https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/44455976 So does it help or hinder our chance of getting back to the big time? Without some serious financial clout no chance of being the top one in the championship. IMHO, The middle 8 format was our best chance as you could see a scenario where a couple of SL teams implode and go down (Salford and Widnes this year?) Interesting comments from Hethrington, definite split between the top clubs One thing it will be grossly unfair if the relegated team get a parachute payment, but in this sport, fairness takes a back seat!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/44455976 So does it help or hinder our chance of getting back to the big time? Without some serious financial clout no chance of being the top one in the championship. IMHO, The middle 8 format was our best chance as you could see a scenario where a couple of SL teams implode and go down (Salford and Widnes this year?) Interesting comments from Hethrington, definite split between the top clubs One thing it will be grossly unfair if the relegated team get a parachute payment, but in this sport, fairness takes a back seat!

Improves it IMO as we would only have to be the best in that league, not beat a team in the league above us, who just coast throughout the league then recruit and try in 7/8 games in the Middle 8s.

Also the decent prize money is only given to the top 4 of the championship. The two that miss out from the 6 currently challenging could be seriously weakened in the future. Tornto don't have to be given any and they'd still be the best funded. They are likely to go up so we wouldn't be competing against them. Widnes & Salford are the most likely to be relegated which would cripple both INL and can't see them putting up the funds to dominate the league like Toronto have this year.

We're a couple of years away from mounting a challenege for SL again. Still have a fight to get out of L1, and if we did, it will be about consolidating in the championship next year.

"We're terrified of the prospect that we could lose four Super League clubs this season as a result of the Super 8s," Lenagan said. "That's not a sensible proportion."

Ridiculous. Risk is what makes sport thrilling, and artificially propping up a club by giving it money, and limiting the risk to it at the detriment to other clubs who don't have that windfall (or assurance) is equally as ridiculous. If 4 SL clubs, with all the money they are given, get relegated then that is because they are not good enough to beat the Championship opposition. And dare I say both leagues will be better off for it!

As if the field wasn't unbalanced enough already for Championship clubs. Admittedly the door hasn't slammed shut, but without a lot of independent financial support (a la Toronto) I can't see anyone getting promoted. Whereas the highly funded but underperforming SL clubs can sleep easy knowing that their place is secure.

Could you imagine any other professional sport actually stating "we're going to limit the number of clubs promoted and relegated as we want to retain a status quo in the clubs we already have in the top tier, despite the fact that they may be better than us"?

Since when has anyone ever thought four SL teams could go down any years of the Super 8s? Usually there are at least one or two teams that are way too strong, and two Championship teams who are nowhere near good enough. To be fair I think this year is the biggest chance ever that more than one SL team may go down. But if SL teams go down that means they aren't SL standard. The game needs a reshape for sure but such a weak excuse.

It's a strange statement to make because they wouldn't be losing anything, simply replacing one team with a different one.
You could even argue that some teams in the championship would actually improve SL if they were to take the place of some current clubs in the top flight.

I think we're a few years away from being anywhere near the top of the championship so not really too bothered about all this right now.

That's exactly the point: if they aren't good enough then they should be replaced and not protected. Actually for the good of the game!

Is this actually a done deal?

No, nothing has changed.

"oh poop, we saw what happened to Bradford, then Leigh almost hitting bottom of the Ch, our money is running out and we are petrified it will happen to us.... Drawbridge up boys"

Firstly, let's not kid ourselves that there is anything altruistic about Leneghan and McManus and the gang of 5 who want everything for themselves.

Secondly, one up, one down with no central funding (note his words '...funding until this deal runs out' carefully) means a closed shop, expansion for the privileged only, loss of clubs like Coventry, loss of many historic clubs that are living on the breadline and a much smaller game.

Key for me is the lines

'The Super 8s are hurting Wigan's season tickets' (Remember peasants that no club is bigger than the game...except Wiggin)
'This year there could be 4 teams relegated' (More gammon sensationalism than likelihood but never mind...)

This is not about growing the game it's about petty parochialism and 'I'm all right Jack' mentalities.

Just see the reaction to Hetherington's statement on SM by fans of Wigan, Sts, Wolves etc... Wolves' fans especially ironic given they were a gnats fart from liquidation 20 years ago.

The thing with the 8s is that the game has changed dramatically since they were introduced.

An idea based on what was, in its original concept, a 'shoo-in' for the well financed SL clubs, changed entirely once the Leigh owner fought for the SL salary cap to be made effectively the same for all well-funded lower league clubs. Nor were there any very well funded clubs like Toronto, Toulouse or New York on the horizon when the 8s were envisaged. "They don't like it up 'em, Captain Mainwaring".

