Don't know where you get that from; doesn't appear to have done Premier league / Football league soccer any harm.

Both divisions in football are full time and get millions to pay staff with. A bit different to Wigan and Batley.

This year London, Salford, Widnes and Castleford would have split to join Fev, Fax, Leigh and Sheffield.
London are the worst team in SL this year without a shadow of a doubt (if not in the history of the comp) and they have comfortably dealt with Sheffield and Fev already....the 12-12/8-8-8 plan is flawed on so many levels, but specifically on the full time v part time basis.

1 Group of players will be at work Monday to Friday whilst the others will be training, recovering in state of the art facilities and being prepared for a game at the weekend.....this is not the Challenge cup where a team will step up for a big game...this is every weekend league fixture stuff.

And that is why the entire proposal is nonesense and as such I cant even believe it is being pushed the way it is. Unless all clubs are full time and get similar levels of funding then it simply will not work. As there is not enough money in the game to raise the salary cap and sustain 14 teams then there certainly isnt to sustain the 24 full time teams that would be needed for this to work.

If the stupid split is voted ahead, that will be the final straw for me.

And yet some like myself might well be tempted back by having meaningful fixtures again

That is not to say I think this is a good idea, IMO licencing could have worked better, but it required more support for the lower tiers and a more honest approach from the RFL, but that went straight out of the window with the Crusader farce

No. Wrong. The new structure will be fantastic for the game here and if, as proposed, it is left in place for decades, the game will be stonger and grow incrementally over time.

The clubs mentioned currently at the top end of the Championship will have central funding (Sky money) 5 times more than they get now plus, with something to play for (i.e promotion), will generate higher revenue themselves. There will be 23 league games in the initial 12 team leagues each season with only 7 after the the 8-8-8 split.

We're talking about what's best for RL in this country not in Australia (where they both do what is best for them & where they obsess more with aping the USA rather than Europe).

Can you point me towards where you have got these figures and how much does a Championship club get now? After all 5 times say £50,000 is still sweet FA in terms of running a full time squad competing against Wigan, Leeds, Saints etc on crowds of 10,000+ and getting £1.2 million in Sky money. It is still nothing compared to the likes of Hull KR, Wakefield etc getting this amount of Sky money and approx 8,000 crowds. What about the clubs at the bottom end of the Championship, how much will they get in this new structure? Is this less than the top Championship clubs you mention?

How many suns on your planet?


The clubs at the top average about 2,000 attendance......the game in general can't attract sponsors, but youthink Fev v London at the end of the season is the answer





I dunno......a billion dollar TV deals and 17k averages aren't too shabby

The details are not yet known as the RFL Executive is still formulating them prior to being voted on by the clubs. My information is that the amounts will be determined each season and vary according to final league placings but, intially, I understand current top end Championship clubs will get nearer £700k rather than c £140k.

But will the part time clubs genuinely have have anything to play for. As gutterfax pointed out, they just aren't going to be able to compete against full time clubs.

Also, when the four clubs are relegated after 22 games, how is that going to effect them financially. They still have to pay for a full time squad, but do it by playing Seven games that will attract 1000-4000 each game.

Even if they do sustain that, surely that will effect recruitment for the next year while the "top 8" will have enjoyed decent crowds, and will be much financially stronger for the next season. It will effect recruitment, players will only want to sign for a top 8 club (even if that means not playing much) as I can't see them wantin to play part time teams at the end of the year.

I fear we will have the same 8 every year, the same 4. Coming up and down every. Crowds below the 8 dwindling, that puts clubs at risk each year, and I fear clubs below the 8 will struggle.

The RFL seemed so fix on been innovative as creating competitive games that they have come up with an idea that just won't work below the 8. This is a massive decision for th RFL and I feel it is something you would hear on a blue Peter program!

I really dont see how that can be the case to be honest unless the Super League clubs are going to accept less money, which firstly isnt going to happen and secondly even if it did it would only weaken the game even further in this country. What about the rest of the Championship clubs, unless they get simlar amounts to the top Championship clubs then it will just create a 2 tier 2nd division 12 team league with the same teams finishing in the top 4 every year.

There simply isnt the money in the game to make this plan work and we will simply get a 2 tier top 12, a 2 tier 2nd division and the same teams in the 8-8-8 splits each year. The only way it can possibly work is if every one of the 24 teams got the same level of funding and that cannot and shouldnt happen as RL cannot sustain it and it would destroy the only big clubs that the game has got (which is what the elite competition should be all about).

Scrap the salary cap and it might work, that way ambitious Champs clubs that have wealthy owners and/or big sponsors on board can compete with SL clubs without just relying on Sky money.

People seem to be forgetting that the bottom half of SL cant compete with the top half unless we continue to reduce onfield standards.

You seem to have forgotten that these same club need to reduce there expenditure to stop themselves from being leeches to generous benefactors & constantly knocking on the door of bankruptcy every season.
P&R in what ever form it takes will help them to do this

given by licensing.

So to sum up,you want to carry on dumbing down the onfield standards just so the dross of the league can compete.
Its not really surprising fans are finding other things to do with there money

Why do you see it as the top coming down rather than the bottom teams coming up?


Misuse of "dumbing down" by the way.

The main reason i see it like that, is because of what i watch on tv.
The game seems slower and it feels like theres a lack of intensity.

The need for an 8 team playoff to keep it interesting for couple of clubs, and then the one that most people talk about,Leeds being able to plod through the season and then become a completely different team when the playoff start

The new structure could quite possibly mean it's the same 12 teams in the top 12 at the start of every season - so no real change from what exists now. But that's not the point - there will be a (pretty difficult) but open gangway for other clubs to reach the top level if they do things right (manage themselves well, develop players and supporters, attract financial backers (like Featherstone) etc. Upshot - the new structure will be better for the game in this country as a whole, not just for a [iselected[/i elite few

Compared to what era?

