No it does not.

It still leaves a huge gap between the top tier and "the rest" making it just as difficult to get in and just as painful if you had to drop out.


You keep on with this myth!

The proposed two tier system would not contain a "renamed championship", it would be an SL2 with different teams, with proper funding and with a transparent method of moving up and moving down. It would give hope and targets for lower clubs to progress and provide a safety net for higher clubs.

No, it would be a renamed second division. Whatever you call it, however many teams in that league and the leagues above and below it, it's the second tier of the sport. What's the history of TV and spectator interest in the second tier of sports?

...and your point is?

Why are we wanting clubs to drop out? If they are needing to drop out of a franchised SL then its not the dropping out of SL which is causing the problems, those problems are obviously already there.

Also which of 'the rest' are better of as an SL2 side than an SL side?

It is still a just a renamed championship. Except they have pulled the drawbridge up behind them. People aren’t going to come from miles around and fill up stadiums because Castleford are playing Leigh in tier 2 RL and their players are living the dream earning a massive £30k average

1. That renaming the 2nd tier isn't some magic answer.
2. When you answer the question I asked, you'll understand.

Another warped view. But, as you asked:-

It partly depends on whether there is automatic promotion and relegation between the leagues - as there is in soccer in England - which creates huge spectator and TV interest:-

Football League Championship (2nd tier of soccer in England):

Total match attendance in 2011/12 season: c 10 million.

TV: "From 2009–2012 Sky Sports have the rights to broadcast 65 live matches, live coverage of both legs of both play off semi finals and the play off final live.The BBC has the rights to show 10 first choice live games for the regular season as well as the rights to show a highlight show. The deal is on a three year contract and is worth £264m that will mostly be paid by Sky.Sky Sports will then take exclusive live rights to the Football League from 2013, having signed a three-year deal worth £195m. The new deal will include 75 live league games, all the play-off matches, 15 League Cup ties (including both semi-finals and the final) and selected Johnstone's Paint Trophy matches. Sky will also have highlights packages, with the free-to-air rights yet to be decided. "

Two questions in response:
How does that compare to the top league, particularly the TV revenue?
Why do you think it's a "warped view" ?

Why were clubs dropped at the formation of SL?


I can't recall saying anything about "pulling up drawbridges".

The point is it isn't simply a "re-naming", there would be a different structure and different funding. That's like saying SL was simply a re-named Division One

Just to keep some perspective that figure is one 12th of the Premier League figure. Should Sky be willing to give the championship one 12th of the SL figure we would get a massive grant of £1.2m, for the entire competition.

It's still "tier 2" and as such of significantly lower interest than the top tier.

They werent
Then the same problems would occur when a club dropped down from SL2 to what would be currently Championship 1 as what were apparent a couple of years ago when a club dropped from SL to the championship.

The only way to make a supper league, 2 is to have two regional divisions, equally funded something like they have in American football, if you want relegation and promotion how can you have both leagues called super league, the people who run the clubs are not that daft as to think moving to SL2, is nothing more than being relegated, some of these richer clubs who keep spouting about ware not producing enough players, they should stop plundering all the young talent from the so called lesser clubs,and start producing there own, Castleford are bringing talented kids through constantly, but as soon as the bigger clubs come sniffing and telling them how much the grass is greener, and what they can offer, they become unsettled and want to go, some keep going on & on, we have not got enough quality for 14 clubs, coaches such as Mr, Smith, Gentle, and others should concentrate on bringing there youth through, then the playing pool might get bigger,
Wigan, St,Helen's, & Leeds, do there bit, London are starting to bring lads through but some of the teams with sugar daddies find it easier to poach other clubs talent, its time every club has at least 5 or 6 players from there academy in the full time squad, it has got to be looked at, and if a club is not doing its bit to bring players through rather than poaching other clubs youngsters should have there Sky money reduced, as they don't need it, when the franchises came in it was supposed to be that you had some stability, and to produce more home grown talent. if the richer clubs get there way, 10 will soon be 8, and that could be the start of the end, and if Sky don't up the funding where will the funds come from

Sky pays money for the right to broadcast rugby league in this country to the Rugby Football League.







Any Widnes supporters care to comment?

Only an extra four.

No it doesn’t, Sky pays Super League (Europe) Ltd, of which the clubs and the RFL are shareholders, for the right to broadcast Super League games in this country. It is then distributed by the RFL.

Another example of your disingenuity. One wonders why you bring in the [iconcept[/i of Sky's willingness to pay money "to the Championship" when you have just shown that you already clearly know that Sky pays all its RL coverage money in this country centrally for onward distribution to all clubs, Super League, Championship and Championship 1.

No it doesn’t, im pretty sure I was pretty clear the first time, so ill just repeat it to you.[i No it doesn’t, Sky pays Super League (Europe) Ltd, of which the clubs and the RFL are shareholders, for the right to broadcast Super League games in this country. It is then distributed by the RFL[/i

It depends on what you call significant.

In Soccer in this country, the average attendance at second tier (Football League Championship) matches is 50% of that at Premier League matches (17,500 v 35,000). So, if the RL governing body got its act together and put a structure in place that provides for automatic one-up, one-down promotion and relegation between the leagues and with an appropriate level of funding to all clubs i.e. SL2 clubs getting just under half what SL1 clubs get, the second tier of rugby league in this country ought to be attracting an average crowd of c5,000.

Then, the game as a whole would have a structure that allows it to grow.

Did I dream it?

Featherstone, Hull, Waky and widnes were dropped

Keighley and Batley were denied promotion

Paris came in as a new club

London were fast tracked from division 2



Don't agree, It would be far less worse than it is now. Anyway, we won't drop any sides, we will just keep promoting into SL1 until it overflows

Yet it doesnt.

Apparently so.
Why? Would a club dropping from SL2 to what is no championship one, be less affected than a club moving from SL to what is now the championship?

Extract from Andy Burnham MP's letter to the RFL Chairman below about introducing automatic promotion and relegation between the leagues.

I'm hearing that some positive feedback is now pretty imminent.

"We believe this is urgent and essential to the long term health of our sport at every level and we cite the following specific reasons to support its re-introduction.

• It’s ‘the British way’ of doing things. Do we really think that the same old sides year in, year out playing in the top flight is good for the game? If you take away the dream of top flight Rugby League from the Championship clubs, you take away their lifeblood. Where is the incentive to invest in the squad if there is no prospect of promotion?
• Likewise, without the threat of relegation where is the incentive for Super League clubs to improve, knowing they can and will remain in the top flight year on year.
• Promotion and relegation adds excitement and drama to the season at both ends of the tables. Currently bottom of the table fixtures are played out as meaningless games.
• The loss of competitiveness, threatens in the long term to damage spectator and TV audiences for the sport. Too many predictable, one-sided games will make people switch off or not bother to turn up. "

Thats MP for Leigh Andy Burnham.