Quote ="beetwaste"The benefits would be a single code of Rugby that would be better place to compete on a domestic and world stage with other sports. Imagine an English league with Leicester, Northampton etc, combined with Wigan, Leeds etc. It'd be a helluva league. And the rah-rah boys have a much better supported international game than we'll ever have. Couple that with the blue-chip sponsors that seem to be drawn to the 15-a side game, and there are massive benefits.
The downside is, that the new game would be utter tripe, because it'd almost certainly be RU with 13 players. Lineouts, rucks,mauls. Constant kicking. I doubt the RL fans would adopt that.
I wonder how an experimental mini-series between the two codes would work. Top 2 SL teams vs top-two in RU, in a mini-league. Try some different rules and see what sort of game we'd get. Drop line-outs and two players, but with contested scrums and rucks/mauls. Or 15 a side limited tackles.
It'll never happen. Completely fantasy.
'"
If the codes merged there'd be a much greater emphasis on the international competition as that is where most of the money lies.
Look at other small-mid sized international sports worldwide, cricket, hockey, etc. Chasing/expanding the international game eventually kills off the club game. In Australia you'd basically be handing the country over to the year-long AFL and soccer club comps while a merged RL/RU would simply take the place of what RU is now; non-existent clubs and one or two well covered internationals a year...
Give it a couple of generations and the next gen Inglis, Tomkins, Foran, etc would be growing up idolising the week-to-week players of their favourite AFL/soccer club and the unified rugby would lose many, many players and fans.