Anyone got any stats on 2nd tier crowds pre and post franchising?

It is possible to get the best of P&R but "protect" new teams from yoyoing.

If you accept the basic premise that 1 championship side HAS THE CHANCE of going up each year, (so lets say the GF winners).
Firstly they only get the chance to go up IF they meet certain ground safety requirement/facilities etc.

You then get a number of options:-
1) they play the bottom placed side in SL in a one-off game at the Championship sides ground
2) they play the bottom placed side in SL in a two-legged game home and away
3) they get automatic promotion and bottom of SL go out.

Then to protect the side coming up, you introduce the fact that a team cannot be relegated out of SL in their first season in SL. A decision would have to be made in such a circumstance that the promoted side does finish bottom...do you have no promotion or does "next to bottom" face dropping out (it will always be one of the bottom two though).

There are two divisions of pro cricket clubs, and there should be two divisions of pro RL clubs. The comparison is not a fair one, it's like compaing SL with the National Conference.

Depends what you mean by 'really competitive'.


Not over the course of a full season they couldn't. They'd finish bottom and get relegated the season after they came up.

Its not, its like comparing SL with the championships.

It would be nice if there were two divisions of pro RL but there arent enough clubs, players or money to have that.

This is a hard issue. P&R threatens the stability of clubs who do get into super league, restricting the ability of younger players to get through the ranks, as management bring in grizzled old pros to try and stay up. However, not having P&R kills off the support of lower league clubs by giving them nothing to aspire to, and little chance of a 'big game' against the top end of super league.

I think the optimum scenario would be P&R, but with parachute payments & subsidies to newly promoted teams. So, for your first 3 seasons promoted you'd get some money off the RFL to allow you to get players in, and an exemption from the salary cap. For 3 years after going down, there'd be support from the RFL to ensure clubs didn't go bust (though these would both obviously reduce year-on-year).

This also needs to happen between the Championship & Championship 1, with the ultimate aim of bringing all those clubs up to a level at which they can sustain a fully pro team.

However, that will need to go hand in hand with generating paydays for smaller clubs (by expanding the challenge cup to ensure more lower-league clubs face SL/top level championship opposition), and by supporting the grassroots in expansion areas (particularly vital in London & Wales).

Well said Smokey.

There are enough players and clubs. It's money that's the issue. A lot of the players in the second division are either players that have come through Super League ranks and been released or young kids who never made the grade. In a full-time environment, I have no doubt that a lot of these players could make the step-up.

You are all looking at P & R from the view point of the clubs as they are now. With P & R you will get bigger crowds for the champ. clubs, better coverage of the team and better crowds. this wil allow them to grow manage the finances well and you can build a team, over many years that can compete at the top. As for TV money all the money at the moment is from Super league. The champ. clubs were sold down the river and there games were given away for free. get someone in the RFL that can get a fair price for the games and you have more income. Sky have super league and prem. sport, ch. 5 or BBC have rights to Super league Div 1.

I have plenty of doubt. We can "produce" as many young lads as we want, but until we improve the quality of the coaching they receive andimprove the attitude at the places they learn their skills then we won't produce enough young lads of good enough quality.
We don't want to admit it, but the problem is at grassroots level.

But it all boils down to money. If rugby league was cash rich then we could afford to develop an excellent player pathway and have things that encourage more players into the game.

A second professional league would not hinder rugby league; it would be hugely beneficial and whether that's existing players or not, matters not. If the money is there, those club can spend on youth development, can get in the right coaches (plenty of coaching staff out of work and ex-professionals) and there are experienced coaches like Daryl Powell, like Karl Harrison and John Kear that can get the best out of those players.

This isn't necessarily about producing international class players in the short-term. It's about strengthening our game and allowing the free movement of clubs from division to division without losing half their team and risking themselves financially. It's about marketing our sport more and ensuring that it can grow sustainably.

I dont think anyone thinks it would be a bad thing or hinder RL to have a pro tier 2, its just not possible and isnt the over-riding priority for the entire game.

