So, Widnes have announced they will have to operate a part time team next season & beyond. c.newsnow.co.uk/A/990801554?-433 ... ad_top#out This to me is why relegation is flawed in RL as unless they bounce straight back they loose the parachute payment in the second season. I know part of it is the club’s own fault for getting into administration. Given the size of the sport for me, licensing should have stayed. There’s no reason under licensing SL would have to be a closed shop. We can admit teams as an when required, I’d rather have a league with more teams and only play some once rather than less teams and play some 3 times. We should be looking to grow what we’ve got, if/when we get to a position where we can sustain enough professional teams for 2 divisions then re-introduce promotion & relegation. Where we are now is risking the future of clubs & players livelihoods and their ability to support their families.

So, Widnes have announced they will have to operate a part time team next season & beyond. c.newsnow.co.uk/A/990801554?-433 ... ad_top#out This to me is why relegation is flawed in RL as unless they bounce straight back they loose the parachute payment in the second season. I know part of it is the club’s own fault for getting into administration. Given the size of the sport for me, licensing should have stayed. There’s no reason under licensing SL would have to be a closed shop. We can admit teams as an when required, I’d rather have a league with more teams and only play some once rather than less teams and play some 3 times. We should be looking to grow what we’ve got, if/when we get to a position where we can sustain enough professional teams for 2 divisions then re-introduce promotion & relegation. Where we are now is risking the future of clubs & players livelihoods and their ability to support their families.

Licensing does not work as it is not open and transparent.


If you want a licencing arrangement then you need to have an open points system.

I think under licensing Widnes would also struggle as licensing had critiria around attendances. Proximity to other clubs. Etc.

Liicencing kept Widnes out of SL for many years as the rfl fudged these rules keeping in teams that did not develop their stadia and did not grow their fan base and that did not meet financial rules or develop youth as the "rules" said they should.


If you had real licensing it would probably shrink the league to 8 teams.

What you have shown is that Widnes can't work in a competition environment. Not that a competitive environment does not work.

The quality of SL this year is very even and Toronto are looking strong for promotion. It actually seems fairly healthy. One club having to adjust the reality of its situation is not a barometer for the whole system.

Quote ="Trainman"So, Widnes have announced they will have to operate a part time team next season & beyond. c.newsnow.co.uk/A/990801554?-433 ... ad_top#out This to me is why relegation is flawed in RL as unless they bounce straight back they loose the parachute payment in the second season. I know part of it is the club’s own fault for getting into administration. Given the size of the sport for me, licensing should have stayed. There’s no reason under licensing SL would have to be a closed shop. We can admit teams as an when required, I’d rather have a league with more teams and only play some once rather than less teams and play some 3 times. We should be looking to grow what we’ve got, if/when we get to a position where we can sustain enough professional teams for 2 divisions then re-introduce promotion & relegation. Where we are now is risking the future of clubs & players livelihoods and their ability to support their families.'" What you have said is the truth pity we can not convince the super league the same why should players suffer and their families suffer when their is a answer

Quote ="Trainman"So, Widnes have announced they will have to operate a part time team next season & beyond. c.newsnow.co.uk/A/990801554?-433 ... ad_top#out This to me is why relegation is flawed in RL as unless they bounce straight back they loose the parachute payment in the second season. I know part of it is the club’s own fault for getting into administration. Given the size of the sport for me, licensing should have stayed. There’s no reason under licensing SL would have to be a closed shop. We can admit teams as an when required, I’d rather have a league with more teams and only play some once rather than less teams and play some 3 times. We should be looking to grow what we’ve got, if/when we get to a position where we can sustain enough professional teams for 2 divisions then re-introduce promotion & relegation. Where we are now is risking the future of clubs & players livelihoods and their ability to support their families.'" What you have said is the truth pity we can not convince the super league the same why should players suffer and their families suffer when their is a answer

Licensing could work.

The licensing SL had, had two main problems imo.

1. It wasn’t honest and the Bradford situation exposed that.

2. It was very prescriptive. People who believed that some things ‘stand to reason’ and so don’t need any further thought decided that they could write a set of flat-pack instructions that would work for all clubs, whatever their circumstances.

The issue really is the sudden drop-off in revenue and with a full-time top division that has to fall... somewhere. They tried to smooth it out a bit in the 8s system, but it really just moved to midway down the Championship.

When there is no relegation, the bottom clubs have nothing to play for,hence meaningless games,hence poor attendances. Atm it is all to play for,so this structure is proving to be working nicely.

How come that doesn’t happen in the NRL though?

There are plenty of clubs who can’t make the playoffs in the NRL yet they don’t get meaningless games.

As for attendances are they higher now than under licensing?

What actually happens when there is no relegation is that it gives clubs towards the bottom of the table the opportunity to plan and to grow instead of constant panic short term decisions to avoid relegation.

The sport isn’t big enough for P&R. We have what, 14? fully professional clubs? And even then whilst the players might be fully professional the clubs themselves are not in a good position with low crowds, poor facilities and very poor infrastructures.
We have probably 5 or 6 clubs in anything like a position that’s comfortable off the pitch.

That does NOT lend itself to a P&R system. To constantly weaken and hinder the development of already weak clubs is not healthy for a sport in our position.

P&R would only work if we had 20 ish clubs that are fully professional both on and off the pitch.
It works in football because they have 90 clubs that are full time.
If you compare RL to football it would be akin to being relegated from the Championship and going straight to the Conference and a Conference team being promoted to the Championship. It’s massively destabilising for both the clubs relegated and those not relegated but involved in the relegation fight.

