Ok, so where is your evidence for this? Using either the 4 years of franchising we have had, or from the multitude of other sports around the world which don’t have promotion and relegation please provide us with the evidence that led you to this conclusion. Is it? more people are playing than before, im not sure why we would assume that less of them would want a career in the game?
No it isnt, its a proposal to take some money from some clubs in SL and give it to some clubs in the championship.

Sorry about that; won't do it again.

I was simply wishing to agree with you 100%.

It was another poster who referred to "full" or "part time" leagues.

Why do you assume that? Some of the clubs in those figures were never promoted to the PL, they were in it at its creation.

And why do you assume that removing automatic relegation means there could be no structure for promotion?

Since automatic promotion and relegation between the leagues was abolished by the RFL, the average crowds at clubs in the professional (i.e. non communuty) game have gone down.

Quite alright



It's just that when you pose questions under a quoted post from someone, it looks like you are talking to them.

All the clubs relegated from Soccer's top division since it became the 'Premier League' were promoted to it (even if that was before it was called the Premier League).



Because if a team got promoted each year and nobody ever got relegated, the league would get too big.

There needs to be a happy medium between P&R under the old system (which did promote an unsustainable boom and bust scenario that did the game no good whatsoever) and the current franchise system which in my opinion is only working for a select few.

The main point seem to ignore (apogies if you have elsewhere) to relates the number of SL clubs chasing a salary cap that they cannot afford without third party funding beit Sky or rich benefactor, and even with it are suffering serious financial trauma.

There are too many clubs who can barely open the front door let alone balance the books when relying upon income via first and secondary spend.

How can that be good for anyone?

There is little point them having a 3/5/10 year plan under the current format because the way they are heading there is a grave danger some of them won't be around (in their current format) in 3/5/10 years time if they continue as they are.

It would be fantastic if every club could aim for the highest common denominator but as things stand there isn't enough money or interest in the game to fund that. We dont want to drop to the lowest common demoninator either.

What's needed is a happy medium whereby an 'average to good' sized club (lets say Cas for arguments sake, it could easily be Wakey, HKR, Salford etc) does not have to spend beyond it's means (as they currently are) trying to hang on to the coat tails of an elite 5 or 6 clubs but can at the very least provide a sustainable business platform to grow from.

You may say the current set up provides that. The number of clubs continually struggling to makes ends meet says otherwise, and its a struggle not created by a short term blip either, it's a worrying trend that was always there under P&R but shows no sign of restraint during the current system either.

Well yes, we have more clubs, its what you would expect, in fact unless you thought that the two promoted clubs would be averaging more than the average SL attendances it was pretty much a guarantee.

We are however seeing year on year on year increases in average since the increase in size of the league, and obviously large increases in the total number of people going to watch games, which goes against your hypothesis somewhat as more people are watching the more the teams play each other.

What? Are you saying that clubs who werent promoted to the premier league were actually promoted to the premier league even though they werent promoted to the premier league. Interesting.

Not if we only promote the clubs capable of being PL clubs,

It is only working for a select few, realistically only a few (in the scheme of things) are affected by it.
That’s true, but as you say, it is also the case under P+R, and in my opinion the pressure to spend was greater under P+R.

If we use Cas as an example then yes, they are a ‘decent’ sized club who cannot compete currently, financially, with the top SL clubs, and yes, they may need to ‘overspend’ to keep up. BUT, and it is a big one, where is the logic that cutting their income, cutting their attendances, cutting their visibility etc is going to give them that platform? Yes they can cut their costs, but this whole idea the whole two leagues of ten idealogy is based on an assumption that it would be more profitable for Cas to be playing in a 2nd tier, chasing promotion, and fighting against relegation in the top tier, than it is right now for them, when there is a very good chance that, even though Cas are spending less on players, and winning more games against a lesser opposition, that they also lose more fans, more sponsors, more visibility, more corporate attendees etc etc etc, That is why the idea wont work. Cas are better financially, at the moment, as the little fish in a big pond than they would be as a bigger fish in a small pond.

Apart from splitting the league into 2 leagues of 10, is there any more meat on the bones of this idea???