I can't see how you can equate the number of teams in the playoff series to the quality of the league. The same point on the number allowed could as easily be used to argue that the quality has equalised upwards.

Possibly, but having a low on confidence ' losing mentality ' team up against a ' winning ' team will produce some potential upsets ( more than the current no potential whatsoever )

Those bottom clubs are not getting much more than that currently, especially at the end of the season

I agree

Everyone will have there own preferences but IMO the split would just be making the game a complete an utter joke.

I'd personally go for a top division of 12 and a second division of 10. However no matter which way it goes we need to make sure the game is picked up nationally and well sponsored and IMO neither is happening at the moment.

Premier sports have got the world cup for example because they dangled the biggest coin but IMO it would have being far more productive to have the whole comp shown nationally. Maybe we should look at expanding the Northern Rail cup too.

For me we don't give ourselves enough national exposure and that is why the game is dieing over here.

I am in favour of the season split over traditional '1 up - 1 down' P&R. The seasonal split method allows for a club that aims to break into the top 12 to do so with more steady progression rather than having to go from poor house to penthouse in a short period to have any hope.

Under straight '1 up - 1 down' at least five clubs that were in the top tier the previous year will be spending as close to the SL cap as they can to avoid the one spot that guarantees they will drop a level and the club that comes up has to spend a similar level to try to stay up as their future tenure depends on taking points off Wigan, Leeds, Wire etc as well as their rivals and spending such amounts can and has killed clubs when such a plan fails to work and they go down. Any club that drops down a division also then has to quickly dismantle its squad (or has it forcibly dismantled) and start a new, cheaper one from scratch. Also clubs under such a system find their promotion confirmed only after the very last game of the year so have to hastily assemble a squad capable of (hopefully) competing well enough to avoid last place from the unwanted players that are still available. Players can't take a punt on signing provisional contracts with promotion chasers as their livelihood is at stake. With anti tampering dates moved forwards the best players are signed by the top flight clubs mid season so any good ones will be snapped up.

With the season split option failure to take many points off the likes of Wigan, Leeds, Wire etc doesn't condemn a club to the drop as that is ultimately decided by results against their fellow strugglers and the best of the second tier in the middle eight. A club looking primarily to stay up (whether in its first season or its twenty first in the top 12) only ultimately has to compete financially with the lower half of the top tier and the best of the second tier in a given season. So a club like Castleford or Widnes if only capable of sustaining a spend of £1 million could spend that knowing that their squad though only costing two thirds of that of the top four clubs' squads can compete in the middle eight thereby giving them more ties against the bigger clubs next year to help advance their club should they finish in the top four of the middle eight. They can then look to increase spending on players when possible and gradually look to improve their squad and club year on year until they can make the top 8 on a more regular basis. This would apply equally to a club like Fev or Leigh should they make the top four of the middle eight and be promoted. Instead of having to look at increasing spending immediately by three or four times on going up such clubs could look at more modest increases initially looking at taking them from a club that may have just managed to sneak fourth in the middle eight to one that is capable of finishing more comfortably within the top four of the middle eight in year one (just doing enough to stay up). They could then look to build the club off the back of the fixtures against the bigger clubs in the first phase of the season to gradually step up all aspects of the club and make gradual progress to become more established in the top tier.

The difficulty in securing promotion via the middle eight is IMO exaggerated by some people who do not like the system. By no means does it guarantee a team will go up as straight P&R would but they do not have to top the middle eight to go up, just finish fourth. This could be achieved by winning just one game against one of the SL1 teams (a team that managed to beat two SL1 teams would have to mess up against the other Championship/SL2 teams or be very unlucky to not get fourth spot). Even if initially unsuccessful in the middle eight a club would have an idea of where it needed to strengthen to compete better with clubs at that level and to earn and maintain a SL1 place in future. For movement to happen more regularly there may need to be an allowance for the clubs in the second twelve to spend more than at present if they can afford to but even with the current disparity there have been wins by lower tier sides in one off games with other games where the SL clubs were lucky to win in the cup. With the second phase being a series of single meetings the games against SL1 teams in reality are one off games and a good second tier side like Fev or Halifax may only need to win one of their four to snatch the fourth spot.

Below is an example of how a club from the second tier can earn promotion from the middle eight by beating only one SL1 team (this has been done in the cup and has very nearly been achieved on a number of other occasions too in the recent past in the cup by clubs with a quarter of their opponents potential cap). Teams A-D are SL1, E-H SL2 top four.

...........W D L PTS
Team A 7 0 0 14
Team B 6 0 1 12 Losing only to A
Team C 5 0 2 10 Losing to A and B
Team E 4 0 3 8 Beat D, F, G and H
Team D 3 0 4 6 Beat F,G and H but lose to E
Team F 2 0 5 4 Beat G and H
Team G 1 0 6 2 Beat H
Team H 0 0 7 0

Even if Team E got their win against A, B or C and lost to E they could still take fourth on points difference. This is not the only scenario by which a team can be promoted from the middle eight without having to beat more than one SL1 team either. If they can win two of those one off games and avoid slip ups against the other SL2 teams then they will be promoted. Some people seem to think that the SL2 teams would need to win most if not all games against their SL1 opponents to go up but that is definitely not the case.

Great post Mike.
Exactly what I was gonna post.Honest.
Seriously I agree with most of that.
No one actually knows what is the best way forward,but I see the eight split as giving more teams more to play for.

Probably the best post I've ever read on an RL forum.