Although there is a lot of talk about the SL licences, the situation at the bottom of the pro leagues seems worth looking at too.

With paltry attendances, a history of serial failure (how many times have they gone bust ?) and regular huge scores against them, should Gateshead Thunder remain in the pro ranks ?
Similarly London Skolars, although not looking quite are precarious, are always near the bottom and just haven't taken off at all in London.

In fact to call these "pro" clubs is a very loose definition as they are probably at a standard lower than the top "amateur" clubs.

I know it's great for expansion to say we have clubs in the North East and North London but what does that really amount to ? Not much in these cases I don't think - perhaps they should go into the Conference instead, as they would be more credible there ?

Don't do yourself an injustice your currently 4th and your crowds are impressive ,last 2 years you were poor and your board is still iffy but to cull you would be ott imho

We need a cull at the top IMO.

The likes of Leeds, Wigan, Warrington and Saints have a monopoly on rugby league in this country.

When I try to start a serious debate, how disappointing it is to find that 2 people with the IQ of an amoeba (between them) can spout their usual tribal rubbish.

I was not talking about their club (or mine), yet the infantile brains cannot work it out.

(at least Damo tried to make a general point)

From TlJ's signature:

[iHate rovers, hate their fat ugly fans, hate their players, hate their coach, hate their directors, hate their "pride of the east hull slums" mentality.
Always have, always will.[/i

TlJ - IQ of [ihalf[/i an amoeba.

But he still raises a point for debate that is drifted straight away.



IMO TLJ has a point, but I wonder if a cull is too extreme. Perhaps these clubs need some more support from the RFL, but in a more targeted way. I suspect the Leeds and Saints of this world don't really need RFL support so anything they might get can be taken away and used elsewhere. Whether its a losing battle remains to be seen. I'd like all the "pro clubs" to be doing well, well enough to compete and improve.

i thought that john kear made a very good point when he said that the rfl should be pushing to make championship teams full time and then bring back promotion and relagation.

imo not all lower league clubs have the ambition to be any better than part time clubs and they should be allowed to stay that way if they like but not at the expence of clubs with ambition to move forward in that same league.

i would introduce a two league system with both leagues having to fill a criteria of been full time and i would bring back a two up two down system.

super league 1

leeds
wigan
warrington
hull
huddersfield
st helens
hull kr
catalans
widnes
bradford

group 2

castleford
wakefield
leigh
featherstone
harlequins
crusaders
barrow
salford
tolouse
south wales scorpions

with the remainder playing on a part time basis in a conferance style league.

I am sure Halifax would be delighted to be excluded but Fev included! By the way I think the 2 division approach is the way forward as well...its difficult to pick the 20 teams that would make that up though..

No room for Batley, Dewsbury or Sheffield? might as well get rid of Cas and bring in london scholars or even Hemel stags.

i knew i would miss one or two teams out but you get my point that all the teams that feel they have the capability to go full time and a crack at the top league shouldnt have that opportunity pulled away from them has is the case at the minute.

on top of that i would like all sky money devided equally amongst all the full time teams and at least 1 game a week shown live from both groups with all clubs allowed to work to the same salary cap.

but do those clubs have the ambition to play at an elite level,i recently heared an interview with the owner of batley saying they no their place and are comfortable with it and any attempt to think otherwise would bankrupt them.