On the red button after the Huddersfield and Leeds match .Nigel Wood said that there are 4 proposals under discussion and the 2 leagues of 12 reverting to 3 eight was gaining a lot of interest both at SL and Championship level .He also hinted that the salary cap was also under discussion maybe with a top up for 2 marque players over the cap limit.

And did he mention where the money to fund this is going to come from or is he still looking to give Super League sponsorship away for free?

John Wilkin did he is the spokesman for the players union and he said that the product on the field deserves more money pumped into it and the RFL are trying to get blue chip companies to invest in our sport .I thought Wilkins was a tongue in cheek effort towards the BBC who only pay 3 million for the CC.Nigel Wood indicated that the top four in division 2 would get more money to make them into a full time pro clubs and eventually over the years make all 24 full time pro. Noble and Millward with comments from Dave Wood could only see the changes as for the good of the game Dave wood was in the opinion of IL that the England team would benefit from the players going to the NRL whereas Wilkin disagreed and said that we should keep our players over here .Nigel Wood also said that to expand the game and give the England tri nation some better opposition was to consider Toulouse into SLE.

Well Tony Smith has weighed in on the subject. Have a read of thishttps://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sport/wolves/wolvesnews/10414657._/?rl

Ignore the stuff about Salford and points deduction, it's the rest of what he has to say that is pertinent to this thread.

IMO it is a side swipe at Nigel Woods and his "fantasy RL" ideas.

He's basically asking why are you faffing about putting alternatives forward and has anyone actually thought through the consequences of any of them (his comments on P&R for example)?

I think a lot of people have been intrigued by the split league idea and there is a lot of support for P&R but when the dust settles the questions that need asking are why are we doing this, does it solve the fundamental problem the game has which is financial weakness and is it workable (P&R wasn't before so why is it now)?

As I have said elsewhere I don't think it does. Changing the league structure is window dressing and it is Nigel (head in the sand) Woods latest wheeze and nothing more.

Smith has realised this and is the first senior figure in the game I am aware of to question the RFL's leadership and he is spot on IMO.

really? which 4?

Surely two tens ticks most boxes, and ensures twenty FT teams

South Sydney, Melbourne, Roosters and Manly. They are of a different quality to the other teams at the moment and I'd say Manly are bellow the other 3 stated.

so the Bulldogs, last years finalists and the broncos are not in the same class?

You don't watch the NRL if you think that, the Bulldogs this year are nowhere near the same standard set in 2012 mainly due to injuries, suspensions and Ben Barba discovering alcohol and gambling. As for the Broncos they are battling to stay in the top 8.

so, you say the top 4 are a class above, last year the bulldogs and broncos were doing fine and the roosters werent, this year its all turned around. Most years are different in the NRL not like over here. You might say the top 4 but thats just for this year.

Really? When did P&R make a division competitive whenever we have had automatic P&R since the game went full time and SL began?

The promoted team usually went right back down. They weren't competitive at all and were in fact cannon fodder.

Widnes who spent three years or so preparing for promotion finished bottom in their first season back in SL despite all the preparation. Should they have been related straight back down?

P&R has proved to be unworkable between leagues so far apart financially and with so few quality players to go around. Tony Smith is right to favour licensing over automatic P&R.

Why do you think options 1 & 2 are completely reasonable?

Given P&R has been proved not to work between SL and the championship and given option 2 that would mean 20 full time clubs when there isn't enough money or quality players in the game to support 14 teams never mind 20.

What is missing is option 4. Leave things as they are! The problem is NOT the structure of the league, it is money. That is what needs addressing, the amount of money coming into the game.

You can adopt whatever option from 1 to 3 you like but they are all stupid IMO. They either have us revert to something we know doesn't work (option 1) or involve RL trying to sustain more full time clubs when it can't sustain the ones its got already.

For what it's worth I've always kinda been on the fence about this. Going full time proffesional to semi proffesional and vice-versa in the course of an off season is quite hectic. It's a shame that there's little to play for near the end for the lower teams, but the NRL's the same and it's certainly not struggling!

I don't think hectic is the right word to describe it. Going semi-pro form pro means you effectively lose all your players.

So for example that three year deal Burke has just signed is ripped up and he becomes a free agent. So all the money invested in him is for the benefit of others. The same applies to all players at a relegated club.

Relegation is not just sporting ignominy (which it would be if it were between two compatible divisions) it actually boils down to the forced destruction of a clubs squad. It's is just not feasible and is counter productive in that weaker teams who may face relegation simply will not risk developing young players and playing them. They will do whatever they can to survive instead and buy in players to try and stave off going down.

We saw all this before and these things were put forward as why we went to licensing so God knows why they suddenly don't apply any more.

The only way P&R can work is if its between leagues with clubs able to spend to the same salary cap level.

That may be the idea and maybe they will spread the Sky money between 20 or 24 clubs and work to an even smaller cap. I doubt it though. I think they will go for option one (12 team league and one club promoted/relegated each year) and we will be back to the promoted club going back down again every season.