hunsletgreenandgold

You're right but I don't think (well not what i've seen) that people are suggesting that even with money we wouldn't have these players and stronger player pool overall. Without saying it I think that's what everybody always recognises as being the primary reason for the current shallow pool.

But if this means the stadium isn't half empty that'll please some people right?

So this thread ultimately comes down to what we all already know - if there was more money in SL we'd be able to: - Retain our best players - Develop better and more young players - Attract quality overseas players - Put more money into marketing concepts - Make more games into 'events' - Any other point that would make RL better but requires more money Where this money comes from is the question nobody can answer* *Some people have pipe dreams of restructuring TV deals, others reckon we need billionaires, some think the RFL are sat on a pot of gold

Not sure the players that aren't playing in SL helps your argument that we have a good enough playing pool if they were. There are plenty of players in Super League that shouldn't be anywhere near the elite level of the game in the northern hemisphere. If anything they'd just help offset that a little.

I mean even if that was the case (it won't be) that would've hardly been a shock to anyone - I thought you had something worth gossiping about...jeez

Well where, Mr ITK? I'm presuming you're not bound by an NDA.....

Yeah exactly....."Welcome to Bradford Iestyn!" I think the most telling thing for me was neither Canberra or Bateman mentioned that 'arrangement' in their statements.

Probably just ask any Aussie team mates that have played in Super League what excuse they used...... Maybe Blake Austin can jot down a couple as they pass in the airport.

Nothing selective about it - the attendance has been over (very slightly) 80K once since 2010 and as you elude to, I'd suggest the actual 'attending' figure is far lower than the quoted 'official' attendance. Point being, if the attendance (official or otherwise) seems considerably low this year using the excuse that it's because Catalans are in the final simply won't wash. My opinion, as I've stated on other threads previously, is that the success of Magic and GF is to a degree to the detriment of CC final. CCF used to be the neutrals day out now they have 6 game weekend and the pinnacle of SL (GF) - people aren't doing all 3 and London has always been the most expensive of all.

For 3 years? I doubt it.

Agreed - Bateman is still a better overall player though IMO. Either way they'll both do great there is my point. Whitehead's defence is second to none as will Bateman's be - I just think Bateman offers a bit more in attack than Whitehead.

Regardless of what is said by Wigan, i'll be very surprised if he rejoins them after 3 years. Bateman will go very well in the NRL IMO especially if it's at Canberra where he's arguably a better player than Whitehead in all aspects of his game and he's doing great there.

There was over 84,000 at the CC final last time Catalans got there in 2007. By contrast there was only 68,000 last year for Hull v Wigan. This highlights to me that if the attendance is again low this year it's nothing to do with Catalans being in the final but rather a cup competition that has been in decline for at least the past 5 years.

Can only assume some people hit the wrong link sometimes....

Honestly, Kayak - I entertained some of your earlier points and genuinely agree that some RL clubs should take note of how well TWP have done off the field in such a short space of time. But then you went, well.....a bit loopy. You seem obsessed with trying to make out everyone is against TWP and that's their reason for calling out your BS. To be clear, my comments are aimed at you and not TWP - who I think are great for RL.