The “green” credentials of the Super League’s expansion plan are under fire, as clubs question its long-term financial sustainability and accuse the Rugby Football League (RFL) of promoting a model of growth that is fundamentally unstable. The pushback is framed as a demand for a more environmentally sound financial ecosystem for the sport.
In this context, sustainability refers not to the environment, but to the ability of the league’s clubs to survive and thrive without relying on a constant cycle of debt and owner bailouts. The dissenting clubs argue that the expansion to 14 teams, without a corresponding increase in revenue, is inherently unsustainable. It will, they claim, increase the financial pollution in the system by stretching resources thinner.
The RFL has been accused of failing to conduct a “sustainability impact assessment.” Clubs have demanded to see a detailed financial model that proves the 14-team ecosystem is viable in the long term, but this has not been provided. This has led to the charge that the RFL is ignoring the principles of sustainable development in its pursuit of short-term growth.
The opposition from the league’s main energy source, broadcaster Sky Sports, is a critical part of the sustainability argument. The clubs warn that you cannot build a sustainable system by alienating your primary power supply. They fear the expansion will lead to a “brownout” in funding that could cripple the entire grid.
The call to “press the pause button” until 2027 is a call for a more sustainable approach. The clubs want to use that time to strengthen the existing ecosystem, ensuring all its current inhabitants are healthy before introducing new ones. They are demanding a plan that is not just ambitious, but financially sustainable for generations to come.