That is the whole essence of sport, this is what makes a contest fascinating.

Using featherstone as the example, they did conquer much bigger teams when they were last in the top flight and what about the mighty Sheffield Eagles in the CC ?

The ehos of some of our supporters would banish these contests, share all the money between the favoured few and the rest of the game can disappear.

For the success of the game, the grassroots have to be strong and we need investment at every level of the game and this will maintain a strong and competetive upper tier.

Many of the larger clubs think they are the "b all and end all" of the game and this is utter fallacy.

Ok there are differences in the quality of teams and players in each league, however there should be a mechanism in place to allow clubs to improve and prosper.

If the lowere league teams have nothing to aim for, investment from within will reduce and player development will suffer.

People talk about the Rugby League Family, but some people are akin to a family member that gets a new job and stops speaking to the other members because they regard themselves as being better than them all of a sudden.

If SL pulls up the brawbridge it would be a dark, dark day.

Wrencat I dont know if you've noticed? , the drawbridge has already been lifted

Nah, just another rumour on RL Fans !

You just can't make this sh-t up! Priceless!

We're going over old ground here. 10 teams in the leage would mean 18 fixtures (+ "magic weekend. Although this could be increased to 27 fixtures by each team playing the others 3 times, this becomes too many fixtures against the same teams and you would still possibly have 2 levels of teams within the league.

The league was expanded from 12 to 14 clubs only a few seasons ago to accomodate Crusaders etc and we should probably reduce to 12 clubs.

The key for me is still to strengthen the second tier and allow for promotion and relegation.

This format will suit ALL clubs and the supporters (I know that we come a long way down the pecking order !). The only problem with this, is the possibility of one of the "untouchables" fnishing in a relegation spot.

Nothing wrong with repeat fixtures, I'd rather see my team play good teams three times a year than crap ones twice

The attendance figures from the last time we had repeat fixtures back that up

We should let the Premier League in our our great idea, then we will be able to see Man Utd, City, Spurs, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool play each other 4 times a season, maybe let the Welsh team in for expansion and Aston Villa to represent the Midlands. Would be good that.

You can't compare our game to the biggest game on the planet in any capacity

Well look at Sheffield Eagles, what happened next? They were unsustainable, it was unsustainable for them to compete with the top clubs, they had their day in the sun but it damn near killed them. What good would it do Featherstone to go down the same path?

The Kiwis have a good record of actually competing in Finals they qualify for. They've even won a fair few in recent years. England/GB do not and they never are a realistic chance when they appear in one. I don't think we should be diluting the top tier of international RL by including England.

So you think that the international game would have been better served by having the kiwi team which was worse than England than playing in the final rather than the England team which was better than the Kiwi's. Its an interesting one I'll give you that.

Just like England really. It's unsustainable for them to compete with the top teams internationally for more than one game running. They have their occasional day in the sun when it doesn't really count and they surprisingly win a game but it damn near kills them in the process and they get hammered the week after. What good does it do them going down this same path internationally year after year?