The big news in all the weekend papers wasthe try scored by Chris Ashton. Chris was of course a league player with Wigan and this illustrates the big problem with our sport. He scored the try in front of over 80,000 people and live on TV throughout the world. Now comes the news that Union will be making a bid for Sam Tomkins and a few others. At the same time this was happening Australia played NZ in front of a not very full stadium, a good game but shown on BBC on Sunday afternoon. Despite this we still find most fans are not bothered about internationals and I am certain that when the next SL season starts it will all be forgotton. I still say that without a credible international scene with regular matches and touring teams the game will continue to lose its best players. The 4 nations final showed once again how far behind we are in playing standards in all aspects of the game. They are quicker,pass and tackle better and play at a higher intensity. It is time for the authorities to take this aspect of the game more seriously, if not I can see it being stuck in the M62 corridor for ever.

I agree with pretty much all those points.

The difficulty is that the biggest RL playing nation couldn't give two rabbits tods about the international game.

Super League salary cap = £1.65m

Rugby Union premiership salary cap = £4.0m

That's a massive gap but even then only takes account of club rugby. England internationals like Ashton earn money beyond the wildest dreams of any Rugby League player.

If Union want any of our top players there is little we can do to stop them.

I'm in two minds over the whole international / expansion arguement.

For me its at what cost. If it means a multi leagued system with promotion and relegation with teams from all over the british isles playing in front of big crowds then bring it on. Sadly what it seems to mean is that the RFL want this to spring up instantly,so if it was possible they would set up 14 clubs in 14 major cities in the uk, all would have new football stadia and would be branded as the London raiders, Birmingham bulldogs, Glasgow eels etc... They would then play in these football stadia at a 1/4 full at best and wonder why the people aren't watching.

The growth needed would need to grow organically over many years with teams being allowed to grow and gain promotion on merit, thus allowing fans to experience highs and lows and grow to love a club and feel attached. Creating a franchise system wouldn't work in a country like England as its so small its always easy to watch something else.

I may come across as small minded but I'd rather admit we watch a minority (2nd tier) sport that is based around the M62 and has a really good entertaining league then throw the baby out with the bath water trying to catch the uncatchable dream of being as big as international RU.

Quite right and the fact is Australia RL has a very high profile. You have to ask yourself apart from the money thing, is the attraction the fact that as a Union international you play competitive games against several nations in front of massive crowds whereas as a Kangaroo you play NZ! This was the point I made about Ashton, look at the profile he's got now.

and no matter how much RL tries to spread the international game we need to understand that RL will never be as successful having the international spread as union. There's no way for example that we will end up with quality RL teams in Argentina, South Africa, Italy, Ireland, Scotland (made up of scots not Aussies) etc

Part of me is thinking that the RFL should stop concentrating on expansion of the game in the UK and focus on what it knows works. On the back of the world RL should maybe stop concentrating on growth and just focus again on what works.

Sadly there's no answer to keeping good young players. We have to ackonwledge that in the next 10-15 years the shift may even go further meaning RL becomes more a feeder competition for RU.

If that happens you have to think it is over as a full-time sport. Clubs would either operate as Championship clubs do now or jump ship to RU. Heart says the former, head says it'd be a slow death.

Depends really. Clubs jumping ship would be an interesting one.

I'd be more inclined to think that due to the loyal fan base RL has in its northern heartland we may be sustainable as a sport but just with slightly lesser players playing the game. If the level of the players drops slightly across the board theoretically it would all be relative and the competition should still be competetive enough to keep the fans interested. Does mean imo that the RFL will have to shift their mindset though away from growth to survival.

Would Sky pay anything like what they do now for a feeder sport? Union has its attrative-to-advertisers demographic and successful International competitions at least.

Union is not without its issues and they mirror League's in some respects.

This interview with Ian McGeechan highlights some of their issues and a few will look familiar to RL fans (if back to front on North-South).

rlhttps://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/aug/31/bath-ian-mcgeechanrl

I'm not sure of the exact figures but i'd guess Union gets far more sponsorship from Sky than RL does already?

It's also interesting as you say that Union can attract sponsors of the size of Aviva. Just further highlights our inability to compete in the future.

Sky and Setanta paid £54 million for 3 seasons of GPhttps://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/dec/11/sky-setanta-guinness-premiership-rugbyrl


When Setanta went belly-up ESPN stepped in.

rlhttps://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/dec/14/espn-guinness-premiership-rugbyrl

That's £18 million per season between 12 clubs, which is £1.5 million per club. SL clubs get £1.2 million from Sky iirc. The big difference will be in revenues earned and distributed by the RFU from the international game. Our television revenue covers 75% of our cap, theirs covers 37.5%.

That £4 million cap is high too for most GP clubs which might be why Leicester and Wasps have won 12 of the 14 professional championships. There has been talk of lowering it and enforcing it properly - a team that plays about 300 metres from where I'm sitting is regarded with suspicion by their rivals, I belief. And I can't see much potential for growth tbh. The silver lining to having a crap int'l game is the potential for improvement. Don't think I'd ever want it to dominate the sport though - I'm unashamedely club-first.

Interesting thanks for that. (just to be a pedant its now the AP)

RL in England won't die, nor will it become a feeder competition for RU. People have been suggesting that since RU went professional in 1995 (or whenever it was), yet RL attendances and TV audiences have been on the up ever since. Next season I believe attendances will increase even further. A sport that is averaging >10K per game over the season is not dying, and should be able to support a full-time structure.

Looking back over the players that we've lost to RU, how many of them do we really miss? Apart from Robinson, and maybe Ashton and Vainikolo, I can't think of any that have had a detrimental impact to the international game. RL and RU are just too different to justify massive player shifts between the codes.

Our biggest problem is Englands lack of competitiveness against NZ and Aus. We can put this down to crap imports/coaching/player development/dodgy refs , but not RU poaching players from RL.