Union produces its own players you know to play its own game,the majority of rl players simply could'nt cut it in union,there isn't a problem with player drain to union.

There is room for professional rl in the world,its just unfortunate that that only adds up to ten clubs at the most

JC, I dont think what you are saying is correct.
Platers are being "poached" by union, Joel Tomkins, Chris Ashton, Sonny Bill etc
Also, where does the mythical 10 pro teams come from.
The number of pro clubs that can be sustained isn't finite, it is dependent upon on the success of the individual clubs raising sponsorship revenue, together with the RFL's ability to secure a decent TV deal, plus the bums on seats etc.
If we keep reducing the number of teams this will accelerate the decline in the number of players that are attracted to the sport (as a means of earning a living)
The key is to find ways of expanding the game

A handfull of players.....none of whom caused the game to implode.....players will go where the cash is...always have done, always will



Given that Hudds and London are 100% reliant on benefactors to stay afloat, Salfords apparent "wobble", what's going on at odslum, wakeys recent run in with admin.....10 clubs is a fair statement


It's ALL about the TV deal.......wihout it, you'd have a pro wigan and Leeds with a few other part time clubs...

Possibly.....but it does seem that 13 English teams are having trouble getting quality english players....325 is all they need......how many anzacs are currntly registered in the English SL clubs?


It is 100% the responsibility of the RFL/SKYTV to fund the "expansion" if they want it.....same way the storm is funded in the NRL.

Problem with developing English talent is as soon as you do rich clubs with flexible salary caps snap them up. How many players from hudds, salford, cas etc have been signed up by top 5 clubs? Hardly creates an incentive to invest in developing players. We are just starting to see the fruits of our jnr labours at HKR and sure enough the vultures are circling.

Who are they then? Who are these youngsters being pinched by the top 5?

And how many players have HKR signed from other clubs? how many other clubs youngsters have HKR pinched?

A few as we are paying more than some clubs can. I see FC are signing Holdsworth, another example of the salary cap evening up the comp, not!

The point is that without a strong and diverse professional game, the uptake amoungst young kids may not be there.
There has to be something to aim for and the smaller that we make the target ie only 10 pro teams ??, the more likely it is that kids will be attracted to other sports.

Players move, its a fact of life, its not like Holdsworth is ome youngster plucked from obscurity and trained and developed by Salford, he is a 28 year old who has played for St George and Canterbury.

Im not sure why that has anything to do with the SC.

I asked if you had some examples of young British players trained by the smaller clubs and taken by the bigger ones. I asked this because i think you will find that for every Luke Ambler going from Salford to Leeds there is a Jodie Broughton, or Ashley Gibson going the other way. For every Jay Pitts leaving Wakefield for Leeds, There is a Peter Fox and Lee Smith going to Wakefield. For every Scott Taylor there is a Josh Hodgeson or Craig Hall.

I think you'll find that for every Scott Taylor, there is an Evarn Tuimavave!

i think what jb down under is really saying is 'im so jealous hull fc have got a chairman who is willing to stop at nothing and aim for the top, not just to beat his poorer neighbours!'

We obviously look at things differently because i dont see a strong league and most deffinately not a diverse league.
The whole comp is a joke at the moment,cheap tickets to make attendances look good,to many blowout scores,a massive lack of intensity to the point were the likes of leeds can under perform for most of the season and still be favourites to lift trophies.

Good luck to him, as I said be has quickly cottoned on to the fact if you want to challenge don't worry too much about a salary cap.

Yes, things always take on a different perspective, depending from where you look at them.
At the moment, in certain quarters, there is a clamour for reducing the number of teams in the top flight and whilst these things should be open to review, one does have to question the motives of some who are asking for the reduction for purely selfish reasons.
If the big boys really think that the comp will benefit from fewer numbers, why the hell did they agree to increase the league by 2 teams just a few seasons ago, particularly when the
Crusaders team was largely made up of second rate antipodeans.
Although the trip over to Wrexham was enjoyable, their inclusion was a backward step for the league - instead of fast tracking them into SL, they should have built more solid foundations.
Regarding spectator numbers and cheap tickets, there are 2 reasons for this: increasing a clubs fanbase (which certainly can work), but more likely this is to try and tick a box on a franchise application.
The very fact that we now have a Grand Final and play offs, does mean that teams dont need to try and win every week.
Teams at the top can afford to manage their squads to ensure that they peak at the back end of the season and if they drop an odd 2 points here and there it is not critical. This in itself could be rectified by reverting to the old top 5 play offs, where there was significant advantage in finishing 1st or 2nd.

Who is this mystical person you expect was going top fund the set up and and running of crusaders in the championships?

And also, im not sure on how solid ground a wakefield fan is to denigrate another club on the basis their team was largely made up of second rate antipodeans.

Is there any pont to this thread? In the last forty posts, only two mention Salford and neither of them have anything to do with administration.

So you would prefer that we keep dropping expansion teams into the top flight, watch them fail and then be happy that we have another CC team ?

are they our only two options?

Clearly not, its better to grow something by planting a seed and nurturing it rather than plant a tree in the desert.

To labour your metaphor you also dont plant them too close together because it means you cant grow a strong tree as it needs to fight for nutrients, and water, and sunlight and instead of a big strong tree able to last for hundreds of years you get small trees which struggle and wither at the first tough winter.

The lone boabab can last for a thousand years in the desert,

You don't come on RLFans expecting =#00BF00gardening advice.

Yet if you plant them in fertile land many can prosper in close proximity to each other. Irrigated land is better than desert.

Are there too many clubs in Sydney?

yes, far too many, most people in Sydney would agree.

In fact the next expansion of the NRL is as likely to come from a Sydney franchise moving as an expansion of the league

Totally loving the knowledge on here, you really can learn something new every day

The salary cap would even the comp up more if every team could afford to spend up to it.