i saw it written that Wire, Hull, Hull KR, Huddersfield, Saints & London along with wigan have been highly critical of the rfl plans, so looks like we backed lenegan

[url=http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/rugby-league/gary-hetherington-unhappy-at-super-league-reverse-8867477.htmlGary 'No interest in Briscoe' Hetherington not best pleased[/url

[url=http://www.sportinglife.com/rugby-league/news/article/480/8987352/super-league-dispute-rumbles-onAnd so it continues....[/url

Wonder if he'd have the same clout and coverage if he was still running the powerhouse that is Laaandon

That's an opinion, and arguably a guess. The very fact that some clubs don't want to vote on the proposals shows that they DON'T believe that they will have a positive impact on the WHOLE sport.



From what I can see, it's equally the case that he and the RFL's behaviour is very unsatisfactory, as it seems they just wanted to force through an 8 to 6 vote and avoid the fact that 43% of SL clubs appear to have no confidence in them. To me, for such an important issue as the structure of the competition a majority of more than 2 should be required. If you can't get that you need to keep talking and considering other options until you can get more backing.

For some time (possibly still) any changes to SL required two thirds to vote in favour of a change. When the league was 12 clubs strong, it was a simple cut off: 8-4. two thirds of 14 is 9.3, so you have to round up to 10 (actually 71%), and there were a couple of complaints that it was too hard to make progress and too easy to block change.
The bigger the majority required, the more elusive action becomes. And we need action because the current system broke down. They should keep talking, but can't afford to do so indefinately - we can't (please, surely) start next season not knowing how many, if any, teams will be relegated. A decision on 2015 can possibly be pushed back a little further, but not much.

The RFL have created the monster that is Super League . The game needs SKY`s money to survive and they want Super League .
I can see the SL breaking away and being administered by the Clubs . If you are a SL Chairman why should you worry about the lower league Clubs? Most SL Clubs are struggling to survive without the threat of relegation and financial ruin .
The RFL are to blame for this mess. Promotion and relegation should have stayed from the start of Super League .
Why suddenly decide that for the good of the game re-introduce it ? Will there be a parachute payment for the relegated Club?

Getting rid of P&L was the right idea, not enforcing the licensing conditions and rescuing Salford,Bradford, London and Wakey wasn't

London and Catalan should be binned . London are a waste of time . Catalan should be in the French Leagues.

Catalan are a great club and doing a lot for RL, London should be kept but move to part of London where RU isn't as strong.

Wakey, Cas, Widnes and Bradford should go.

Completely agree, I honestly don't understand why people still want to stubbornly reject them based on nothing rational.

Indeed but as MR mentions higher up Pandora's box is open on that score.
I will say however that I can't see it being over the 12 team reduction otherwise I fail to understand why the clubs are the one's likely NOT to be involved.
If it's over a reduction in funds I cannot see Salford, Cas, London, Bradford or Widnes going for that.
So either we have turkey's actually voting for Christmas or it's over something else. My guess would be the governance of the RFL.

Like I have said on the VT I get the feeling GH want's the top job at the RFL so won't want to rock boats. If that is the case you can count out Leeds and Wakey straight away.
Do Cas, Bradford, Salford, London or Widnes want to make foes at the RFL? I doubt it.

That leaves Saints as the only team I can't figure out but let us not forget they were against it so I await their responce with interest.

Some pretty strong clubs in opposition there and rovers

I'm sure Adam Pearson at one of the fans forums on the subject of SL sponsorship the RFL etc said if the RFL did not get their act together re the commercial side of things he could see SL going the way of the Premiership in football. He mentioned Wigan and said other chairman where not averse to this course. I just wonder if this is now coming to fruition.

Clubs don't play enough games. 13 home games a year and one cup competition is mega-challenging from a financial perspective.

Well 2 big clubs wire and Wigan.

There may be more clubs apposed to the RFL ideas than the 6 that walked out. They just chose not to throw a tantrum and strop out favoring staying and trying to sort the issues out?

uote="Ferdy"Well 2 big clubs wire and Wigan.

There may be more clubs apposed to the RFL ideas than the 6 that walked out. They just chose not to throw a tantrum and strop out favoring staying and trying to sort the issues out?'"

The games to hard to play more, we have more injuries than any other sport.

This is an inherent problem. When the game was "softer" the top flight was similar size I think, but more cup comps meaning midweek games, higher frequency of interaction for the fans, more opportunities to generate revenue. Chuck in the old Alliance comp and contrast with this season when home supporters went a month without a game mid season (ok, because of pitch relay, but you get the point). I completely take the point on injuries but to me the limit of 13 occasions a year to go to a game doesn't create a compelling offer for the supporter or deliver a great financial opportunity for the clubs.

Quote ="number 6":nyj5ql7ouote="Ferdy"Well 2 big clubs wire and Wigan. There may be more clubs apposed to the RFL ideas than the 6 that walked out. They just chose not to throw a tantrum and strop out favoring staying and trying to sort the issues out?'" For the good of the game or their own little bubble? The anti Christ has spoken on the matter www.therhinos.co.uk/news/21696.php#.Umgjg_msiSo

Quote ="number 6":nyj5ql7ouote="Ferdy"Well 2 big clubs wire and Wigan. There may be more clubs apposed to the RFL ideas than the 6 that walked out. They just chose not to throw a tantrum and strop out favoring staying and trying to sort the issues out?'" For the good of the game or their own little bubble? The anti Christ has spoken on the matter www.therhinos.co.uk/news/21696.php#.Umgjg_msiSo

Why should all clubs be sheep and follow the crowd? if its not what you stand for then good on them (the CEOs) that never showed, there wouldnt be an RFL if it was not for our clubs, so the owners should have there say. I would like to be in the Hetheringtons house tonight listening him ranting haha.

G. Hetherington, K. Etherington and J Rule three of the voting representatives there makes for a bit of an unholy trinity.





Perhaps Gary sees this revolt as a threat to his alleged plans to take over the reins at the RL who knows. Personally and its only my view, its pretty reasonable that the Clubs should know how the new structure and the Clubs in it are to be financed and what marketing is in place to sell it before they agree such a revolutionary change!

NH is coming off my christmas card list.
FC and KR fans are not supposed to agree this much........It feels unnatural.



Gary Hetherington must be spitting feathers about now. I mean he would have gotten away with it without those damn SL clubs

wire are a small club with a rich owner

This was supposed to have been shelved till after the world cup.
A meeting was suddenly called (Which by accounts the non SL clubs knew nothing about) and the clubs were asked to agree.
The 6 clubs in question refused to be bounced into agreement and walked out in protest.