The examples would suggest that the current view of expansion is, at best flawed, at worst a disaster...



1. London Harlequins: After over 20 years the London club still cannot attract substantial support; it is only recently that they have contributed any players at a senior level. Ok they have fostered grass roots development at the junior level, but do they really deserve a franchise for SL?



2. Gateshead: this is a club in an area that's designated as a 'development area' and has been for numerous years. Apart from a foray in SL that resulted in a merger with Hull and breaking into NL1 last year the club is all but bankrupt.



3. Crusaders: after a promising 1/2 season on the field the wheels well and truly fell off when they lost 6 overseas signings to visa problems, causing major embarrassment all round and possibly resulting in a major fine (that might see them out of business); added to which they can't really find a home.



4. Catalan Dragons: heralded as THE SUCCESS. Looking under the covers though... this is in a strong RL area of France so does it really qualify as a 'development' project?



So the only success is in an area steeped in RL tradition - what are your thoughts - success or disaster?

There is two ways of looking at this.



1. We need to expand the game and persist with it. Nothing suddenly grows overnight and we need to get the game established in wider regions which have large resources to tap into. eg. London, Russia, USA etc



or



2. We have to accept that after 114 years of the game's existance, we have expanded as far as we're going to go (Australasia and pacific nations, and France) and that our game will remain largely regionalised. We enjoy it so is there any real need to spread it further?



Personally speaking I would go for the sceond option. Yes i think its the greatest game in the world but that doesn't mean the rest of the world will agree.



Therefore, I would like the money the RFL waste (on euro nations like Ireland, Italy, Lebonan, estonia etc) to go back into the communities and clubs already established (and i would include the south of france, wales and London in this).



It already costs me a fortune to travel to Catalans, Crusaders, Quins plus Wembley and Murrayfield.



I wouldn't mind a SL team in Cumbria as it's a Rugby League hotbed... and its the closest I am to rugby league since moving to Scotland 3 years ago!!!

SL need Sky or another broadcaster to double the money now given, that Sky pay double to Union because they class their sport as National with a better European and Global infrastucture, both Codes are slowly but surely coming together with the changes each make to the Laws of the game, its quite concievable that there will be one viable code in less than 50 years from now, so League will expand but not in the way you would wish it to.

^^^^^



Is my take on it

It's certainly conceivable. However, at the inception of Union professionalism - and even after the start of Super League - I can remember plenty of pundits opining that there would be one code (pretty much a Union takeover of League) within a decade. Long may we continue to push out the timeline!

If RL is going to take off outside its heartland, it really is 'now or never'. After three dreary autumn internationals for 'the other code' even the die hard Union fans that I am surrounded by here are taking a hard look at the code they follow and saying positive things about RL as a spectator sport.



Supposedly the IRB are in 'crisis' talks about how they can make Union more interesting to spectators. I suspect that a lot of the rule changes they will propose (uncontestested scrums, simplifying breakdowns) will make the game flow faster in the way that League does.



I sincerely hope the RFL can steal a march on the Union guys and get Union fans through the gates. Things like losing the CC from the BBC will not help, because most union fans watch this at least.



That's my rant over...

I think the main problem with expansion is satellite clubs. They're always going to struggle unless they're put in an area where there's already a strong desire for RL (like Catalands).



Crusaders proposed move to Wrexham would be beneficial for them as it brings them closer to the heartlands of the sport while maintaining a welsh presence in the game.



Quins have always had a problem with attracting fans, one that is not helped by the fact the current administration of the club don't seem to WANT to attract fans, at least that's what I've picked up from their message board.



TBH, I think the smartest way to expand the game is to look at the borders of the heartland and push out into these areas. There is oppotunity for expansion. I have no doubt about this. However, expansion cannot be rushed. Many people were jumping up and down over Crusaders this season "oh they shouldn't be in SL", "they're not competitive", "the world is flat" etc etc etc.



Personally, I felt that it was a little too soon for them to be promoted up to SL level. But, as I love the game, I was willing to support them.

Though, I would have prefered they had these 3 years in NL1 to build their fan base and establish themselves (after all, how can you attract fans if the team gets it's ass handed to it every week?).



But I will still support the idea of expansion because for the game to survive or even thrive we need an ever increasing player pool. More clubs mean increased catchment areas, schools playing the game, and that will have a knock on effect for the rest of the game in this country as we'll have more players to pick from and reduce our reliance on overseas imports which in turn may mean we start to grow and improve our international game as well.



As for overseas expansion, I'd suggest the US is ripe for the game. There is a similarity in rules between RL and Gridiron and the fast paced style of RL would appeal to an american audience. There's also the fact that RL requires very little in the way of equipment to actually play and the way you get a sport to be popularised in the states is if it's played in schools and colleges. You've also a potentally large player pool of failed gridiron players as players drop off the pyramid all the way from high school to college to pro leagues. But again, this would require long term planning.



No quick fixes will improve our sport. Only considered and well thought out planning and development will do that.

Personally, I would welcome one game of "Rugby", so long as the new game kept some of the key elements of league. The 6 (or how ever many would be decided) tackles would be the main one for me.



I wouldn't be opposed to line outs, reviewing the number of players or the union scrum for example.



Simplification of both codes to fit a new game would also attract more new fans IMO. A huge barrier to getting people to watch our (and their) game is the complexity of the rules.

Oh and could someone change the thread title to the correct spelling.....it's bugging the hell out of me!!

Each to their own. You would not get me to Odsal, or even to switch on my TV, to watch a unified code.

the problem with the idea of the combined code is that you'd still have pureists on both sides who'd not want to watch the new game and so you'd end up diluting the game from 2 camps to 3.

Even if that was THE ONLY game around.



I agree that 3 different games would be a non starter, I'm talking about a single game.



Keep it in summer and we would, ultimatley, end up with a huge product to sell.