Do you just make this stuff up?

Silly me, you are quite right. RL is in a wonderful place. Our best players are looking to move to the NRL or Union, we have clubs with dire financial positions just scrapeing by, the quality over the season is awful, our national team has never been worse, we have so little media attention its embarrassing.... The much vaunted playoff system attracts awful attendances, but can be justified because one of the top 4 clubs finished 5th and won it twice, therefore causeing people to class it as a success!!! Yeah all is wonderful.

But hey!! Good news!!! Leeds are successful within the current system so all is well!!!

Are you pitching for a job at the RFL by any chance?

Because that's the sort of empty hyperbole they like.

What specifically are you saying is hyperbolic in that statement?

Okay, we'll change 'empty hyperbole' to 'empty rhetoric'. The point stands. You've got the job.

Doesnt seem anything empty in it either.,

Which bit do you disagree with, that a better salford would result in a better tv deal? That a better TV deal is good for everyone?

That we wont have 14 teams worth of SL level players if we only have 12 SL Clubs?

Your lack of overall realism is the bit I disagree with.

Everyone wants 14 top teams. Everyone wants a strong Salford, strong Wakey, strong London etc. But whether those things can ever be achieved in the current state-of-affairs is the issue.

The argument that we can only strengthen by concentrating the talent and funds in a hardcore of 10 or 12 teams is a valid one, because it's constructive and it offers a viable way forward. Hollow shouting about how we can never have 14 great teams if we only have 12 to start isn't much of a rebuff. In fact, in this context it's about as useful a contribution as saying pigs won't learn to fly until they get wings. Both are true, but neither actually means very much.

Why would we ignore that fact though? Its quite important. If we only have as many teams as we have players right now, then the league is never going to grow.

And having a strong Salford, Wakefield, London etc is obviously what everyone wants, and yes there is a question over whether we will ever get there, maybe we will and maybe we wont and I accept that, but I also know that Salford, Wakefield, London etc wont ever be strong SL sides if they aren’t in SL.

I don't want it to happen, but, sooner or later, it will.

One rugby.

Within 10 years, I'd guess.

I wouldn't mind betting there are people in both games making serious plans along those lines even now.

Semi-pro is a no for me, so is reducing the size of SL if that means fewer bangs for your bucks. I have seen more resentment this season than ever in the way the game is going. I know there are no easy solutions to the problems, but things must change and soon, dump the meaningless exile games (which helped to spoil our season) bring back P&R, that would at least put some interest back in the game at the bottom end of the league at the end of the season and help boost the championship, and as we keep on saying sort out the play off structure so as to put life back into the weekly rounds.

Sadly, i agree with you on all counts...

This is delusional rubbish. How would it possibly be effected and how it could possibly work is beyond me. And, for those who believe that they run the sport (they don't) do you think Sky would sanction the loss of their best rating week to week Summer sport?!

You Wiganers are seriously overstating the present problems in Rugby League, for (IMO) fairly obvious club-centric reasons. Club Rugby Union is in a much worse financial state than Rugby League.

There'll never be one exclusive code of rugby. No RL or RU fan worth their salt would want to watch a diluted version of the sport they watch. It's feasible that clubs may share a combined playing squad, but the onfield products would never merge, as there'd be no significant audience for it.