport that is owned by them?

The RFL aren't proposing to pay the Bulls wages. They are advancing the next instalment of the Sky money a week or two earlier to the Administrator.

I don't think it will be possible or necessary to replace the RFL. But management/personnel changes, root and branch, are essential, along with sweeping changes in policy, attitude and ambition. Money in RL comes from Sky, rich owners/backers and fans. The fans have no voice currently, and the only way we could exert influence in future is to convince the Sky bosses and the money men that it's in their interests to force changes.

Interesting. I made the mistake of relying on the BBC.

If that is what is happening then I have less of a problem with it given the state the Bulls are in, though it is still a form of lending from the RFL (it's like a pay day loan).

The Premier League did the same when Portsmouth went belly-up a few seasons back and advanced their TV money so they could get to the end of the season and fulfil their fixtures. Probably better for everyone concerned including the other clubs if they can make it to the end of the season and then take the fallout from there.

The RFl as as organisation is not the problem, it's the people currently running the RFL, Wood in particular. Put competent management in and it should work fine. I would also like to see some involvement from the fans, the players and the club chairmen though. Perhaps Jon Wilkin, in his 1leagu3 role, for one, and maybe alternate one of the chairmen on, say, a two-year rotation. For the fans, perhaps the spokesman of a supporters club, again rotating between clubs on a two-year basis?

Just a thought.

Did anyone see Back chat last night - interesting comment made about super league sponsorship being 50 trucks rattling round the countryside but no money and yet someone who was prepared to sponsor super league to the tune of £750,000 has taken their cash elsewhere and are now sponsoring some darts comp.

I don't think anyone should knock Stobart, it's not their fault and as the old saying goes any publicity is good publicity but why would the RFL not take 750k when it was on offer?

One thing that did make me laugh out loud was when Rod Studd - who looks like he uses the same chip shop as Nigel Wood - quoted from the Leeds match programme from last week (I think) where Gary Hetherington described Tony Smith as the Gerald Ratner of super league