How much money each league would expect?
Would there be cross divisional games?
Would teams in SL2 have a chance of making the GF?


Apart from a brief mention in the warrington Guardian is there anymore to this.

It's all well and good saying that those in SL2 will be more competitive, but what would stop SL1 pulling the shutters down on them once they are out??

But how many is "a lot of very good players"? Once these players--who are currently only good enough to play for the bottom 4 clubs--have been spread out between 10 teams, how much real difference to the week in week out intensity are they actually going to bring? I'm not doubting that there are some good players, but it stands to reason that by and large they aren't as high quality as those playing for 1-10, otherwise they would already be there.

Regarding the gap between top and bottom, if we're lucky the difference between 1 and 10 would more or less be the same as it is now. If we're unlucky, the top clubs would get their pick of the "best of the bottom", and the gap between 1 and 10 would be as pronounced as the gap between 1 and 14 is now.

For the purpose of this, lets put aside the top 5 or 6 clubs becuase they'll always be the top 5 or 6 and historically always have been and look at those below them.

So...



I'd disagree, there are adds and omits to the arguement but on the whole personally I disagree. The best part of SL this season was the odd game and the last fortnight. After that I found it pretty dull and of low standard which after 30 years watching the game leaves me asking why. Maybe I've just got bored of it!

But, the bottom half of SL are technically trading insolvent whilst the middle tier between SL and grassroots is totally on its backside.

The interest from both supporters and sponsors is next to dead at that level, apart from the GF even Sky can't be bothered showing it anymore. This leaves ambitious clubs with little chance of building a platform and average clubs linking up with bugger SL clubs as a cheap way of making their squad numbers up. Given it's in many instances the foundation to top flight RL, it's foolish to ignore it's predicament.



So happens when the gravy runs out? Not just Cas (apologies Cas fans for using you as an example!), we could list half a dozen others. We're trying to get financial stability in the game, you more than anyone beat the drum about clubs being better managed thus warranting their place in SL. By your own admission here, that's clearly not happening and defeats the whole object of it all.



That's the whole point, inversely, they (and others) are not competing as it is so what's lost? Sometimes what is spent does not equal value for money.

I'm not convinced if they cut their spending by (say) 40% that it would necesarily result in a 40% drop in standards. For example, Championship wages have halved over the last couple of years but the players are still there. After Uncle Des stopped throwing silly money about at Barrow, Steve O'Connor and a few others got together and said this has to stop.

Now we have the likes of Leigh, Fev, Fax keeping their spending at more realistic levels so what we dont have now is an abundance of part time players/Aussies/journeymen earning £30k a year, average salaries are now at less than £10k. The same players are still playing aided and abetted by dual contracts and loans.

Would it not go the same in the mid to lower levels of SL, where very average players dont earn the £40-60k they are now (as quoted by Sean Long at a recent event) but earn more realistic salaries?

It's a bit of tough love granted, but something has to be done. With it, the morbid/joyous interest generated by P&R is there, Sky remain there, competitive derbies still exist, pro rugby still exists, the big clubs are still there, and financial stability has a greater chance of prevailing.



From memory, as well as taking over 10000 to Headingley for the GF, Cas had just as many (if not more) watching them in the Championship (regular crowds of 6, 7000) than they did last season so I'm not convinced on that one. Then again, P&R existed



Rather than have a huge gap, why not a medium fish in a medium pond? We're not on about sending them to SL2 oblivion, we're on about having them (and those like them) competing in the top 3rd of SL2 and bottom 3rd of SL1, a band of clubs numbering maybe 8 or 9 (ok, on showings over the last few years lets list Cas, Salford, Wakey, HKR, Widnes, London, Fev, Fax, Leigh) who with a kick and a push would not be too far adrift of each other [iif[/i the financial playing field was level(ish). A situation where a good coach, youth set up, star player here or there makes the difference between being the best of this lot and the worst, and not a club hanging onto the shirtails of others and still needing an unstainable third party cash injection.

Then, when a club gets promoted the gap between them and bottom of SL1 isn't as huge as it is (and has been in the past) but at the same time neither is the financial risk in getting there or indeed falling from there.

