NW10LDN

Difference is that union has history in Italy and 2 clubs competing in pro competition. Italy's League side are all NRL players.

How though? France are in there. Serbia have a decent domestic set up and so do Greece. Forget about Italy. They are reliant on Australian players, although their union side obviously prefers League based on how they play.

What international game? Aussies don't care. They'd be happy just to play NZ and Tonga every year and leave it there. No other country in Europe comes near our standard.

4 is too much. 3 with 12 each is better. That's a 23 week season with Magic.

Swinton could be bigger but I don't think there's enough interest in Salford to warrant 2 teams. Relocating or renaming doesn't seem likely.

I reckon an investment firm could do a better job at marketing their team than a ageing oil trader.

Well David Hughes had spent a lot of money on the Broncos but they still have an attendance of around 500. 10,000 people turned up to their first game as Fulham. London Irish moved back to London and are already reaching an average of 3000. I do think we need close off the SL for a few years and let's clubs apply to join when they are ready. Pro/Rel offers no stability for Leigh or Toulouse.

Right. Just chuck them into the SL then if that's it.

Does anyone have a list of the current full time clubs in Champ/League 1. I would agree with having a split between full time and part time clubs.

Then do it politely. League is going backwards and the solution is not have 3 clubs from the same borough competing in the top level.

Again, I never said they were the top 10 clubs. Is it possible for you to actually have a reasonable conservation without resorting to snide remarks.

I never said they were the best ran clubs but they have more potential to grow than Featherstone or Wakefield. The game already has serious problems if you haven't noticed.

It has to be 10 with the potential to grow. Leeds, St. Helens, Warrington, Hull F.C, Wigan, Catalan Dragons, and Hull KR are safe. Below that for me would be Salford Red Devils, Huddersfield, and Toulouse. But you could also throw Bradford in there so limiting it to 10 doesn't make sense.

I would keep both SL and Champ at 12. Either way, some clubs will not make the cut. League 1 with reduced funding is effectively the NCL.

Don't need to do that. A 9s competition can't be limited to existing clubs within the SL/Championship. Want to grow the game through a 9s completion then have a place for developing teams as well. Leicester Storm, Nottingham Outlaws, etc. These are the places which need to be targeted.

Innovation to me is not 9s. Even the 7s has sort of faded away despite World Rugby (away with that name, jokers) to continue pushing it. It hasn't actually led to any noticeable improvement in weaker nations. Innovation involves moving beyond the M62 corridor and building the sport in all parts of the country and beyond.

Don't think a 9s will be successful. Works in union because they use it to showcase the game in other countries. Reducing the SL to 10 is just an admission of the sad state of League in England. We could potentially have 3 clubs from the same borough next year (Cas, Wakefield, Featherstone). All great clubs but not sustainable going forward.

It has to be measure of success and one why the RFL has failed at. And it's not just in London.

Maybe and it would better than now because Londoners might actually pay attention to the sport. Grassroots is actually very weak in London. Most boroughs have no underage clubs and most schools don't have it in their PE programme. Again, you've ignored the point. Melbourne's success had led to growth in the in the grassroots game. Broncos and David Hughes have been useless for growing the game in London.

So you didn't bother reading the rest then. It's better than what is going on here. You just highlighted why this game is in decline in the UK.

Sport is run in an amateur fashion. The NRL gets a lot of stick but Melbourne are heading for the second final in a row and the NRL has put serious effort into growing the game in Victoria which is AFL country. They also put a PNG team into the Queensland Cup which is really helping them. The RFL on the other hand took the opposite approach. The game might as well not exist in large parts of the country but everyone in Aus knows what the NRL is.

Short answer. Union is much bigger so they are willing to tolerate it. Same reason why they'll show a dull 0-0 draw between two Big 6 clubs and ignore an entertaining game between Leeds and Aston Villa.

Growth is limited even within England. League might as well be non-existent in large parts of the country. Heritage sides are good for establishing the game in different countries but you can't rely on them long term.

It is a poor lager though but drink whatever you want.

No benefit to a 10 team league. At least you get 22 games with a 12 team league. Decent season for all clubs. Keep it at 12 and put strict requirements on clubs. Academies, long term growth plans, etc. This will hurt the Broncos but the game has no hope in the capital when most of the city has no community clubs. Put it this way. Gaelic football, a sport played only by Irish, has more underage clubs in London than rugby league.