Most RL fans cry out for the sport to put some medium and long term plans in place. And then demand a system that ONLY allows short term planning.

Widnes are a club who relied on the handout. Would they warrant a licence considering they’re clearly no were near self sufficient (not saying all clubs are like). I’m all for relegation. It’s exciting, nerve wracking and what sport is all about.

Problem we have is every system we’ve tried has its flaws and after 2/3 years of it fans focus and complain about the cons instead of the pros. Whatever we try next (and let’s be honest we’ll probably have something new within 3/4 years) will be the exact same.

It's an entertainment industry. The relegation battle is 10 times more exciting than the top this year. If you take away relegation we are left with a much less interesting package.

They can get second jobs, their wives can work it's not 1950!

The NRL is more entertaining and doesn’t have relegation.

Relegation is forced entertainment and worse than that it actively degrades the quality of the clubs involved in it.

You can't change culture and traditions with a gimmick. The NRL is born out of a different sporting set up.

The NFL has a different system again.

As does baseball and basketball and ice hockey.

All those systems work because that is the tradition of those sporting competition.

I think for rl the NFL league structure would work best, but it does not mean the UK sporting public would agree and that is who we are selling this product to.

If you took away relegation, 75% of the games would have no meaning or appeal, the top few teams would run up cricket scores. The outcome will be dire for one team but some of the better games to watch recently have been relegation battles.

Yet no-one can explain why this doesn’t happen in the NRL.

Or any other sport without P&R.

Because it's a mentality thing.

Take basketball. You are EXPECTED to score when you have the ball. When you fail to score in posession it's massive. This is obviously a completely different thing but it shows mentality in different sports is varied.

The other thing is that nearly all sports in this country have P and R, other countries didn't. The psychological thing of losing something you always had is quite influencing. That's why certain gameshows are tense to keep your money rather than gain a bigger prize. It plays on human mentality.

The lower divisions could be seen to be losing out on a chance they've always had - that's why it wrankles.

And even though I hate being down there it is definitely tense and entertaining just for the fear of LOSING something. There is less tension in failing to gain something.

And yes, it is still exciting to try and win something - its just there is no jeopardy if you don't.

What? Blow out scores and meaningless matches? This happens in the NRL every year.

I was just as interested in the top two clash last night as I have been with the relegation battle. You’re not a Leeds fan by chance are you?

Of course there are blow out scores and meaningless matches. There are under any system. P&R doesn’t guarantee no meaningless matches.

But the NRL is seen as both higher quality and more entertaining.
Just because the relegation battle is interesting doesn’t mean it’s good for the sport. It’s manifestly not.

As I said, RL fans consistently call for the sport to plan for the medium and long term. Yet insist on a system that ONLY allows for short term decision making and actively destabilises at least 20% of its professional clubs every season.

I am a Leeds fan. That’s pretty easy to check. A Leeds fan who has called for no P&R for at least 15 years. When Leeds were winning 3 in a row, winning the treble etc I was calling for no P&R. Leeds are probably the most well placed club to survive relegation.

I can only speak for myself but I'd have been utterly bored by the fare Leeds have served up this year, were it not for the threat of relegation. As it stands, the games matter. I can accept P&R may not be in the best interests of the game though I reckon it's one that was born to struggle whatever its systems, hence franchising might not achieve a right lot more.

Actually just about everything in this sentence is incorrect. P and R is good for sport as it forces teams to improve rather than coast along not winning anything every year but still getting paid.

What it is NOT good for, is business. Sport is NOT business, it is entertainment in all its forms. If you firmly believe that sport = business try going and standing outside M&S or Tesco and cheer them on. Sport needs financial support yes, but sport is sport and both ends of the table provide entertainment that Sky are prepared to pay money for.

Why doesn't the NRL have it? Because they never had it and therefore their sport is built around not having it - plus the lower league is financially supported better than over here and they are not treat like second class citizens. Thats back to the whole mentality thing I posted earlier.

I also put to you that supporting Leeds for so long, you've forgotten all that. That isn't meant to be a dig at you, but its a possible view of why you have this opinion.

As I seem to be talking more about basketball than RL here today, i should mention that I think that perception is based on people watching highlights, which are more likely to show scores than misses. A team having 50% successful shooting from the field (I dunno why they call it a field) is considered very good.

I was once watching season highlights of Icelandic handball (long story), and pointed out to my friend how ineffective the goalkeepers seemed to be - same sort of thing.

In many ways I enjoy watching games as discrete 80 minutes of entertainment. I’d happily watch a series of challenge matches, without worrying about there being a champion, I imagine.

I see the value of a league structure in providing an ongoing sporting narrative, as well as regular fixtures and income. I prefer having it, but could still enjoy games without it, I think.

sometimes, I think the ongoing narrative distracts us and takes us out of the moment. For example, in football, when they say ‘what does this fixture mean for these teams hopes of qualifying for the Champions League?’, i feel like they’re moving on before we’ve enjoyed what’s in front of us.

So I don’t really get the concept of a meaningless game or dead rubber. Surely each game itself should have meaning - its result matters in of itself. As much as sport matters at all.

But that seems to be a minority view and the sport needs to appeal to the broadest possible audience.

This one million percent.

You live beyond your means and this is what happened. I see nothing different to suggest Widnes would not be in a better position should we still be licensing. We need all the headlines we can get and relegation gets that. We are seeing teams starting up and entering in the bottom structure and growing nicely.

Him is obviously $h!tting himself coz Leeds are in the poop.

And it's Sinfield who has degraded your club.

Seems to me like relegation is used as a scapegoat for clubs making bad decisions.