Tommygilf

Any challenge cup attendances?

And if they are smart, they'll want a good finish to the season to improve the optimism and hope for next season amongst fans.

I sincerely believe so many RL fans now would have remained in the Union in 1895 with their attitudes.

So what's the problem then? Clubs were well aware some change was coming to the top level at least. Not specifics, but they weren't stupid to the way the wind was blowing.

And IMG hasn't caused them to stop? When exactly did it start? Because the clubs have known for some time now that some form of minimum standards/licensing was coming in.

When we have 92 teams capable of being in Super League we can have that, currently we don't. London going up replacing Wakefield despite being so bad is all the vindication the new system needs.

Its not even 40 years since they got rid of election to the Football League. They are rich enough across the board to have more clubs in their acceptable minimum standards.

The British Psyche is then based on what Harry? Those sports you all highlighted don't support what you are saying? People do like P/R, but they like it in terms they accept like "this is the agreed standard".

Association football ran an elected league system for decades till it grew so financially and numerically massive it could afford standards based P/R across 11 tiers of ever increasing numbers. It doesn't have its equivalents of Hunslet or Swinton anywhere near its equivalents of Southampton or Hull City. Cricket has quite literally a major counties only league. The second division being introduced to split the number of red ball matches being played by those special 18 counties who otherwise all compete on the same level. Union only went pro and had "proper" leagues in the relatively recent past. Even then, in England it is heading to a closed top/top 2 tiers - In Wales, Scotland and Ireland it already is like that. Rugby League is the prime example of a competition set up specifically for one type of club, "professionals"! We've never had a "pyramid" because we've always had a clear distinction between the amateur and "professional" clubs. For the past 25 years, if not the past 35 years, the sport has grappled with whether there should be a distinction between the fully professional and semi professional levels too.

Its a difficult tension at Leeds. Hetherington had it good for a long time by getting a core of quality players to accept less money to be at a successful team. Leeds still spent well and to the limit, but they maxxed out the value of that spend. Since that time GH has been willing to spend. The 2019 intake of Hurrell, Lolohea and Merrin on reportedly marquee wages stands out. As does the transfer fees paid for Croft and Ackers. However none of these big spends have worked particularly well or had an immediate impact. Perhaps spending is just in the wrong place? And the value for money Leeds used to get isn't close anymore?

Is it Smith or Pearson Hoy's father is referring to in his comments?

In fairness, that last point is the purpose of a trial run...

Its been contested by a decent number in that time too though.

Its definitely an odd narrative really isn't it!

That is the tagline I've been seeing for the Cup Final ticket advertisements on my social media feeds. There's a very big push on the fact that we have had 7 different winners of the comp in the past 7 years. It hadn't even occurred to me that had been the case till I saw it. Add in that Salford (behind closed doors admittedly) and Huddersfield (at Spurs) have also made the final in that time too. Shows how wide open and not very predictable the cup can be?