A 14-team Super League may sound right but in this moment, it’s wrong

First of all, it is important to reiterate that despite all the speculation, there have been no decisions made about anything relating to Nigel Wood’s strategic review.

It is possible that by the conclusion of Tuesday’s Council meeting in Wakefield, there will still have been no decisions made or no votes conducted. It remains entirely possible those calls could be for another day, with the primary order of the day to be the delivery of the review.

But one thing is abundantly clear: there is a growing school of thought from many within the sport that Super League is heading in the direction of becoming a 14-team competition once again.

Wood’s review will likely recommend that to solve the problems around fixtures and the calendar, but what happens next in terms of how we get to that is where things get really interesting. For example, it has been stressed to Love Rugby League there may not be a vote on the day tomorrow – and instead the publication of the report to try and promote transparency to supporters.

But when you examine the current climate of European rugby league even briefly, it is clear that right now, 14 teams would be an unmitigated disaster and a move driven by greed and, you guessed it, self-interest from some people who have been tasked with making these kind of decisions for far too long.

First and foremost, there is not the money in Super League or the sport in general to sustain 14 elite teams. Love Rugby League has already revealed that if a move to 14 goes through, one working theory was for the two teams coming up to take limited or no central funding.

That would make it palatable for the existing 12, who would have no interest in cutting their ever-diminishing central funding further. But it’s an idea riddled with lunacy and great financial risk. Asking two teams to take an almighty leap with grave uncertainty ahead of it.

What happens if the TV deal for 2027 stays the same or, even worse, goes down? The two promoted clubs would be within their rights to ask for an even share of the money at that stage, given how they’ve done a year at huge risk to themselves. And there might not be enough money to share about.

Defenders of Nigel Wood will point to the fact that he delivered a record TV deal when he was running the show but there is another contrasting point to make at this stage. It was articulated best by Jon Wilkin on Sky Sports recently; that TV deal was delivered in a very different broadcast landscape.

The idea that Wood will return into a string of prominent roles – he will likely be chairman of the Rugby Football League before the end of Tuesday – and Sky will stump up more cash is, at best, fantasy.

There has been no concrete suggestion at this stage IMG will be shown the door, and any two promoted teams are handpicked internally. Wood’s review may suggest severing that partnership tomorrow but it is important to note the review will deliver recommendations, not orders.

Removing IMG from the game is a whole other debate that won’t be finalised or sorted before Tuesday. So with that in mind, we must assume if an increase does happen, it will be the teams ranked 13th and 14th who are invited up.

But there are other problems with 14 right now. The player pool being one of them. Two more teams means a need for between 50 and 60 elite-level players. A good chunk of that – 20 to 30 – will come from an increase in the overseas quota.

But is there the depth of talent in the Championship to make up the rest of that figure? It’s debatable; some of the Championship’s best players may actually not want to step up to full-time, professional rugby due to commitments elsewhere away from rugby.

Get rid of French clubs – again, nothing has been decided on that front, but it is part of the review – and your player pool shrinks further, by the way.

14 teams solves some key problems, the big one being a skewed and imbalanced fixture list. And if the next broadcast cycle delivers what Wood and the rest of the sport are hoping for, it’s perhaps a discussion that will have merit on the table.

But right now? It would be a huge risk Super League – and rugby league in general – can ill afford to make.