Judging by some of the responses to this thread, one would get the impression that a magic treasure chest filled with an endless supply of cash to sustain widespread full time RL exists, and that it can be tapped into at any time. How come I haven't heard of it?

Money (or rather the lack of it) is one reason why we can't have two full time divisions of ten teams, but the lack of available talent is a crucial factor, and again, some seem to think that we have access to the same player pool as more popular sports such as football and RU, when we clearly do not. RU can sustain P and R as they have a player pool of over 2.5 million; while RL has just over 100,000. This means that there simply isn't enough talent to go around, and combined with the poor junior coaching that Him alludes to, it's no wonder we have to import mediocre Australians to fill the pool up and barely sustain one full time division.

The London Welsh case never went to the high courts? It set no legal precedent what so ever. It was a 'normal' RFU appeals panel, except one that the clubs sent QC's too.

The appeals panel ruled that London Welsh should be promoted (despite failing to meet minimum standards) because other clubs already in the premiership didn't meet those very standards. Nothing to do with "what happens on the field of play".

Lets get a few things straight, two divisions won't happen without Sky supporting the concept. Sky wont support it without it being sold to them, ie what will they get from the deal.

I would suggest potential benefits would be

1. More subscriptions
2. Better product due to more evenly matched games, more viewers
3. Greater crowds at the top, and bottom
4. Improved Intl product in the short term
5. Expanded sport that they control

In return we ask for no more money from the current deal, so basically if we sell the benefits correctly Sky are in a win/win situation.

But the [ifact[/i is that the non SL clubs have been cut adrift by the SL clubs, they voted for the SL because they were told they needed to to "save the game" and since then they've been ignored.
It is a[i fact [/ithat the likes of Fax, Fev and Batley can give the lower SL clubs a game - they did so in the CC this year.
It is a [ifact[/i that Bradford are in serious trouble, Crusaders disappeared as a SL club (twice) Wakey have been in administration and London's crowds are pathetic.
If a competitive comp consisiting of two ten team divisions with P&R between them, (with provisos) plus P&R between the lower division and Championship 1 (again with provisos) could be insitigated I think given time a vibrant game would emerge.
What we have a the moment is effectively moribund. And given what's happened and what's rumoured to be about to happen change is needed.

I think you should look up what the word fact means before you try to use it again.

It's daft that the RFL are even looking at this when the clubs that could come up are so weak. There are no clubs bar Fax, Featherstone and Leigh who could even entertain the notion of moving into Super League and they would all be relegated after one season anyway.

What the RFL should be doing, rather than trying to grow the existing clubs (Which are mostly poorly run, have poor infrastructures and are in undesirable locations) is to try and get outside money involved in the sport. If you are a Sheikh with £50m to spend on sport, rather than buying a Premier League or Championship football side that you will then send into administration, why not invest it into Super League? You could run a successful club for 20 years on the same money you would blow on acquiring and maintaining a football club.

Win the lottery. Buy a Renault Clio instead of a Merc.

Widnes have just about started to hold there own in SL. Fax, Fev, Leigh and I believe Sheffield all outperformed Widnes on the picth last year so why would they automatically go straight back down? One safeguard would be the kind of amensty in year 1 for promoted clubs as I outlined in my suggestion.

Thats a very valid point but in our recent discussion with Sheikh Onamaface the lack of guaranteed p&r killed the deal.

Interesting. When we were negotiating with Baron von moneylaundering, it was the fact that he could almost guarantee getting a team into SL by building the right club infrastructure, rather than having to depend on the lottery of a small set of playing results that made the idea so attractive to him.

Thats quite interesting, do you think its a cultural thing between Germans and Arabs or historical, due to one having one and the other not?

No.

I don't think that's a very apt analogy. You are implying that soccer is a better sport than rugby league, when we all know that isn't the case. A better analogy would be chosing which musical group to invest in; a musically talented, hardworking indie band who write amazing music, but who won't ever be internationally famous, or some bubblegum pop, lowest common denominator e who will get lots of exposure, but might end up costing you money in the long run.