The gap then from the top of this band isn't too far from the bottom of the uppermost band, they've reached that touching distance organically rather than overspending money they have not got in the first place which is what they need to do now.

But this has always been the case hasnt it. When has the 2nd tier of RL ever enjoyed high attendances or paid for, realistic tv broadcast?

Sky can't be bothered to show it, and wont be bothered to show it under an SL2 banner. There isnt a huge amount we can do about that. In the main, Sky dont care about lower league sport.


There will be, and is right now, rationalisation. It may be that Cas cannot be an SL club, they may go pop I said a few years ago, I very much doubted that Cas would be in SL in 2015. I cant see how they can build their market to the requisite level. They are a small town team, surrounded by bigger clubs with bigger markets. I think in the next few years Cas will be one of those clubs to be lost (as an SL club) in that rationalisation. So what happens when the gravy train stops, Cas will likely take a step down. Now that is what I think will happen. I don’t know that is what will happen, and I would be happy to see Cas prove me wrong. What I do know is their best chance of doing so, in fact their only chance of doing so is with the absence of P+R. That’s the truth of it. The absence of P+R gives them a chance if they are well run, if they aren’t (and possibly, sadly, even if they are) then they wont succeed.

Its not necessarily a ‘drop in standards’ but revenue. On a pure commercial basis, Cas’ stadium, costs and most back office costs will be pretty much the same. Cutting back on coaches and youth development employees is something of a false economy (and not what we want as a game). The only major saving for Cas (and it is major one), will be players. For it to make sense, it is necessary that the savings Cas can make in players wages, is greater than the losses they make on lower attendances, sponsors, corporates etc. That’s where the idea falls down, its where the idea loses any credibility, because there is no reason to assume that Cas’ would be more profitable, or sustainable as a successful 2nd tier side than a struggling top tier side.

Yet the argument is that these clubs are being left behind by the SL clubs. This will only be exacerbated in a 2 SL system. Cas would be further away from being a top SL club by being a top SL2 club than a struggling SL club.

The morbid interest in P+R is a myth, look at the attendances for clubs who are relegated, their attendances throughout the season are uniformly awful. When we had the £1m game between Cas and Wakefield we had circumstances conspire to put everything in our favour, we had two local rivals, coming down to the last games of the season winner takes all in front of a packed house. Unfortunately prior to that packed house, that one isolated well attended game, we had an entire year of terrible rugby, played by overseas journeymen, in front of empty stadiums.
Whilst I don’t have the figures for Cas to hand, it clearly wasn’t the case for Widnes or HKR, or even Fax.
That’s the thing though, the gap between the lower part of SL wouldn’t be smaller, it would be much bigger. The promoted team doesn’t need to be better than the 14th best SL side, it needs to be better than the 10th SL side just to stay up. Whilst 6 championship clubs would get some more money, 4 SL clubs would be getting massively less. The 6 championship clubs may be a bit closer, but the 4 SL clubs would be much further away. If everything you state would happen happens, and the best case scenario happened, the fact is that SL2 clubs would be further away from being an SL club than they are even now.

A lot about Cas there which in fairness I dont think either of us intended to use as a specific reason to reinvent the future of SL. I used them as an 'average to good' SL side but it could easily have been others.

Moving on...

I dont think either of us can say catagorically what would or would not happen if it did or did not happen so to save another eleventy seven pages, and repeat the same things for the next month its best leaving it there.

What is relevant is the current SL format was meant (among many other things) to create financial stability.

It hasn't, far from it, and as long as the bottom half of it are overspending someone elses money to keep up with the top half then it will only get worse.

How would you fix that?

The only thing of relevance there is the 1 that doesn't exist any more. The rest, well, somebody lost money, but hey, that's sport investing for you. Doesn't seem to have deterred rich people wanting to give it a shot. Whereas in our wonderful franchise system money is flooding into the like of Salford. Safe from relegation they're an amazing investment, surely?

