Sadly, the answer is that the ambitious clubs in tier 2 need to be better. None of them are knocking on the door of SL. None of them are ‘sleeping giants’ or clubs ready to take the next step. We can complain all we want about how ambitious tier 2 clubs cant get promoted, but they themselves are struggling to make any sort of argument that they should be.

For all the complaints about Salford, there isn’t a club outside SL which would come in and get noticeably better attendances.


SKy arent bothered about 2nd tier sport, even the championship in football is a relatively poor relation,

....that very few people can agree what the solution is. There have been some cracking ideas on here along with the more barking ones as to how to improve/secure the game, but there are constraints most of us don't know about (i certainly don't claim to), and regardless of the contempt some of us have for the RFL & other (purportedly) supporting bodes, they're the best of a bad job & we'll just have to lump it (unless someone's got a few million spare, stuffed down the back of the couch )

To be fair it's a catch22 situation, they need to be "banging on the door" but they can't do that as the competition doesn't have the exposure needed and the quality will automatically be lower due to the lower income and salary cap. That's the way the twin tier would work because you could have it set so that there was 10 or so in each with a smaller salary cap gulf maybe 2 and 1.2 million.

probalem is, in rugby league it's almost impossible to "go down and come back stronger" - you can't get stronger by dropping down to semi-pro level then plunging back into the world of Super League - where they'd not survive once more and the cycle repeats.

As much as i'd agree with the structure, it wouldn't be financially viable for the smaller clubs

Good job that clubs at the bottom of SL ARE financially viable..... Oh wait. Teams in football don't come back stronger, or in any sport for that matter, but people learn to swim when they feel they are about to drown. Too many teams are just existing, and not really contributing to pushing SL forward. The RFL have a massive role to play, so do the clubs. Many on these boards are keen to have a pop at Wigan and things that happened in the past, but Wigan’s exploits did more to keep the sport in the news and give positive press to TGG, than the financial cock-up’s of some clubs over the last couple of seasons. We need a governing body, and clubs that aspire to be successful, not to just survive. What people who criticise Wigan for in the past, is a desire to win, and be the best... God help this sport if we lose that, and i fear we have.

Wigan did exactly what some of the recent clubs have done: over-spent, had a financial cataclysm and, in their case, lost their home ground. Just because finding a rich benefactor was relatively easy for Wigan does not give them a right to preach to other clubs who follow the same path to disaster but are not so fortunate.

Or they drown. This sink or swim attitude forgets that sinking is a very possible option. If Salford sink who do we replace them with? Fax? Leigh? Fev? Are any of them obviously better placed than Salford? Is putting them in this sink or swim scenario any more likely to result in them swimming than sinking? So we lose Salford, and then Fax, Leigh and Fev, who next? Do we keep on going telling clubs to sink or swim and seeing them sink?You cant on one hand say that clubs should follow Wigans lead, then criticise them for their financial issues, then claim clubs should learn from Wigan and not repeat the financiial issues that were brought about by Wigan doing what you are telling other clubs to do.

I agree that there are clubs for whom just surviving is acceptable, there are clubs for whom success is measured in continuing existence and not trophies. There are clubs who would see the game held back so they can compete rather than driven forward. There are parts of the game who are failing the game and its future for short-term self interest and that is wrong, it is very very very wrong.

But the lessaiz-faire at all costs attitude from the other side is just as dangerous, just as counter-productive and just as much a failure of the games future. The answer lay somewhere in the middle, with a more balanced approach.

The game and SL is stronger together than individual clubs, there is nothing wrong with the game/SL working together to improve the strength as a whole. We should, like the NFL, look at the game as a whole and work more for the success of the game as a whole. But when we do that there will be rules to regulate it. There has to be otherwise it wouldn’t work.

I have no problem with what the wigan fans would likely deem more ‘communist’ efforts, whilst I think this Salary Cap fails in its form, I think we do need some talent distribution measures, I think more can be done as a game in youth development, whilst there is innovation at this level I think it is limited and I think the competition between clubs in youth development can be counter-productive. I think we could work together more to improve the bottom clubs, it’s a longer term view but whilst it isn’t their responsibility the likes of Leeds and Wigan benefit from stronger ‘lesser’ clubs in the long term. But I also think that we should expect and demand more of some of the lesser clubs.

First i would like to point out that i'm a Wigan "fan", not Wigan "fans". Also, i am not looking at this matter purely as a Wigan fan, but as a watcher of sport and its place in the world over many years, so stop the "wigan view" crap. I'm sure you would have been the first to put the boot in if we had gone to the wall, or been relegated in 2006. Wigan bias? Thats something WE hear that all the time.

When we threw our lot in with Sky and took the money, we decided that we were in the entertainment industry and whether you like it or not, and moral issues have to be seen in that context. We have to provide entertainment. We are in a position now where we cannot compete with RU or the NRL, and thats all down to finance, nothing else, finance. The RFL have set a terrible precedent buy their actions with Bradford. Should they bail out Salford? Are Bradford an Iconic club, yes of course they are, do i want then in SL, yes of course i do. But Salford are equally important as a menber of the SL. and that suits your argument. But clubs have to be viable, who would i replace Salford with if they go to the wall? You tell me. SL is in dire straits, and if you can't see that you need to take a step back and take your anti Wigan bins off and take a look. The very future of the professional game is threatened, we don't have enough quality players to go around, anbd can't afford to bring in quaility from other sports or other competitions. So do i blame the RFL and the efforts of clubs, bloody right i do!!! And any amount of saying, "Well Wigan can get a benefactor" has bugger all to do with the efforts other clubs put in. Its all a mess, people have been saying it on this board for several years now and nobody has been taking it seriously. Well, its time people did because the great game we all know and love is, at a proffessional level on its .....

Rugby Leagues days as a fully professional sport in the UK are numbered.

What actions are these that the RFL did for Bradford that they wouldn't do for other clubs. Certainly many clubs have been advanced their SKY monies to assist cashflow.

Do you think it indicates a healthy situation when monies are advanced? Will the RFL be buying the Salford stadia?

So you're not going to bother answering my question? I presume because you cannot back your assertion up.

As for your questions:

1) not healthy however given the current economic situation at large not suprising.
2) I wouldn't have thought so as it isn't owned by Salford.

Any chance you'll answer my query now please?

Will Salford survive ? In a nutshell NOPE unfortunately

Did whom buy the stadium?

The Salford City Stadium from what I understand is owned by a joint venture between peel Holdings and Salford City Council.

Salford Reds have already had their "rent" per annum halved when Sale agreed a lease.

So again what did the RFL do for Bradford that they can do for Salford but won't or haven't?