Are you happy that Trinity could be sacrificed for London, York or anyone else ?

Without additional money, there is little scope for expansion and there has been absolutely no mention of this. In fact, there is more likely to be less cash from Sky (or whoever).

As for the game evolving, I dont know how old you are but, we've had numerous structure changes over the years.
Back in the 80's there were 16 top flight English sides and now we have 11 (10 last year).
So, you will have to excuse my scepticism.

It’s only rubbish in your opinion, Watching our game for the past 70 years has taught me to be cynical of our game’s leadership, especially since the onset of Super league.
No I don’t expect MC & JM to spout rubbish, but I’m sure they have considered the possibility, and do everything to minimise risks.

Fair enough PT, but what do London bring to SL more than Trinity do. I think you’ve been around long enough to remember the start of SL, you’ll remember how Trinity were engineered out of SL.

I remember it well!

Expansion should not be at the expense of existing clubs.
How can it be true expansion if say London and Newcastle are brought in and Trinity plus one other are out.?
Expansion is maintenance of heartland RL and adding to it.

If you believe that IMG are truly `independent` in the sense of the usual suspects having there usual influence on decisions then I think you are extremely naïve IMO, I don`t believe it for a minute. As Dunkirk alluded to, I`ve seen too much in this game to have faith in the integrity of decisions made and that`s not just where we have been shafted, look at the the Cas relegation / Wigan points deduction postponement situation, had it been the other way around can you seriously say the same would have happened? I really hope that it`s different this time but as I say based on the history you can`t blame anyone for been sceptical.

London invested properly in can bring more than any club in SL. Unfortunately that will take a monumental amount of money and time to realise that.

I’ve just read this item from the link. Perhaps we might earn some brownie points after all. But it appears it’s not just about stadium quality “It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans. “We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.” https://www.totalrl.com/img-vice-presid ... licensing/

I’ve just read this item from the link. Perhaps we might earn some brownie points after all. But it appears it’s not just about stadium quality “It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans. “We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.” https://www.totalrl.com/img-vice-presid ... licensing/

Quote ="Dunkirk Spirit"I’ve just read this item from the link. Perhaps we might earn some brownie points after all. But it appears it’s not just about stadium quality, but the wording is a bit ambiguous “We are looking at what you have actually done” “It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans. “We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.” https://www.totalrl.com/img-vice-presid ... licensing/'"

Quote ="Dunkirk Spirit"I’ve just read this item from the link. Perhaps we might earn some brownie points after all. But it appears it’s not just about stadium quality, but the wording is a bit ambiguous “We are looking at what you have actually done” “It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans. “We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.” https://www.totalrl.com/img-vice-presid ... licensing/'"

Quote ="Dunkirk Spirit"I’ve just read this item from the link. Perhaps we might earn some brownie points after all. But it appears it’s not just about stadium quality “It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans. “We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.” https://www.totalrl.com/img-vice-presid ... licensing/'" We built a sustainable business model We built a first class academy and scholarship with clear pathways to first team football PDRL and LDRL We built an award winning community programme We own our own ground We are refurbishing the ground to excellent standards Other than the mortgage for the ground we operate with little or no debt Areas to develop further: the ladies team (ready for full professionalism) The commercial interface The multi sport Educational facilities Seems good progress to me… put a couple of genuine moneybags directors and we’re flying

Quote ="Dunkirk Spirit"I’ve just read this item from the link. Perhaps we might earn some brownie points after all. But it appears it’s not just about stadium quality “It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans. “We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.” https://www.totalrl.com/img-vice-presid ... licensing/'" We built a sustainable business model We built a first class academy and scholarship with clear pathways to first team football PDRL and LDRL We built an award winning community programme We own our own ground We are refurbishing the ground to excellent standards Other than the mortgage for the ground we operate with little or no debt Areas to develop further: the ladies team (ready for full professionalism) The commercial interface The multi sport Educational facilities Seems good progress to me… put a couple of genuine moneybags directors and we’re flying

All great. But we don't have Montgomery Burns

People would feel far more comfortable with this if IMG had put their cards on the table before finding out who may want to be in SL.
Notwithstanding the fact that, on principle, you shouldn't promote/relegate anyone because they have more or less plastic seats.

