Exactly how much time? Is it 115 years, 28 years or 4 (for Hull KR) And for what reasons should clubs have expanded the game geographically? How could clubs 115 years ago know what the RFL's licensing criteria for the next round of franchises would be?

Hello, ello, lo. By heck it's deep down there!

Discuss around it then, you asked a question, I answered on page 3

it's a good discussion!

Where would that be? It's pretty easy to expand a competition that until 25 years ago banned non-Sydney clubs into 2 states where RL was already well established and a single club from the whole of NZ (you Aussie trolls even said SL should have a new NZ club so the NRL didn't have to have both), only Melbourne are an expansion club and they're successful due to News Ltd funding alone. SL has 3 clubs outside the north of England, though I suspect that will be back to 2 soon, though eventually back up to 3 with Toulouse.


Of course I want it but until you I value quality and am not impatient. You as good as said yourself you'd rather risk ruining an expansion club and damaging the league than being patient and waiting 5 years (or 3 or 10?) for the time to be right just because you thought it was too long to wait. It really isn't long in the scheme of things and unlike you I'd rather expand right. I suspect you have a hidden agenda of wanting to get rid of expansion clubs by forcing them up early so they fold

Can we please not let dally derail another thread with the usual "everything the Aussies do is right and England do is wrong" boll*cks. It all ends the same way, he contradicts himself, gets humiliated, then runs off and ruins another thread.

Let's not feed him on this one as well.

If I'm not alone and people agree with me, give me a sign! "Let's make this a dally-free zone".

so for 113 years it was in clubs best interest to do nothing expansion wise.

but now because their SL spots will be determined on it they will do something?







that explains why RL has been neglected for so long in england.

that god for the RFL then for making clubs do what they shouldve been doing a century ago

not that im a fan of it, look what AFL is doing in australia.

they are putting clubs in places nobody cares about the sport and backing it with lots of money.

they are prepared to back their sport 100%

RL is a far better product and many of you lot are just scared to try anywhere expansionary unless the club is as good as a heartland club

RL has been played in queensland prior to the NRL, NZ too.

heck brisbane had its own competition for near on 90 years.

lucky im here to help you lot

so the key for expansion of current heartland clubs is cheaper public transport then?

self sufficient , ie they earn enough money to pay all their expenses of operating

How you do that is the problem

london has hads it own rl competition for 30 years, doesnt mean it made much of a differance.

The thing is the RFL aren't all that rich so it would be imprudent. If the RFL had tens of millions spare each year I'd be all for it (though in places like Cardiff not Bridgend or Wrexham), but unfortunately they don't so we have to use quality standards

Thats your response to a valid point that doesnt agree with you?

dally free zone please.

Why the hell not

What do you expect them to say? boo hiss?

Correct, otherwise I would imagine that in 113 they might have done so. And strictly speaking there is still no benefit to clubs for geographical expansion per se. It is simply that there are targets for crowd size, if additional supporters can be gained from outside the traditional catchment areas then so be it.




Geographical expansion never has been and still, is not a requirement of any individual club. And McDonalds?

Barnacles brought some good points there.
In answer to starbugs last point, if you could gain an extra 30k each on the next tv deal would that help? I'd imagine so.
For me the biggest worry at that level throughout is youth structures. Don't know too much about them but I've seen SL just pick off juniors from surrounding Chp clubs willy nilly

moist!

err they didn't, hence why it took 80 years before the game moved beyond two states of the country at the top level and still has 14 out of 16 teams in the same areas.

who says its imprudent?

it shows that other sports are very keen to back their expansion

with RL its mostly a case of our sport is so good so well put no effort in, we expect them to do it on their own.

thats why it doesnt expand

so pre 1908 how did RL expand to become what it is today, australias number 1 sport?

the brisbane competition was stronger than RL is in england today you goose.

look ill make this simple for you

some RL clubs have been very succesful over 100 + years. clubs like wigan, leeds stand out over that time. theyve done all the right things regarding marketing, juniors etc.

for much of the rest its their own fault theyve got left behind

clearly the problem with RL in england is too many poor clubs hanging onto the coattails of the success generated by the strong clubs

i love the double standard.

whenever its a failed heartland clubs its always the RFLs fault.

when an expansion club fails its their own fault

laughter is my response when i find something funny