RFL Returns fire https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/44468711

RFL Returns fire https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/44468711

Trouble is we now seem to have two bodies, RFL and SLE, both of which seem think they run the sport.

Much as I've railed against a lot of the RFL's actions, I do think it's time the SL people were put back into their box.

I think we can all agree that the RFL have been ineffective, wasteful and utterly clueless in the past (and probably the future), but as the only thing the SL body cares about is SL teams; and as we're not in superleague, our only hope for the sport not be be gutted financially from the bottom up is for the RFL to take a lead here.

For SL to dictate who can and can't be promoted into their league directly affects Championship teams, how can they change things that affects teams not under their remit?

There's a clear conflict of interest in SL clubs deciding the structure of the game. Quite a few of those clubs are failing businesses and propped up by a sugar daddy. They are no different in many ways to clubs below them in the championship.

The RFL should be leading the process but the issue is that it relies on a majority of clubs to vote. The majority of clubs are outside SL, so they'll decide even if it's against the will of all SL clubs. It seems barmy.

The main problem is we have a bunch of cash strapped clubs fighting over what is not enough cash. There isn't enough money coming in as a whole. Adding an extra few hundred grand to a club's budget here and sacrificing clubs to pay for it there won't be a game changer people seem to want (unless its detrimentally).

What the game needs is a significantly bigger TV deal as a whole. The game was healthier when we had salary cap parity with the NRL. Now we don't we're a 2nd class comp. Development of the game has been cut. Participation is well down. Arguing over a few hundred grand is like arguing over the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Anyone else get the feeling that Big Nige was stopping Leneghan from wreaking havoc?

Mark Moore (Halifax chairman) claiming that the SLE were planning to reduce lower league funding by £1m...

Does anyone know how gate money is distributed? i.e home team, away team, league.

No idea what the answer to that is.

As far as I am concerned, its years of incompetence, inconsistency and stagnation caused by Wood, Rimmer, Barwick, Ganson and the board that has led to a vacuum.

The board at the RFL approved Woods payment of approx. £360,000 while simltaneously cutting the funds to development areas, now collapsing.

Something had to change, unfortunately it looks like its going to get worse.

The way this whole episode has exploded could have been avoided by a professional approach (heaven forbid)

A meeting and an agreement on a way forward, with approval from Sky and lawyers - then have a press conference.

But this is rugby league, so lets have a public fall out and make ourselves look like a bunch of dopes (again)

The idea behind the Super 8's was that it was to give the impression of P&R without ever actually delivering on it. Trouble is, SL has continued to go backwards in terms of quality as the sport in this country is run by incompetents at both governing body and club level to a point where there could realistically see a swing of 4 down 4 up. The crowds attracted by the teams at the bottom of SL this year aren't much but they're still better than what a promoted Championship club would be looking at bringing. As such, self-interest rather than good of the game wins out and the drawbridge to SL is slowly being raised again

Straight promotion and relegation has to be better than the current system as it is no matter whether it's one or two teams that go up or down. The way I see the current 8s system is that it provides false hope for teams in the Championship that they are good enough to compete with the Super League teams, and in our case I wonder whether that lead to signing more players that we couldn't afford (e.g. Nielsen). I'm not suggesting other teams have been irresponsible in the same way but it's like waving a Wonga loan in front of someone who is skint and won't get paid for a month. The present system favours the Super League clubs - we all know it even though there has been two promotions in three years. It's time for a change, and I hope whoever decides this can make the right decision and stick to it this time instead of chopping and changing the league structures every three years. Surely this chopping and changing contributes to supporter alienation.

Probably a lot of incoherent and non sequitur arguments there. I'm tired.

The problem with automatic P&R is that another major reorg will be needed because the bottom 4 SL teams will be losing 7 games and their revenue.

The comments from some SL teams that four of them could go down is utter tosh one or two at the most. A few rich clubs just want to get richer and see the poor clubs go down the drain. if they are not careful they could have 5 clubs in SL (the ones with money) and the rest scratching around for cash.
2 up 2 down suits me if you are not good enough to be in SL make way for clubs that deserve a chance.

This "guaranteed" 1 up 1 down P&R - have they actually guaranteed it? Or is it guaranteed based on criteria such as academy, ground etc like 15yrs ago?

One of the major problems is that, if we are to believe what we hear, the TV money is far more likely to fall than to rise, so I don't know how that would go down, but I'd suspect it would be more likely to increase the infighting than decrease it.

That is also compounded by the fact that, yes, arguing over a hundred grand is a bit like moving the deckchairs to most, but I'd suspect that for some clubs in our league, £100K would probably amount to somewhere near their total annual turnover, so not, in any way, small change for them. I think those clubs would definitely regard it as detrimental.

If someone were to write a novel, or make a film, about the game of rugby league it would be panned by the critics as just too detached from reality to be believable.