I'm ok with having well defined minimum standards for SL but, this isn't what appears to be happening and who decides which criteria is most appropriate.

Just imagine if, at some point, in an attempt to expand the game, there is some geographical restriction on whether a club could be in the top flight.
Of course, they've said, from the get-go that A grade clubs wont be relegated but, as more clubs achieve this grading, RL will become a protection racket for certain clubs, just as it always has been, with certain clubs having substantially more influence then others into the running of the game.

Just remember folks, we were effectively chucked out once before.

RL is a sport and should be about what happens for 80 minutes on a Sunday afternoon and not measured by having X number of plastic seats and it's a major, major worry that IMG seem to have this concept back to front.

Just noticed this from yesterday’s Difficult to disagree with the first 4 of these clubs, but how the hell does number 5 keep getting the positive press. https://www.totalrl.com/imgs-overhaul-o ... -the-most/

Just noticed this from yesterday’s Difficult to disagree with the first 4 of these clubs, but how the hell does number 5 keep getting the positive press. https://www.totalrl.com/imgs-overhaul-o ... -the-most/

Bottom line is, should any of those clubs get in at our expense?
Have to say no.
London - Tried before and failed.
Toulouse - In the brown stuff financially.
Newcastle - Good idea, but part-time.
Bradford - Odsal. Say no more.....
York - Probably the best placed out of the lot.

You say "Bradford - Odsal. Say no more...", but I must!

Bust 4 times in a decade, whipround and auction money pocketed by old directors to pay off debts to themselves, delusions of grandeur, arrogance and entitlement, bailed out by the RFL in shady secret deals, owned by the bloke who oversaw the Toronto debacle!

Bulls for SL?

Not for me, never!

A fully functioning Bulls side could give the game a boost but, as usual, it's all about the money.

I'm still struggling with having "A" grade clubs exempt from relegation.
RL is supposed to be a sport and the game takes place on the field of play.
No problem with meeting financial criteria and some minimum standards but, even if there were 14 "A" grade clubs, it wont suddenly increase the appeal of RL to the TV companies and this is the most significant revenue for the clubs.

The truth is with Bradford is that they will never get anywhere near the height's they have been at, even with some success. They are looking back at "Bullmania" and it`s nothing but a pipe dream IMO. They haven`t had those massive crowds in 15 years, they haven`t been in SL for 10 years, Odsal is substandard (that's been very kind) and the money that they would have to put into to bring it to standard is above and beyond what you could imagine. Sure, if they came back into SL, they might add another solid club into the mix in terms of 8/9k crowds but that is about where it ends.

The best thing that IMG could do to promote the support is a 'sporting documentary' a bit like the 'all or nothings' that amazon produce, the amount of sporting documentaries both present day and in the past that have elevated the respected sports in unrivalled.

The ones of the top of my head that have been produced and are 'hits' on streaming sites.

All or nothings - NFL, NHL, Rugby union, Football
F1 drive to survive
The golf one
NBA
and I'm sure tennis (the one of the most dull sports around)

I wholeheartedly agree. We've needed this for a long time but Amazon and to a certain extent Disney + are making it much more trendy and accessible.

I think you under estimate tennis though.
The winners of men's and womens singles will each get £2.4 million and Tennis is the 4th biggest sport in the world for sports betting, only behind NFL, Football and Horse Racing.
Over half a million attended Wimbledon last year.
53 million watched the final on iPlayer with 7.5millikn watching the men's final live.
9.2 million tuned in live to watch Raducanu in the US Open

You may be in the minority thinking its dull.

No sorry but it’s dull along with Formula One and no way should Raducanu receive an award, has she won another match since.

I agree with you but, it's not going to be about what you or I think.
The have made great play about this not being about "promises". However, the perceived "pull" of Bradford, Newcastle and London (plus Toulouse) will no doubt give them some extra brownie points somewhere and at the risk of being boring, criteria can easily be changed to accommodate a "preferred" bidder.
Once the clubs have agreed in principle (and lets face it we're already fully signed up with IMG), there is no going back.

I guess it's up to us to try and get an A grade, if this is possible ?

That's going to take us well off subject but suffice to say I wholeheartedly disagree with you about Raducanu.

yeah agree with the points above, although i still think its dull

Fair enough.
I was, of course, trying to put it succinctly.