Not really true as far as I can see in the near future.

[urlhttp://www.theroar.com.au/2011/06/20/nrl-expansion-plans-on-hold-until-2015/[/url



Even if they go to 18 teams in 2015, that doesn't represent a massive increase in demand or influx of UK players when the best of southern hemisphere yawnion talent will be on the NRL doorstep and ripe for picking.

The point is; if they don't want our most of our decent players now; why would they want them when they have stacks of money and only two extra teams' squads at most to fill up?



All it really means is that we will get an even inferior quality of second rate aussies over here.

If our coaches have enough sense (debatable), they should see the opportunity to develop and use home grown talent instead of relying on inferior quality imports.



God, I'm sounding like Gary Schofield now - shoot me!

If they have money to spend (and it's looking increasingly likely they will have, the best NRL teams would be foolish to not have a scouting network that includes the north of England. Who knows where the NRL could go with this kind of money? It could start them on the path to being a NFL, MLB, Premiership of our game i.e. a true genuine global brand. Although it might mean we lose some players to the NRL the overall increase in exposure for the sport is potentially ludicrous.

That's League's business.







I think old age is beginning to affect your memory, mate. Don't you recall our conversation several months ago in which we discussed the current and likely future economic climate in relation to Rugby League? I distinctly recall you agreeing with me when I said League is likely to struggle given a) the seemingly endless depression affecting the North of England, b) Union's ever-increasing finances and c) the NRL's latest TV deal.



League is not in the ascendant. Our results against the best team in the world are an embarrassment. Crowds are not what they were and neither is SL's sponsorship. We are desperately short of talent and Union is about to embark on a massive spending programme. The guy interviewed on SKY wasn't talking about bringing one or two players to union a season. The emphasis was on [ibloc signings. [/i







Why use the NRL's windfall as a counterargument when it was conceded in the first place? We're talking BRITISH rugby here. Not the world game. And what good a cash-rich NRL will do SL I've no idea. Sure, we benefit at international level but what's the point if the game HERE has become a joke with washed-up, third-rate deadbeats being the star men at the top clubs?







Unfortunately, this "fortress" appears to be leaking our best talent. On the other hand THEIR fortress is like the home of King Croesus.







Yeah? How much are the season tickets?

I disagreed with you on the union bit, but said i expected the NRL to become a magnate for British RL players and potentially like the NBA in Basketball or NHL in ice Hockey. That doesnt mean league is dieing it means its growing.



Mugs you are talking British RL , i am looking at the bigger picture. Just as you cant look at RU without taking in their international game, so you cant take in the state of RL without looking at the NRL.



I also disagree about there being no point to the game if you are not watching superstars.

RL has never had genuine superstars in this country it has only ever had local heroes. As such to be a fan of RL you cant be someone hypnotised by glamour, because there is little hype and glamour in British RL. What attracts people to RL is the game itself, and the genuine feeling of community amongst its followers.

You see the same thing outside the realms of Premiership football. Tens of thousands of fans watch championship teams knowing those players are second rate, but they do so because they love their football and are passionate in following their local side.



In a war there are always casualties. We will lose a few good men along the way, but just as Britain stood firm against the Nazi Hordes so should RL stand firm against the Twickenham white shirts. For we know that across the Oceans a leviathan has awoken. Just as the USA turned the tide against Hitler, the Australian NRL will ensure that League wins the Rugby war.

Money talks in sport but we have the better more marketable game (for the masses), swings and roundabouts, they both survive side by side like they have done for years Union will always be bigger and League will always get it's plaudits from the occasional neutral. I'm not worried.

Exactly. To be honest I don't particularly care all that much for the NRL. It's not that I don't enjoy watching. It's just that it is too far away to be socially relevant. It's not like I can just nip down to Brisbane to take in a few games here and there. And the NRL can stand up for itself. It is not under any threat.







Of course you can. There are thousands of British SL (and lower league) fans who haven't watched a single NRL game and have no plans to do so - just as there are millions of football fans who haven't the foggiest idea who the Dutch champions are.







You're confusing stardom with ability. A "star" is a media construction. You can be a world class player whilst never being a "superstar". To be honest, I could quite easily live with no stars at all. But a game without talent is at an evolutionary dead end.







Martin Offiah was a superstar. So was Ellery Hanley. Paul Sculthorpe wasn't too far away either with his regular appearances in the media. But don't try and convince me that the game never had outstanding talent. It did. The problem we face to today is talent is being leeched away from the sport. And THAT is something I cannot simply pass off as insignificant.







Why do you keep talking about "glamour"? I never mentioned it.







Alex Murphy was "second rate"? Tommy Voll, Billy Boston, Ellery Hanley, Kevin Ward, John Woods, Tony Myler, Brian McTigue - all "second rate"? These are some of the very people who DEFINED the sport of Rugby League.







For heaven's sake quit with the cod-Churchillian nonsense. It might stir the passions but it doesn't alter the facts.

What are these facts that you refer to?

I actually quite liked the way it was put .....and nowt wrong with passion

The number of players Union will target is probably lower than most would think. Despite some moderate success with league players (who were deliberately fast-tracked into the England side) there have been a fair few failures as well - Chev Walker, Danny Williams and Lee Smith from Leeds for example. If we get our s kicked by Aus/NZ again this year, it's hard to imagine Union falling over themselves to sign up players.

I do not rate Josh Tomkins that highly, is he is above average player but that is all, can you blame anyone at his age if he is offered the "rumoured" big money, I would take it!



So many Super League players have tweeted this last few days that they would love that type of money and also the chance to play international rugby in front of packed crowds!



There is not sadly the money in our game currently to throw around to keep players, so many clubs are running at a loss, gate receipts do not cover wages neither do the local lotteries that RL clubs used to run successfully, the Euro and UK Lottery has taken a lot of that cash flow!

Woah!!!! Great classical reference there. Probably only three people understood it though.