M j M

I'm sure you could find a way which would work for both parties. Headingley has, in the context of international games, essentially limitless corporate capacity it can open up so there would be plenty for them to both go at.

The ticketing website is appalling but it looks like the North Stand has gone off-sale for Headingley. Now it's not as big as the old version was and the centre sections are corporate* but if it is sold out that is a promising sign. (*if it's true the RFL have taken on selling the corporate rather than leaving it to Leeds then that's absolute madness)

Come on, don't be downcast. I've just crunched the numbers and by my reckoning when London do a SL, LLS and Challenge Cup treble next year, and pack out the Cherry Red for every game, they will be challenging Cas, Leigh and Wakey for that 12th spot.

Wigan will be weak on the financial and some of the stadium aspects so, ignoring the bonus points for trophy lifts, I'd expect Warrington to probably be slightly ahead of them.

"The taxman" has no interest in attendance figures.

The whole thing just confirms what we always knew - whilst we have a handful of six or seven clubs who are obviously very good and valuable to the top flight after that there are a whole bunch of clubs who are all about the same size or have offsetting plusses and minuses. Most of the Bs would make serviceable but not outstanding Super League clubs - and most have in the past or are now in there. The idea that the best way to find out which ones get into the top flight was through this contrived (and within the narrow band of border-line Bs) manipulable, spreadsheet exercise remains utterly ridiculous.

I always look back to the 1998 series vs the Kiwis on this point. The first test was at Huddersfield, an 18k crowd was ok but not a sell out and things were relativity muted in the build up. Enter Bill Harrigan. A contentious call just before half time let the Kiwis score followed by a clear penalty try not given to GB in the second half and we lost by 6 points. The coverage of this injustice the week after was insane (by RL standards) - and Frank Endacott coaching the Kiwis then went out in the press and stoked it to the max with some very well judged wind up comments. The result was the second test at Bolton which for a very long time remained that stadium's record crowd and was the first time I really saw ticket touts getting traction outside an RL game. Controversy and protagonists who get people riled are really important factors in generating interest. Unfortunately our sport nowadays has great expertise in the "they're a really good team who are well coached so it will be a tight contest" approach to pre match build up.

Did you ever go to a GB vs France game???

Has the League Express style guide been binned for this 'journalist'? "Rugby World Cup" - really? In League Express????? "Rugby Union" with capital letters and "rugby league' in lower case? How standards have fallen.

There's often not much of an atmosphere, by UK RL standards, at England/GB games. Unless it's vs Kiwis or Kangaroos and even then it disappears if we're getting hammered. The problem with Tonga I suspect is that we don't really dislike them enough for fans to be at their usual club-level of engagement with the game.

Nope I mean Wigan. . . That's the rumour anyway.

Is it true that Wigan have signed Sam Eseh?

Warriors-Wolves, the merger made in hell.

We're miles off topic but... I've no affiliation with it at all other than having been to its student union a few times a couple of decades ago but I'm pretty sure it was still Leeds Polytechnic in 1989...

Yes, Ricky Stuart of all people isn't going to pick someone rubbish at halfback for Canberra. Leeds I think would like him to be similar to someone like Andrew Dunemann. When Dunemann came to the club in 2003 he had the benefit of having proven himself as a dependable player in SL over several years. Clearly Frawley hasn't quite done that although at least he has the benefit of having played here before so he'll know what he's getting into in terms of broader culture and climate. We'll see what happens, there's a good % of big name NRL players who simply don't perform as hoped in SL and there's likewise a very good number of people with no real reputation who become very good SL players. Making predictions on how a player is going to go at this stage, before he's pulled on a shirt and settled into a new team with a new spine, is pretty foolhardy really.

He's announced his retirement hasn't he?

Yes there is something in there about turnover and about profitability. A few English SL clubs are run on a sustainable basis: Hull, Cas, Wakey and presumably Salford can't really afford to run at a significant loss whilst Leeds is generally profitable and don't get owner funding. The rest though have long been reliant on the long term largesse of some rich men, for which we should all be grateful.

Croft reported to be on around £325k a year at Leeds.

This seems like a bizarre and paranoid rant. Salford are selling two of their best players for a lot of money, it's going to get press attention. There's only twelve clubs in Super League and there are several reporters covering the game for various websites of higher or lower levels of clickbaitery. Your club like all the others is going to get covered, there's no reason to get uppity about it.

One thing that comes to mind when thinking about the Salford "Become an Owner" thing is that it looks designed to ensure the club picks up those points for "owner investment" that are part of the IMG criteria. (The blurb says "Defined as either an equity injection (i.e. share capital)or long-term loan to the club (provided that such loan is supported by confirmation that it cannot be withdrawn with less than one year’s notice). The intention here is to reward clubs that sustainably invest in growth. This is for the three accounting (periods) prior to the current year i.e. in 2023, this would be an average of 2020,2021 and 2022.") I'm intrigued as to whether the ticking of this IMG box made clear at the time? Not that they were misleading or anything, just wondered if it was mentioned.

I've been involved in businesses with around 500 different property leases and they've all had repairing and dilapidation clauses which require the business to be responsible for maintenance. Sometimes with a schedule of condition which mitigates dilaps. There might be some big structural things the landlord will still be responsible for but unless sports stadia are different to other sorts of commercial property (it's possible) I can't see why maintenance would be anything other than the Bull's responsibility.

Yeah for rent of just £125k a year it's almost inconceivable that the repair obligation lies with the landlord.

No, that is not how commercial property works. Maintenance is the responsibility of the tenant.

I've heard there will be an announcement from Leeds this afternoon...

My only guess is that he was trying to get an NRL deal and it then fell through.