In context I arn't actually failing to see anything, I simply posted what Mr Lennaghan proposes which is a return to the same as what has allready failed.

With the same teams and the same old p&r we know it failed in the past and know it will fail in the future as the gap as you say is too wide, enter the yo yo boom and bust scenario again, it's staggers the imagination that anyone assosciated with rubgy league can even think of that as a way forward and worst case undermines their entire credibility.

The new proposals are a result of trying to learn from the past and not repeat the same mistakes and as a result of a full game review that advised a full game solution taking into account the Watkins report and advice from people from within the game and sporting experts who have an unbiased view such as Brian Barwick.

It is claimed that this will fail with countless speculated reasons why it will fail without it even being tried.

If anyone claims to have insight like this and can fortell the future so with such certainty can they please tell me my lottery numbers for this week.

Back to reality.
Regardless of what we think or say at the moment there are two proposals on the table, the RFL based on the above mentioned full game review or back to the same old as per Mr Lennaghan.

With respect,take the Wigan glasses of for a moment and then choose.

a news paper with a biased view because their local club will get less funding if the majority of super league clubs get their way who would of guessed it.

How about you wait and actually see what the real proposal and business plan is? the funding what the RFL are proposing is worse than the benefit system in the UK.

Your turnover is very surprising. As a comparison, Leeds Rhinos turnover £10.3m.

I guess it shows the misguided who the biggest club in the British game is.

Perhaps Gary Hetherington actually knows a thing or two about how a Rugby League club should be run.

The words and proposals are Mr Lennaghans wherever it is printed so how can that be biased.

Everyone will have to wait for the outcome but what he would like to happen is clearly set out so I don't have to wait before commenting on it.

I'm actually saddened that he has said it because it offers no real plausable alternative and I hoped there would be something better put on the table from the leading man at such a leading club.

I actually think it will do his cause no good at all, the real critics will no doubt have a field day with this as it is Déjà vu and it will not be taken seriously.

I already agreed simple P&R is stupid. No need to post the above again.



And the evidence it will succeed is where? The "speculated reasons it will fail" seem obvious pitfalls to me. If you are so in favour of the proposals tell me why my concerns are misplaced.

Saying why the proposals came about is no reason. I suspect you can't say my concerns are misplaced.



It's nothing to do with foretelling the future. Pointing out the pitfalls is simply questioning the proposals and you don't seem to have any answers so must be ignoring these concerns.



Neither are satisfactory because neither address the issues properly.

In 1991 when Wigan beat Leeds to clinch the Stones Bitter Championship (Mission impossible) they received £44K.

In 2013 for winning sponsorless Superleague they received £30K.

Is that progress?

Is it me being a cynical old barsteward, but the more i read about this the more i feel the issue is with Nigel Wood and that the club chairmen simply have no confidence in the bloke.

He has sent a cover letter to the RFL to set a meeting about the subjects they would like to discuss after the world cup, What the news paper is trying to persuade people to believe like your self is that this is the plan agreed by majority of the clubs when truly its only a subject letter. People will find out the business plan/model the clubs have discussed and agreed upon (more than likely it will be more than 1 page).

But even the championship clubs must know that they don't deserve more money, the only real money coming in to rugby league in this country is the TV money and that is purely from the 14 clubs in super league it makes no sense to why clubs who don't even contribute should be awarded more money when the 14 super league clubs are struggling.

FYI Ian lenegan is more of an astute business man than me or your self so i wouldn't disagree to hard at what he suggests when it comes to the administration and set up of the ruling body.

very much so if he had any dignity he would step down instead of forcing the clubs to drag it through this way.

most successful, higher average attendance and generally more famous would suggest wigan.

And just what were Brian Barwick's credentials to be Chair of the RFL come to that? A lifetime spent around football. Does he have ANY interest in Rugby League at all?

I listened to him plugging his latest book on Football on Five Live this summer and throughout a lengthy interview he didn't mention Rugby League once? With so-called friends like this who needs enemies.

For me Barwick and Wood are both incompetent. Get someone in who can sell the game to sponsors. To do that you need an appreciation of WHAT IT IS you are selling.

Two out of three trophies, and our chairman upsetting everybody.... Its like déjà vu all over again..