Please explain what the top-down and bottom-up approaches are, because surely what you've written is a contradiction! If you have lots of successful amateur clubs that have recently been formed in the RLC then the bottom-up approach within the last 13 years [ihas[/i worked. Money has been poured in at the roots of the game and the stem and leaves are starting to open and spread out, so to speak.

in about 90 years, one club has grown from amatuer to semi-pro, one. Skolars.



Since the we put a SL team in London, look at the massive growth of the amateur game there.



The RLC is a very good thing, but it isnt spreading the game as far and as fast as putting teams in London and Wales have done.



Bottom up is building from the bottom, as it sounds, taking a place where there is no amateur game, growing one, then once the game in that area becomes strong enough a semi-pro team or two, once they are strong enough a full pro team. This has never happened, not once, in the entire history of RL.



Top down would go the other, use a club like quins or Crusaders to give visibility to the game, get lots of people interested and help set up an amateur game which will grow stronger, faster.

A visible presence that shows the pair of them lurching from crisis to crisis etc etc etc. That really makes people think the game is worthwhile....good for a laugh for the kick and clap brigade maybe

the kick and clap brigade arent important.



The improvements in the amateur game in london and wales which co-incide with the work done with Quins (in all their forms) and Crusaders has unarguable.

There's a strong amateur game in Cumbria isn't there? No SL clubs there.

there has been though.

which was pretty disasterous if my memory serves me correctly ?



Cumbria has every right to expect SL repesentation as much as Wales,London & France IMO

When was this announced? I cant remember seeing the press release?

I'm not talking about any clubs in particular. I'm talking about what the RFL are trying to do. Replace long time under-performing clubs with better run clubs with more potential.

So you are suggesting that we kick teams out of Super League who are there on merit and replace them with ones who have the potential to be there on merit in the future?

if it were about merit then SL would look a whole lot different than it does now.

London, Paris, Gateshull, Crusaders, Catalans....all given places in the comp before licencing was even thought of...the success of these teams is variable.....but the fact remains that they were all fastracked into SL.

I feel for the team that gets ejected....but repeat that all the Chairmen agreed to this system.....and nobody else but each individual club is responsible for their failings.

The Club I support have failed to attract fans...even though they were told this was the No1 priority by the RFL.....Cas, Wakey, Salford were all warned about stadiums.....they have nobody to blame if they are the team ejected for not addressing the warnings issued by the RFL......



As for the OP......of course the game is a credible sport. Just because you disagree with the governing body doesn't make league any more of a credible sport......

The merits of being in SL have changed. Get over it. Teams that aren't living up to their license promises aren't there on merit any more.