I can see only one way to fix super league and it must be driven from the front by the RFL before we lose everything. We need more rich investors for each club that wishes to remain in superleague so maybe set out a new list of regulations for each club that they must show a healthy set of funds going forward. Then we must increase the salary cap or even abolish it all together and start to bring the world class aussies over here, in tern keeping Sky happy becasue if we lose that contract we might as well find a local rugby union team to support. Souds absolutley drastic i know but our sport is in such a state we really need such a change or our core sponsors will start to get cold feet. We are currently losing money at most of our clubs year in year out and thats due to poor attendances because we have hardly any Marquee players playing in our league. Tomkins is now on his way with the looks of it, are we going to see the death of our sport within the next five years??? So to get our crowds back again we need to lose money before we can start making it again, any Roman Abramovich type investors should be welcomed with open arms!



Did i say it was an easy fix! My Mistake!

An Uncle Mo, 1985 vintage, is what's required.

We certainly need to get a bit more capitalist in our approach. An increase in the cap or an outright abolition may well be the way forward. We need to give those clubs who can spend money the freedom to do so. This will hopefully lead to us retaining our best players and bringing over some decent NRL players like we could 5-10 years ago. In turn hopefully sponsors, sky etc will see we have a better product and invest. I can't believe how far backwards we have gone since the millennium. Someone, somewhere has really taken their eye off the ball.

I think a mix of £1.8M salary cap OR 50% of turnover (whichever is the highest) would be a good way forward. Let the clubs choose which one they want to spend to at the start of each season

but what about investors like Koukash who presumably aim to bring money in by first buying some players who will put bums on seats?

There is no doubt that we need more money in the sport. I'm not sure if it's reasonable to expect owners to fund it though. The money should come from commercial interests, sponsorship etc.



What makes me smile is that the people who want club owners to put their hand in their pocket would generally be the first to complain if the matchday charges/ season ticket prices went up by about £2 or £3 per game.



Just to show how much that would impact Wigan, a £3 increase would mean almost an extra £600K in income.

We shouldn't be raising the prices, we should be finding a way of attacting those who watch the game in the pub or at home on sky.

Well he is doing it now with the cap we have in place so if he wanted to spend that bit more he would need to up the clubs turnover by making it a properly run business and investing in marketing, youth development, community projects etc....



Essentially he would need to run it like IL runs Wigan

Not to the extent I'd like him to be able to though. He's signed some solid players but there's a massive gap between Meli and Morley and Tomkins, Watkins etc.

It already is £1.85m as of next year is my understanding. It was £1.6m but you got various dispensations such as an allowance for a player like Lockers who had been at a club 10 years and for however many senior and junior internationals you produced and so on. If you qualified for the lot you ended up with a salary cap of £1.85m. Wigan probably did qualify.



Next year I believe it's just a straight £1.85m cap with no strings attached. No 50% of turnover rule either but that won't work anyway because the cap is "live" and you can only check turnover after the season has finished.

Koukash is a wealthy bloke attracted to the game yet he is being hamstrung by the salary cap i wonder how long he will put up with the restrictions before he packs up and moves on out of the game as whole

We most certainly do not!



Look at the mess capitalism is making of the world right now. In a genuine capitalist system we would end up playing Saints, Leeds and Warrington ad nauseum. The RFL SHOULD be regulating the competition. The salary cap in principle is a good idea, but needs to be raised or changed radically to allow clubs to compete in the market that is Super League, Union and the NRL.



There is NO money in club ownership. Individuals get into it for a variety of reasons, probably more to do with ego than any idea of making money.



Finding wealthy individuals is not the answer (The Koucash thing will end in tears that's a cert) surely the way forward is to have supporters and the local authorities having a GREATER say in clubs ownership ~ clubs should belong to the community NOT an individual. The game has to be self-reliant with income coming from TV rights, sponsorship and supporters pockets not wealthy individuals, who let's face it aren't really that interested in small clubs in the north of England. Look at the trouble Everton have had getting an owner with money. They get 35,000 gates every other week plus a global marketing opportunity plus much more from Sky than any Rugby League Club does, and they still can't find a sugar daddy.



I'm probably in a minority here but as a lifelong Socialist I still believe that Socialism (not Communism) can provide plenty of answers.

You're talking about two separate things here, world government and rugby league government. I'm socialist when it comes to world government because that's where I believe things should be geared towards looking after those at the bottom, because IMO it would be immoral to not look after them. However, in rugby league the greater concern should be with those at the top, if those at the bottom can't keep up they won't starve or go homeless, they will just have to improve or give up and let someone else have a go.

Socialist principles can applied across the board. The word "Politics" means embracing all areas of life. I don't think you should abandon your principles just because this is sport. Socialism as you know is based on fairness and equality of opportunity, community action and a lesser gap between rich and poor all of which to an extent we can have in Rugby League whilst realising that yes we do belong in the real world and some clubs cannot be propped up if there is no demand for them (ie nobody wants to watch).



I've made this point before but Rugby League in this country has been incredibly sustainable. I would be concerned about the WHOLE of SL not just those at the top. As I said you would end up playing Saints, Warrington and Leeds ad infinitum, ad nauseam!!!