you mean an opinion from someone who sees GH & the RFL for what they are?

Only if you're blind.

or not a Whino?

GH has held back RL for a decade, to keep precious Leeds as the RFL team of choice, now the wheels are off you are in free fall, embrace it.

Of course. The only club in this sport that is a success both on the field and commercially is the one that is holding the sport back. Not, for example, the three that put out SOS statements this week.

Hetherington has done more for the expansion and sustainability of Rugby League in this country than anyone I can think of. His track record of accomplishment speaks for itself.

He's keen for the RFL to remain in charge partly because he had to sort out the mess last time the SL clubs went rogue without any consideration of a game wide strategy or any interest in doing the unglamorous bits of investment and administration the governing body needs money to do.

GH was the major sponsor and supporter of Nigel Wood - no one can seriously suggest Mr Wood took the game forward in any way. In fact the game went backwards so I am unsure as to you comment about sustainability

You have little time for Leneghan - his club produce as man youngsters for his own club and the wider game as a whole. If we consider participation/quality of the player pool to be one of the biggest challenges of the sport then Wigan have/are done/doing a pretty good job.


If the game is going to get a new boss man it needs to be from outside of the sport e.g. Richard Lewis who comes without affliations and is left to get on with the job without interference from the likes of Leneghan or Hetherington. Sadly I suspect Ralf Rimmer - a failure at club level and part of the Wood mafia that failed the sport.


There are two issues for me - The game as a whole has two real challenges - how do you increase participation and how do we get more money into the game. The RFL can deal with the first challenge but the elite competition is what is going to drive the second. Both parties should be left to persue their own strategies seperately. The premier league in soccer shows what is possible financially when you seperate the elite competition from the game's governing body

so you would be happy to have say 7, profitable clubs, 4 or 5 who make the numbers up at the top level and the rest go part time or bust?
Salford, Huddersfield, Widnes and to a degree Wakefield offer nothing to the competition off the field. nothing at all

As I have said I think a 14 team SL - locked in minimum 5 years that covers all the areas the competition wants to include:

West Yorkshire - Leeds, Bradford, Castleford, Huddersfield/Halifax
Lancashire/Cheshire - St Helens, Wigan, Warrington, Leigh/Widnes
Humberside - Hull and KR
France - Catalans and Toulouse
London - Broncos
Canada - Toronto

All other clubs are linked to one of these - say Featherstone to Leeds, Wakefield to Castleford etc

Home and away once no magic weekend unless its part of a regular fixture and each seven lose a home fixture the following year the other seven do likewise

Top 5 playoff for place in GF - no hub cap - prize money based on place in table to encourage competition towards the end of the year. CC to be played for by the top 8 each year.

No other games on the day the televised matches are on if this is practical - would a Saturday afternoon be attractive to a BBC?

why should bradford be rewarded after what they've done?

I agree with most of that. Would just make the play off the top 6, not 5. Don't agree with the CC format proposed, either drop it or make it unseeded for all. And the "hub cap" should be celebrated more not less, it is an achievement that makes the previous rounds something worwhile.

I would also ensure we have a South Yorkshire representative in there, and a Cumbrian. More important IMO than London and Canada.