Not just me that noticed that Wooden Stand doesn't actually read anything anyone else posts then. He even quoted his own post to respond to that, rather than any of the posts replying to him in the Salary Cap thread

So that automatically makes the other 6 outside the regular top 4 perform? NO! Then complain about the surplus driftwood in a 10 only super league.Theres absolutely no incentive for clubs outside super league to even consider being in the only league that counts without a meaningful promotion /relegation format.
The driftwood clubs in super league are blase they arent under any pressure or desperate to avoid relegation so theres a malaise at he bottom equalled by an anti climax at the top of the championship 1(but is competitive).There should be a transitional pool of 2 lowest super league clubs and top 3 championship clubs games fitted into the normal season ,so it doesnt automatically relegate the bottom 2 SL clubs and gives at least 3 top championship clubs INCENTIVE. At the end of the next season this pool will produce the top team which coulkd be an SL that was in relegation zone the previous year or one of the previous promoted teams either way its not a cut and dried prom' rel' issue but gives 2 years .Anyway as it is its crap why dont wigansaints leeds and warrington play in their own exclusive cabal ?

what a load of nonsense that is...i stopped reading halfway through..


what people need to get into there heads is SUPER LEAGUE & the CHAMPIONSHIP are and should be 2 seperate,stand alone,competitions that serve different purposes...

Just out of interest, what in your opinion is the 'purpose ' of the Championships?

If they are seperate, stand alone competitions are you advocating promotion, or pulling up the drawbridge ?
Your make up of the 10 team SL makes interesting reading.
What criteria are you using for "qualification" to your new Super Duper League ?

no promotion.........but when a team is clearly dominating the championship year on year then and only then should that team be considered to be moved up if they should wish to be......

as i said every year we've had different winners of the championship and every year we have morons screaming they should be promoted...all we'd be doing is replacing like with like...instead of incresing the quality of the top division..

and my criteria for my super league is the 9 teams that i feel would produce the best,most consistant and intense RL games............plus london

With your own reasoning Featherstone should be promoted now, but, why put London in ?
FWIW, Tha All New Bulls aint going to be a force in SL for a couple of seasons, not unless there is some heavy on field investment and at the moment there are other priorities for them.

At long last, we get a chance to talk about Promotion/Relegation and the make up of Super League on the VT!

have featherstone dominated the championship? they've only won it once!

Are you talking about the league, which they HAVE dominated, or the play off final ???

i'm talking about it as a whole....when a team dominates the championship,wins it 3 or 4 times on the trot and can clearly prove they are too good and too big for the championship....move them up!


as for why i've kept london in...do you know over the 17 years of SL they've averaged a league position of 8th....never finished bottom and only finished next too bottom twice.....thats why they make my 10 team super league!

They've only won the grand final once but have finished the top of the table for the last 3 years

so??? winning the grand final is what counts......and actually only winning 1 grand final after finishing top for 3 years proves they are missing something and are'nt the dominant club some of you think they are..

Not really, it means thay aren't that good in 'one off' cup games. FYI over the past 3 seasons their league record reads, P54, W47, L5, D2, F2259, A1036.

If we're going on one off games, then maybe they should replace Cas?

He made a nuisance of himself on our forum a bit back. Same problem as you have identified on here. He is stuck permanently on "transmit". He does not seem to have found the "receive" button yet, or if he has he must think it serves no purpose.

champions are decided by winning the grand final.......hth

He has completely gone against his own arguement.
Fev have dominated the CC and in most other sports they would be promoted, perhaps their time will come ??
BTW, are things settling down for you at Odsal and do you think that you will be competetive next season ?

So you suggest promote the ' team ' , not the club , and the main criteria for that team is winning a one off game? , sounds like yearly promotion to me

Nice one !
You will be waiting for a long, long time to find a more dominant team than Fev in the CC.
A club winning a play off series (3 or 4 games at the end of the season, should be regarded as lucky, not dominant.
A club that finishes top of the pile 3 years on the bounce IS dominant.

Why is a club which won the qualifying comp better than the club which won the actual comp?

Yes, in this scenario Fev certainly are the strongest team in the Championship.
Top of the league 3 times on the bounce, plus one GF win and 1 runners up is still dominant.
Although the current system involving a short play off series decides the seasons champions,
finishing top of the pile is the only measure of the strongest team in any particular season.

Although we havent had a team winning the GF fro 8th, if this were to happen, you would most likely have
a club that had lost as many games as it had won regarded as to "strongest" team ?
Even Leeds finishing 5th in SL calls the playy off system into question but, WTH each to their own.

You are getting ' club ' , mixed up with ' team '

I think you are being pedantic, but hey ho.
I'm sure that a man of your stature could easily understand the point I was trying to make.
With the title of the thread, it brings the issue into clearer focus. Should we consider promoting a team that finished 4th in the league,
but won the GF ?

He's not. They are quite different. The first team is a big part of a club, but far from the entirety. It's important to understand that, particularly when thinking of franchising and P&R, where the intent is to decide P&R based on the club not the team.

It doesn’t call anything in to question. If there wasn’t the possibility of someone who didn’t win the qualifying comp, winning the entire comp, we wouldn’t bother with having the play-offs. If Fev were the best team, they would have won the competition.