Here: "Saints back new structure" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3728 Glowing endorsement of Barwick.

Here: "Saints back new structure" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3728 Glowing endorsement of Barwick.

It would appear that the players are not so convinced. www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21

It would appear that the players are not so convinced. www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21

Quote ="FearTheVee"Here: "Saints back new structure" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3728 Glowing endorsement of Barwick.'" anf no mention of mr wood says it all

Quote ="FearTheVee"Here: "Saints back new structure" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3728 Glowing endorsement of Barwick.'" anf no mention of mr wood says it all

Quote ="Rogues Gallery"It would appear that the players are not so convinced. www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21'" Who'd have thought sl players wouldn't like the idea of being relegated? No relegation and increased salary cap please.

Quote ="Rogues Gallery"It would appear that the players are not so convinced. www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21'" Who'd have thought sl players wouldn't like the idea of being relegated? No relegation and increased salary cap please.

and playing more games for the same money

League 13, have they ever come out with anything positive about the game since they started.

It's looking more and more like a moaners forum.

I think we can say that Big Mac is definitely pinning his colours to the mast on this one.

Interesting to see that on the Virtual Terrace where there is a poll about the league structure.

That the naysayers waded in early to say everyone is against it. But actually it's a pretty even split.

Ok 150 is not a scientific study, but it's more than most adverts bother with when quoting that a certain % of people agree.

Some high profile nay sayers have loved saying that the fans are against it, but actually its far less simple than that.

Rather like the vote the clubs had, a difference of one vote but we're all still stuck with the format even though half the clubs didn't vote for it.

He's really stuck his neck out with those predictions of financial prosperity. I have a suspicion that this restructure has been done in consultation with Sky and an improved TV deal is tied in with it.

Does his glowing support not seem a tad hypocritical given he was one of the Chairmen that walked out of the previous meeting?

Can someone also tell me what all the fuss was about last time, when suddenly they all love the idea?

Seems a tad silly to me. I'm not overly concerned about promotion and relegation, but don't really understand what the three 8's is about. I can't see it existing in 5 years time. It also makes it look like the decision to move away from promotion and relegation was done for reasons other than avoiding financial meltdown and now they are using the desperation of avoiding relegation as the main PR point about the new structure. 'Bringing back the £1m match' isn't a great tagline to go with.

Has anything been released with regards to the funding? The only thing I've read is a promise from the RFL that the clubs outside the top 12 will get a 'far greater' share of the central funding. How will that work without the top 12 clubs being pillaged for that? The title sponsorship deal is another thing I would have thought the clubs would have prevented. £4.5m over 6 years is pittance and will likely mean no additional funding to the clubs at all, that'll disappear on overheads at the RFL. Rugby Union's Aviva deal was £20m over 4 years, signed at the height of the recession and gives more money per year than the RFL got in total over 6 years.

Unless there is a promise of significantly increased funding from Sky, the u-turn from the guys who walked out is just mystifying?

You beat me to it, far more efficient typing there Dux.

Did they not? I'm sure I read they all voted 'yes' in the end?

I thought the vote was 7 to 6 in favour with Catalan abstaining. It was also reported St Helens weren't represented at the meeting when some clubs walked out.

I don't think your right there Saddened. Saints as I believe were not at the last meeting.

So you would suggest in a general election the majority of those who vote should be ignored and the minority should get their preference instead???

I'm sure had the vote gone the other way with the same number of votes you would not be suggesting the majority should be ignored. Nope you would be saying the right choice was made and the ones who did not vote for it should get on board and stop causing fuss.

People always set aside a vote when it does not go their way.

Fair play, I thought I'd read that on here.

Big Mac has made himself loud and clear this time! perhaps he has joined the exclusive club of Big Nige and Hetherington.

Strange how Swiss football adopted the same structure, due to falling attendances, lack of major sponsors and TV problems, a little similar, but they had to drop the plan as it was a complete failure!

I'm not convinced that discussions have been held with Sky about the new structure, as it is rumoured talks are going on with BT, who just want to get everything to try and insure there system takes off.

Our new major sponsor for Super League, how many people have heard of them, yes they are the largest independent company, the same that made increases of 18% last year? and this year said people should take less showers and not drink as much tea and coffee to save power and money, we seem to like the desperate haha

Did Catalan abstain or just not turn up?

Swiss football used the system for 15 yrs i believe so hardly a complete failure

And of course the RFL have talked to sky about the new system, they both want the most marketable system and Sky have alot bigger marketing department. I'd be surprised if BT werent told too as negotiations will have begun even if Sky have a contract until the end of 2016, who has the deal for the championship and the P/R playoffs?

And finally, yes the new sponsor isn't Nike on 2 billion a year, but coming from a position of zero its ok considering the RFL have let all potential sponsors know they have been willing to give our sponsorship away for free

Someone posted that it had been scrapped after one year due to the poor attendances in the "2nd eight"
What else I find strange is that the coaches of Widnes and Bradford have come out against the plan, but their clubs voted for it.

It does make you wonder if the clubs have been offered a sweetener that is so good they would be foolish to refuse.

Return of reserves (ish), homegrown cap cap, and potentially marquee signing rule at a guess.

And for the lower clubs, increase from 5 to 7 for off quota.

I think the threat of relegation is what worries the coaches, much more pressure on their jobs! The chairmen can see the sense in it, and in Bradford's case their landlord may have suggested they vote for it

If we are saying that coaches should decide the structure then we would be in trouble.