Toby Chopra

For sure, and I appreciate the irony that I seem to have ended up on the other side of the "let NRL take over UK rugby league" debate when it comes to French rugby league. Perhaps I'm the English equivalent of a clueless Aussie bemoaning English RL's failures! But I hope my speculation is rooted in an acknowledgement of how hard it might be, but not entirely fanciful. In the end. it's about money. As we've seen so many times in RL, until the money is actually - definitely - there, none of it means anything. But if it is, good things can happen quite quickly, as we've also seen.

I understand that's a common thing in rugby league, but in this case we're not proposing setting up rugby league in a blank space, we're playing around with the idea that if the NRL or someone similar invested in taking 6-8 established semi-pro clubs into a fledgling French pro league, is that do-able, and worthwhile? It ain't easy for sure, but for NRL looking to secure a talent pipeline for their expansion plans it could be an option, possibly a better one than the seemingly incoming investment in London. And we've seen with our own history of Superleague that making the jump from part time to full time is possible. Is it the same? No. But are there some similarities? I'd say yes.

I think there's more upside to investing in French rugby league - which does have long established activity in a geographically concentrated area - than, for instance, investing in London. Which it seems someone is about to do. You have to create the conditions, opportunity and crucially the incentive to encourage investment. Then it can be possible. I'm not saying it's easy, or certain to succeed, but to say even considering the idea of a fledgling professional French competition is pie in the sky seems extreme to me.

There wasn't a fully professional league in England for the first hundred years of rugby league, but about 5 years of investment from Sky created what we have today. Yes, it would take money, but there's no reason that a professional league in France couldn't take root if someone was willing to back it.

I do of course defer to your on-the-ground experience but isn't that ultimately mostly all about money and not being able to take longer-term perspective on investment? The lack of cash feeds the lack of imagination. Say the women's game you mention. Richer sports have pushed through the knee-jerk response from some in their midsts who said funding professionalisation was just PC waste of money, and they are now coming closer to self-sustaining levels of interest in women's sport. We just didn't/couldn't afford to take take that longer-term view and are now trailing in that space. So I'm genuinely interested, beyond money, what do you feel the RFL could do to help outside the heartlands?

I wouldn't says it's a belief of non-heartland inferiority, it's just that in permanently skint sport, there's a tendency within the clubs and the RFL itself to shy away from anything that demands a transfer of resources away from the existing clubs towards something more speculative, which creates vicious circle. At the same time though we do have overseas clubs in our structure, and clubs and community activity away from the heartland so there must be some appetite to expand. The test will be if we do - hopefully - secure a better TV deal or outside investment in the next few years, where do those funds get directed? Such opportunities only come around very rarely: In 1995, we put London and Paris in Superleague, but in 2014 we used it to build up mostly heartland clubs. Recent events and signals are confusing at best. It seems the coup supporters want to direct new revenues towards covering losses in existing clubs, but maybe also expanding SL and inviting in significant investment from Australia. Hard to say how it pans out.

I see Salford City FC have been bought out by a Beckham-led consortium with a commitment to "invest significantly in the club, team and its facilities." I wonder if this puts the stadium swap back on the agenda? Salford RD would hardly be in a position to say no this time around. https://www.salfordcityfc.co.uk/news/2025/may/08/salford-city-fc-acquired-by-new-ownership-group-led-by-david-beckham--gary-neville--lord-mervyn-davies-and-declan-kelly/

A rebel league of new clubs in new areas would be bankrupt in a year, however much money the NRL threw at it. Poaching half a dozen of the biggest existing clubs to base a league upon? That could possibly work in and of itself, but if it was in hostile opposition to the remaining RFL structure the damage to the UK game would be catastrophic. I think - hope - the NRL wouldn't go down this course because one of their biggest motivations is to build a supply of quality UK players for their expansion plans, and a civil war would choke the grassroots to death.

I actually think the article isn't completely awful. Most of the things it mentions are either true, sort of true or you could argue the case for. The problem is what it omits - that the material landscape British rugby league exists in is utterly different to RL in Australia - so it gives the impression that it's only traditionalist resistance that's holding UK RL back from a brighter future. Although it's a factor, it's by no means the most important one. Even if we agreed to all the ideas that have been floated, the most likely outcome is still that the NRL would get a hole burnt in its wallet with little to show for it. The mention of a 'strategic partnership' with the NRLbalso makes me sigh given we already have one with a global sporting expert! Which highlights the other thing the article omits - that alongside some traditionalst resistance, the UK game has actually tried some pretty radical things over the years, such as switching to summer, licensing and now the gradings. If you don't mention that, you're not giving a real picture of the situation. I'm still open to NRL involvement - we'd be crazy not to be - so I'm clinging to hope that inside NRL Towers they have a true picture of the situation they'd be getting involved with, rather than the distortion put out by lazy media.

It's very positive but they really need to get those highlighted upper tier blocks on sale. There will be people who would prefer a side-on view from higher up over being behind the posts lower down. My concern is we're entering the territory now where where people can't buy the ticket they want at the price they want and walk away even though we know those tickets will go on sale at some point. We can be very hopeful of hitting 70k now- it would be disappointing if we didn't - so lets at least have 70k on sale covering all ticket options.

