thanks for all the sensible replies to my post,some very interesting points brought up.don`t get me wrong,i`m a died in the wool lifelong supporter of F.C.just look where i was born.Mrs.B,if you like haggis ,i`ll bring it down on friday.

First thoughts are that this isn't a great idea. Will the promoted team get any relegation protection? Look at Super League when there was relegation. The promoted team often went straight back down. Look at Widnes. Given a franchise, but finished bottom. The teams promoted would be like the proverbial whore's drawers.

Needs a lot more thinking through, including whether its a good idea at all

This, in all respects.

I don't follow Hull FC because I want them to be successful or feel they will be - it's the other way around. For that reason the prospect of a merged side being a success would not be enough for me to start supporting it. If I had that mentality I'd have switched to supporting Wigan/Saints/Leeds etc. years ago.

Plus - contractual issues. A £2m cap team gets relegated and has to trim their cap by £1.2m. Unless there's a premier league style parachute payment, or some kind of exemption (which defeats the object of the cap) that has legal problems written all over it, as well as the big clubs potentially cherry picking the smaller ones, so not shifting the balance of power at all.

I'd assume it'd mean bottom 4 go down the year before. I've heard worse plans. P&R gives more games more meaning and keeps the dream alive. A second full-time division gives young players somewhere to develop. Is there enough cash to make it feasible though?

Going back to a structure remarkably similar to what we had prior to SL is radical?

I'm not sure how two tier SL addresses any of the major problems the game faces. There aren't enough quality players, fans, sponsors, or cashed-up owners to support one league of 14 teams so quite how 20 teams are supposed to manage is beyond me. And where are the 10 sides strong/rich enough to make SL1 a top quality league? How many sides would be able to afford to spend the full £2m cap?

Seems like ill-thought-out knee-jerkiness to me.

In what way is it a good plan? What are the benefits? Why would Sky suddenly decide it wants rights to a second-tier RL competition when it's shown zero interest before?

And on the one hand you think the return of P&R is a good thing but immediately call for a side to be relegated based on crowds rather than performance? How does that work? Not that London are likely to be around much longer as a pro side anyway.

You'd have to put wage reduction or release clauses in players contracts.

Yo-yoing would happen sometimes, but if tier 2 had more (sky) money they could build the foundation of a tier 1 squad, and add to it on promotion, rather than having to start almost from scratch like until the drawbridge was raised. To make p and r workable, you need to narrow the gap between divisions, reversing a long trend. To me that is desirable, it is just where the money comes from.
Cherry picking is to be expected, but this would open more clubs to 'investment' and the chance to be picker s rather than pickees.
Break-even sustainability won't happen at clubs chasing success, one or two exceptions apart, unless we shut out benefactors across the board.

A merger is a big no for me and I don't see it as an answer to the fact one club has financial difficulties.

A bigger question is how RL moves forward and clubs can remain solvent. Also how we can keep our best young players from leaving to the NRL, raising the cap is an option but it only makes my first point even more important.

RL has an uncertain future I think unless we get more money men coming into the game.

MERGE ! teams with just as much history in Australia have merged successfully , despite being from very obvious parts of Sydney with their own identity. We come from the same CITY so what have we to be precious about. Time and finances may well draw us to a merger anyway as Rovers are sunk

My heart says I would never support a merged team. My head says that I would after a certain amount of time as I love my rugby. That would be where the risk is in a potentially merged club here in Hull IMO. It will lose supporters in the short term but I think in the long term people would start to return. Whoever was in charge of the merged club would need to be patient and accept that attendances would be low to begin with whilst the initial anger and outrage died away that I think many fans of both FC and KR would be feeling.

This is all just a hypothetical scenario as far as I'm concerned but as things stand what is in it for Hull FC to merge with Hull KR? FC's finances seem to be in order so why would we risk losing our identity and merging with our nearest and dearest rivals?