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.

Players and coaches have a vested personal financial interest in the outcomes of these decisions, so whilst their opinions are valid, they shouldn't be used as the foundation of any strategic decisions.

Not everything the RFL does is great, and not everything they do is incompetent, but they do have a recent track record of major decisions in each category.

From my view point, something had to change - not sure that system 888 achieves the outcomes that were needed, but I am prepared to give it a chance. I do suspect that in 3 years we will be going through the same process again, however.

If they (the RFL and the clubs) have the ability to market the additional 888 games properly there is no substantive reason why the system cannot work.

The difference between now and then is probably how the dosh is split between SL and the Championship i.e. last time SL was being asked to give up too much.

The Swiss FC gave a similar league structure a chance, to try and improve on attendances and sponsorship, but quickly changed back when it failed, I just wonder how long we will give it a chance, clubs should do what is best for the game, not just their own club and what Nigel wants, I still say with his failure over the past few year he should never been asked to do the report in the first place. I still feel that it should have been one club relegated and one promoted, that club should then keep their place for two season's, otherwise we are going to see clubs go bust, just trying to gain promotion!

Quickly changed back? I read it ran from 1988 to 2003. 15 yrs is hardly a quick change is it?
I do worry how London will go in the new structure. Is it better for them in the long term?

I feel that the move away from franchising and back to a form of promotion & relegation is a retrograde step, and will bring back the sort of panic-buying of journeymen plodders we used to have, at the expense of the bringing through of young players, which we've increasingly seen this last season.

Good news for the sort of player that big clubs tend to release in their early 20's because they're not good enough to make it at the top.

London did vote for the new structure? which I do not agree with, I presume with the sell that if you are relegated you can gain promotion in a season. I just look at the longer picture, such as Mark Aston saying last week that team like Sheffield will have to look at going fully pro, are clubs going to spend just to get promoted, then could be down again as quick?

If a new structure was needed I would have gone for two twelve team leagues, one team relegated, one promoted, but a team promoted should have two years in the top league to establish themselves, some day three years?

It is just looking at the wider picture and not what many do and clubs, just parochial, what is best for them!

I think you can't look at a team lower down saying they are going fulltime and think they are going to be spending up to the cap. It does not mean they will be going bust, or even going hell for leather for promotion.

Simply with increased revenue there is the oppertunity to go more fullltime.
Some championship clubs already have full time players, I'd look at it as though they are going to be increasing the percentage of the squad going FT.

Those wanting promotion will need a good starting 17, with a squad of PT players beneath that. Then it's a matter of keeping those FT players fit for the end of the season.

But some Super League teams are already struggling, is it best first to get the elite league right? Wakefield, Castleford, Bradford, and without their rich owners you could add London and Salford, of they struggle how will teams promoted survive?

The new trumpeted sponsorship of Super League is no more than Engage was paying, so we are not going forward as a sport, to allow more financial support to more clubs from the championship.

They have had almost 20 years and millions of pounds to get it right. That's almost 1/5 or 1/6th of the sports existence.

At some point you have to move on and stop waiting for some elite clubs to catch up to some mythical point.

With no pressure from below they have squandered the money and the time that they have had. Competition is needed from below. Move on or die. We can't move on if it's a cartel environment.

Nigel Wood and The people who have pushed this new structure through now carry all the responsibility, it has to work, if it does not then at Red Hall if it does not happen before, heads have to roll!

going back to a previous post, the clubs walked out over the right to be involved sponsorship and to have a say in the funding of the league NOT the structure of the leagues. Their argument was that the likes of saints, wire, leeds can get big national and international sponsors but the league can't

And its an argument thats hard to ignore. If Wire can get Emirates on board then why couldnt the league? Wire are a good side and a good club, but they've only won a few cups, they've never won SL.
We keep getting told that premium brands wont sponsor League because of the income of people who watch it. Well Warrington have dispelled that myth completely.

Whilst I agree Premier brands are good for the image. If they don;t offer the cash to match is it a false economy.

I've no idea how much they pay to sponsor the warrington shirt. But if it's decent money then the RFL should really be tapping up the Warrington marketing guys and girls.

I have not seen figures but we are lead to believe that it is one of the biggest deals in British Rugby league history for a club sponsor?
That is the clubs gripe if we can do it why cant you, and the league are saying go away and leave it to us!!

McManus is on Try time tonight I cant wait to hear his thoughts

So you are suggesting that the minority should have won out and the status quo kept.
That's a novel way of handling democracy.

The fewest votes win....


Or is that called dictatorship.

You can all vote, but I'm only counting the votes that agree with me.