So having a number of hopeless/hapless teams makes for great entertainment? We need to sell a product, not run a charity for failed clubs, they can't be carried. A smaller league would mean games with more intensity, and help the national game too.

Sort yourselves out or hit the road.

And make the competition even more predictable than it already is

2 tier super league is the only solution to fix a litany of issues in RL

Top Tier - Wigan, Leeds, Saints, Wire, Catalan, Hull, Hull KR, Huddersfield, Bradford, Wakefield

2nd Tier - London, Castleford, Salford, Widnes, Leigh, Halifax, Barrow, Sheffield, Featherstone, AN Other (Toulouse/ Crusaders whoever gets the franchise.

This way, those ambitious clubs in championship 1 (the ones that actually stand out and should be considered for SL aren't excluded, and compete at the right level - lets be honest, Leigh, Halifax, Barrow, Sheffield, Featherstone, could all compete at the same level of London, Castleford, Salford, Widnes and the lesser lights of SL would not be bankrupting themselves to try and compete with the wigans and leeds etc.

To stop those criticising that tier two is a re-branded championship, all teams compete in the same league (20 team league like premiership football). This is the clever bit so stop with it...................

Each team plays home and away to clubs in their tier, and each team in their tier again - but this time 4 home, 4 away, and 1 neutral - magic weekend? on a drawn fixture list like the NRL/ or an odds and evens basis (27 fixtures). In addition, Tier 2 teams play only at Home to half the tier 1 teams each (an additional 5 fixtures at home to give a better chance of competing and five marque fixtures with bumper gates to market).

Wins against tier 1 teams equal 4 competition points (2 for a draw) - Wins against tier two teams equal 2 points (and 1pt for a draw) to reflect tier 1 clubs have a harder draw. This way all but one or two teams from each tier would stop in the top 10/ bottom 10 where they were expected to finish - with only the top couple of tier 2 teams, overtaking the bottom couple of tier one teams. Ie/ the weakest tier 1 teams may only win 9/10 games giving roughly 40 points, while top tier two teams may win 20+ fixtures giving roughly 40+ points.

Any tier 2 teams finishing above tier 1 teams at the end of the season swap tiers for the next year - giving those top achieving perhaps 2 or 3 tier two teams an effective promotion, a more attractive fixture list, and opportunity down the line to go for a title- as they grow in a sustainable way.

Top 5 play off for the championship. Every game means something - Every team plays at a level that does not overstretch them, on and off the field, and top teams are not held back by the lower performing teams on and off the field as they now are.

Franchising also stays with the bottom 2 tier two teams over 3 years potentially losing their licence to a championship team, which continues underneath, with only the remaining clubs which realistically would struggle to run in SL anyway, so don't feel unfairly excluded like fax and leigh do.

Totally agree Sale and Salford as a separate entity is an accident waiting to go bust. Both are struggling and no way could Sale run that ground on their own and neither could Salford. Both need to man up bite the bullet and merge like Leeds have done with Union, Cricket and League.

How come so many sides owe the tax man now.

Leeds had to delay finishing one of their stands due to a bill, Wakey, Crusaders, HKR are in trouble as are a few more. Now is this due to non payment of national insurance contributions when clubs look like they have paid some off shore. Difference is that employer is responsible for paying it not the player. So they get a huge bill especially if its back dated. I know Glasgow Rangers had 9 million bill for that practise just before they went into administration.

As for Bradford look at the quality of their squad a decade ago compared to the last 5 years that now looks very dodgy to me and if any club has done what i think they have then they should have been in breach of the cap. Would love to see what the tax bill is for to se if i am correct.

Why not reduce the number of clubs to less than 12? Clearly reducing the number of games, will get more money into the game - that would remove an average of ~34k tickets at the DW and to make it back it's just a ~3k increase in crowd figures over the remaining games. And Sky would have less games on TV, so clearly viewing figures would rocket for the other games to help with the lost advertising revenue.

Maybe just 10 teams is the answer, Wigan would just need a capacity crowd every game to offset the lost revenue. And just maybe this would hold true for all others.

Awww, why bother lets just make it two leagues of 5 - Yorks & London v's Lancs & France to play a parallel play off season with a State of Origin winners at the end.

But seriously - where has this view of shrinking the league come from? Why do people think it's a good idea? Less games = less money, less teams = less players exposed to the top flight, shrinking the sport will grow the sport, going back to semi-pro will increase quality?

Don't forget the damage that the Harris debacle Bradford, this for me was the turning point of the club. Legal fees + compensation put too big a hole in the club, fair enough Leeds had a case but did it have to go so far?

You know looking back, Wigan must have been seriously sh*t to be in a relegation battle? FFS what were those muppets doing in the management meetings? Thank god IL came along and straightened it out...
Maybe the Wigan scare was a sign of things to come? Still, we turned it around maybe the others can, but sugar daddies are few and far between

That is 1 club many are struggling and its always a tax bill from the government. Something has been going on at most SL clubs. And some are now getting burnt. we gave the Bulls almost half a million for Fielden. Its more than just Harris that put them under.

Thats the thing, is IL a sugar daddy? From my limited knowledge, (apart from the initial purchase) all funds spent have been earned through the club and not by IL dipping into his personal wealth

It would be a real shame to see Salford go bust but we simply cannot keep helping out clubs who fail to help themselves....

it does make you wonder what accounting wizardry has been going on re tax for so many clubs to be in the $hit. i might ask the guys at work...

Leeds were supposedly doing a test case (think i am correct) on behalf of some SL clubs. Now since then 5 sides have gone and had a tax bill. If they have got round the cap then those sides should be looked at. If they were getting put into admin due to non payment to a company then it would not smell as bad as it does. But all owe the HMS tax i know they collect taxes on various stuff but its like a domino effect atm one gets put in admin gets out and another goes in. Salford, Bulls, Wakey, Crusaders, Widnes etc.

No, having number of hopeless teams doesnt make for great entertainment. But the point is they arent hopeless, they just arent where we need them to be. And yes we have a product to sell, but that product is the competition and more clubs of a higher quality improves the competition and as such improves the product we are selling, benefiting everyone.
Im a Leeds fan, we are doing ok.

It was not directed at you personally... But yes you are doing ok, produce mediocre performances all year, and get crowned champions in an end of season "cup knock out". This will do more to affect attendances in the long run than a reduction of games. We need games with intensity to produce good players and a terrific product. Leeds fans have been screaming for the coaches head all season... Enjoy the race to mediocrity

It hasnt resulted in a reduction in attendances for the past 7 when only 2 sides who finished top in the qualifying competition won the whole competition, why would it now?