An 18 round competition is just way too short. People enjoy watching rugby league, whether in the stadium or on TV and that would be willfully disappearing ourselves from the sports market for no reason. Let people have what they want, particularly in spring and autumn when interest often peaks. And for that reason 10 teams makes loops more likely, not less. Also, 10 teams reduces the number of full time rugby league jobs in the UK and Europe. This may not matter to the NRL, but it would have a significant Knock on effect on the attractiveness of the UK and French pathways with huge long term implications. Re Salford and Hudds, plenty of sports leagues have teams that go a year or two barely winning any games, but with the right system they can rebuild. In fact that's part of the point when you don't have P&R. Or you replace them with better options, as the UK grading system allows. It's certainly not a good reason to contract the league.

That makes sense, although it still seems odd to make Johnson the target, when it's Wigan, Leeds and the unpredictable Saints that will determine whether this goes anywhere. I don't see how having NW at the helm helps DB keep in the game if the "big" clubs decide to go ahead. But it's a maze of contradictions, and I reckon the smart money is still on none if this going anywhere. Perhaps it's just a clever rouse to spook Sky into a better offer next time round!

It doesn't. It's on a par with Derek Beaumont's magic money spinning rugby league channel idea in terms of financial reality. One poster above even suggested that adding Superleague games to the bundle was key to cracking the US market due to timezones. So does that make Superleague more valuable than the NRL? Maybe we should be taking over them. To be fair to the NRL, the remarks that I've seen from official sources such as PvL have been very restrained and general, so it's not them making outlandish claims. They may be leaking some ideas, but mostly this is just Aussie media mouthpieces rambling on about a topic that's getting a bit of traction, based on their knowledge of UK rugby league in the 80's and 90's. They're no better than many posters on here. The fact that none of them even mention IMG's involvement in UK rugby league shows how limited and surface level their knowledge is on the subject.

Sure, but to some an NRL takeover now seems more attractive or looks harder to fend off now that we've shot ourselves in the foot just as our own strategic plan was starting to take root

It's one potential motive, but at the same time I could never see the old RFL leadership under Johnson agreeing to any NRL involvement that ripped 8 or so UK teams - and the funding they generate - away from the current structure. Why would they, it's ultimately a conservative national governing body answerable to the member clubs. But given the chaos and ineptitude of the coup, it feels to me like the institutional power to block a destabilising move by the NRL has now been weakened. Ultimately - perhaps as always - the most powerful actors in all this are the Big Six/Seven clubs. We know who they are, and if all, or almost all, are on the same page it's pretty hard to stop them doing what they want. I could see them agreeing to join an NRL backed league - even a 10 team one - if the money was right. But I'd like to think that they wouldn't do it in a completely hostile manner that severed them from the RFL entirely, which would impoverish and ultimately cripple the rest of the UK game. I think the Wigans and Leeds of this world can see that wouldn't serve them in the long run.

If we hadn't had the RFL coup most people wouldn't be giving these NRL fantasies the time of day. But it needlessly destabilised an improving situation and now everything is up in the air again. It would be the height of unintended consequences of course if some of the coup leaders found themselves cut adrift at the end of it all.

For the Everton test events they're running shuttle buses between Lime St and the stadium, so hopefully that'll be part of our stadium rental deal too.

Absolutely, and there's plenty like you Harry. But conversely there's a growing number of people in the other GM boroughs who are also happy to say they're part of Manchester in a broader sense. I know a couple of folk who moved up from London to Salford for work at Media City, who live in some of the new flats in Salford Quays. They're clear they live in Salford, and understand the difference (I know for a fact that the BBC in particular hammers this home to their staff). But they also identify as being part of Manchester. I guess it's easier when you're new to the area and a bit younger. Whether any of this helps rugby league, I'm not sure!

It's also impressive how many of the Club Wembley £80/100 seats have been sold. Plenty of people ready to pay good money to watch a world class event in world class facilities.

Definitely room for a fan zone, call Simmo now

Cos it's for the people of Manchester, and those that identify with Manchester, not Salford. I'd rather Salford survive but if they didn't...

There's a nearer option than that. If Salford go pop, then a new NRL-backed Manchester branded club - marketed at the people of Manchester - playing out of Barton would do the job. If I was advising the NRL, I'd say that was more likely to succeed than trying to resurrect London, which is just destined to be a money pit.

Great news on the Everton sell-out, it's unprecedented interest for the summer era. So let's get some of that top tier at Wembley open - we're clearly gunning for more than 51k at the first test now so no need to play silly b*gg*rs with potential buyers. Especially in London as many may be first timers. Looks like they've got another 10k ready to go in the top tier, just not live yet.

Sounds good, but I hope this still includes a UK terrestrial broadcaster.

It's more that the very nature of the event - our national team vs the arch enemy, played at landmark stadiums (well, 2 anyway) - signals something that anyone can feel attracted to, and the potential broader audience has responded in droves. It's this type of messaging that we need to expand on. Yes, it's harder to do for a club competition such as Superleague, but it's not impossible as other sports have shown, you focus on things such a player stories that cut across club and even sporting loyalties, and trying to define the image of the competition as a whole. Many clubs - such as your own - do great job of connecting with their immediate local audience, the job of the collective promotion is to grow the sport's audience more broadly, particularly for TV. Which is why the clubs should resist the temptation to think "oh, we don't need this, we can manage it ourselves."