I think people do have an agenda at times and they are perfectly free to have one and hold opinions that suit it. Sometimes to support such opinions it can be neccessary to argue black is white hence I wanted to isolate the idea Superleague is somehow a bad thing for the game.
I say for the game because the big difference is that Superleague can be VERY BAD indeed for individuals, who do not like aspects of it. When it first came out I worked with a Batley fan who had never had any illusions of grandeur for his club and had no care they never got anywhere near promotion, and although SL would not affect his club (and his club have become a better club in the SL years) he just thought all the razzamatazz was BS (an apt turn of phrase at the time) and he abandoned RL.
I can't say that I was sad about that as personally I welcomed what Superleague did for the game in my opinion. I think it's been very good for the game and without it there's a weight of opinion that the game could seriously die out as a MAJOR sport (I attended the Leeds.v.Sheffield Lacrosse game the other week, that game hasn't died out).
I don't know if what attracted many people to RL were the aspects of the game that were in one way it's downfall - regional, heavy in local rivalries, traditional, insular, northern identity, not liked and supressed by RU, the siege mentality etc. Once free of that of course those who liked the game for those qualities would not be happy. Of course they may then not have a good word to say about it.
Anyway I'm clear the weight of unbiased opinion is that even if you don't like Superleague it's been very good for the game in the most trying of circumstances i.e. the rise of pro RU and maga rich socccer, unless you like your sport on the level of Lacrosse.