I fully agree with reducing the number of clubs but didn't the SL chairmen vote for 14 clubs ?

Rovers lose less money than Hull,







, please







, stop it









You have finished in the league above Hull 4 times in the last 25 years. In that time Hull have made it to 4 show piece finals, winning two of them.



Of course you out perform us season upon season

but aside the partisan attitudes - rovers do not deserve to be relgated

You clearly know nothing about your own club. That's why the Grudge has said Rovers have to cut costs and not spend the cap. We lost 250 grand your average loss is double that and this year will be even more as your gates have dropped by 1000

if it were to go back to 12 teams then that would have to bring back the 6 team play offs which i feel they should go back to even in this 14 team competition



if it were to be 10 teams we could play everyone 3 times but if it is 12 teams would just play everyone twice with an extra for Magic weekend 23 games?

I think he was talking about the seasons that both clubs have been in the same league



In the 5 years rovers and hull have both been in the super league rovers had to stabilize and build a strong superleague squad and hull already had that sorted when rovers were promoted and rovers have finished above hull 3 times

Personally would like to see two full time leagues of 10 with P&R and the money split between the leagues 66:33. Extra fixtures made up of a League Cup with group stages rather than playing teams 3 times in the league.



Wakefield have turned the corner and are a club on the up. Check out their crowds, the developments at the club, etc since Glover took over. More chance of them sticking around than Cas. Cas are no closer to a stadium than they were 5 years ago.



Salford have the ground but seriously need to improve on the pitch and in the crowds. Similar to Widnes I suppose. Don't know where these rumours of them being in financial trouble are coming from. They're just living within their means.



Bradford, well they should start again really unless the new owners pay off the debts.



London should be out. Poorest in all areas other than the ground.



As for Rovers, well I can't see why you'd kick them out other than the ground issue, which is changing bit by bit. Not quite at the pace everyone would like, but faster than Cas and Wakey anyway!



I'd probably go Bradford (bust), London (poor), Cas (declining) and Widnes/Salford.

I love the way the dobbins choose to be selective when it suits them, only counting super league era when comparing tgemselfs to fc . If thats the case the dobbins havent won the challenge or been to a major final or is that me been selective ?

What did Pearson say? Is there a link?



Hudgell, Pearson and McManus all want fewer teams.



I think it might be economically necessary, but it isn't desirable - ideally we'd be growing and spreading the game.



If there isn't enough talent to go around why were so many so keen to cut overseas numbers to give homegrown players a chance?

Where on earth did you drag that load of old fanny up from?