I agree, it could unfortunately apply to other clubs in the same way

As an absolute, no it hasn’t ‘created financial stability’ but as has been said, there is no silver bullet. It was put there to create a more stable environment, everything else is up to the clubs. And I think it has and will continue to do so, and nobody has yet suggested a system which would do it better.

As to what I would do to fix it, there isn’t anything we can do other than try and create some virtuous cycles to build our way out of it and I think we are on the right track to get there.

A few fairly minor changes

I think giving all clubs an perpetual licence is the first step. Putting HKR, Cas, Wakefield, Bradford, London and Salford ‘on notice’ would be the next step. Giving them real and achievable targets for the next 2 years, then the two years after that, and then for the next 5 years, and the 5 years after that etc. etc, as long as they hit these targets they stay in, if they don’t they will be dropped, let them know this. Publicly.

Then remove the link between promotion and relegation. If there is a new Leeds/Wigan/Warrington/Sts/Hull etc in the lower leagues, get them in, don’t wait for someone else to fail get them in when they are ready. Give them 2 years prep time and bring them in.

Aim to drop no-one, aim to expand SL. It sounds harsh, but we as a game, cant afford a pro 2nd tier, we have so many other priorities that unless Bill Gates wants to pump hundreds of millions in, then we will never get enough right to start worrying about it. If clubs in the lower league want to be SL clubs, they can. Make yourself a club ready for SL. But we need to accept some clubs aren’t capable of doing that. So we say fine, we will expand SL in 2016. In 2014 we will tell you who. Everyone is on notice, we will admit 2 more teams in 2014 to start in 2016, make yourself the best you can be and it might be you. Then in 2016, aim to expand to 18 in 2020, and 20 in 2024.

Lastly, the obvious one, improve marketing and presentation of the game.

Read that through again and notice the obvious flaw in your plan

Ok, interesting...

I'll play ball with that.

How would you suggest a club in a league that has minimal TV exposure and sponsoring/corporate opportunites to feed upon be able to prove their worth sufficient to be given the 2 year 'notice'?

You're not allowed to use 'rich benefactor' either.

I think that is individual to each club. I think there are obvious questions to be asked which are different for every club. Leigh and Fev for example would need to answer how they are going to differentiate themselves in such an obviously crowded market place. Fax would have slightly less to prove in that respect, but Halifax is still a fairly small area, they would need to show how they will attract people from the wider area that isn’t cannibalising the markets of Hudds and Bradford.

A team like Sheffield however wouldn’t need to really say anything about that. They would need to focus on how they could spread the visibility of the game in Sheffield and how they can tap in to the relatively huge market they have when they don’t have a history of doing it. They would also have more to prove from a financial side of things as there crowds are lower now.

Toulouse on the other hand would have slightly less to prove in regards to how they are going to tap in to the market as they are an established club, with good links to the local community, but they need to prove that they can get the pathways in place to bring through enough French players to make it worth while, but they may be able to simply walk in the door, show a broadcast contract from BeIn sports worth £10m a year which is there for the taking if there are 2 french teams in SL, something Leigh, Fev, Fax etc cant do.

If the clubs can’t do that, well sadly they wont be promoted.

You need to learn the differece between a demonstrable fact and an opinion

So you only want clubs entering SL, when they are ready, but you say admit teams every 4 years? , but also if current clubs dont hit ' targets ' , they drop out?

How will promotion and relegation work, if it dos happen and when it starts, say if Catalan, Leeds, Warrington, Wigan, Hull F.C. London, Huddersfield ( & Bradford, who SL, can't do with out as we are told) finish bottom, ware would P&R, come in then, the first thing the RFL will do is come out with a statement, saying we cannot afford to relegate these teams so your back to square one the only time a team will go down to SL2, or the new championship, is when one of the other three teams finish bottom,it might sound like sower grapes, but we all now haw it works in rugby league.

It sounds like sour grapes because it IS sour grapes. Get the chip off your shoulder.

That is actually the point, a club like the ones you mention could drop down a division if the gap isnt too big, and they would be replaced by a much better prepared club

Currently as the Bradford ' situation ' showed, once Toulouse turned the RFL down, there was no viable alternative, which in itself shows the weakness of the whole sport