Which is very worrying

But that counts for very little in RL these days.

Why? You're not another Rovers fan who's under the allusion that you own Craven Park are you?

I think that SL should be cut back to 12 teams or the reduction on import numbers be reversed, simply because I do not believe that there is enough quality players in the league to support 14 top flight teams. We've cut back on overseas players (our first mistake) which has ment our talent pool has decreased, not increased. I know lots of the "it's the overseas player's fault we never beat the aussies" crowd were convinced that a drop in overseas players would see 3,000,000 young british superstars suddenly burst into the game, no longer held back by the overseas player glass celing. but suprise, suprise, that has not happend. Super League, IMO, is a less competitive competition than it was a few years ago. Leeds' dominance in the GF is evidence of that. That's not to knock the Rhinos, they've been the best team in the competition. However the rest of the league has been a bad bunch.

The increase in teams and decrease in availible players was always going to be a mistake. How can you have more teams with less players? Basic maths would tell you that was going to be stupid.

The move to 12 appears to be gathering support. With 9/10 clubs confident of being in the 12. The prospect of an extra £150 - 200K per year is far too tempting.

Given at least one team will be elevated that means 3 current teams to go. Crusaders are bound to be favourite to drop. That leaves 2 slots!

In 2006, SL contained 12 English teams. In 2010, it contains 12 English teams. I'm struggling to see the difference in terms of players.

The problem is people expect things to change in an instant, it's not going to happen so soon, and chopping and changing rules every other season will not help. The RFL should stick with 14 clubs for the foreseeable and see how it pans out.

Edited

If the RFL were to drop 3 teams to promote 1 and i hope they dont, i think they would still keep Celtic, they semed determined on that one. Using the last set of critera for the rest ie stadia, crowds, onfield performance, and geography etc I'd say (as i have before) first to go will be salford, and then i see cas and wakey going only because of there are so many west yorks clubs and neither of them will have a ground by the 2012 season. For the same reason Halifax wont come up, so it would be between Widnes and Barrow. Unless they collapse finacially and on the pitch, Widnes must be firm favourites either way.

…. and then we would go back to the ridiculous situation of playing five extra fixtures as clubs will not want to lose out on income from that avenue, despite a spilt of a potential £2.4m windfall.

2006, 2005 … meh (my finger slipped, honest guv

)

Less teams would probably mean less Sky money, which with the sudden attention being given to ratings is something we may have to accept anyway.

like i said earlier in the thread, derbies became boring, with a cup tie and playoff's i think leeds played bradford 7 times one year!

My point was, you can't cut the number of availible players then increase the number of teams and expect the players now playing to be at a competetive level that can be improved to comparable to the NRL. I for one would love to see a 14 team SL with each team fielding a world class team of home grown players. That isn't going to happen if the RFL keep moving the goal posts every year.

What should have happend, imo, is that if the RFL wanted 14 teams they should have left the overseas quota alone for the next 3 years.

14 is fine. Leave it.

im pretty sure this is just a kick up the backside to some clubs who may be thinking that being only the 3rd worst club will save them if (as expected) 2 are promoted.

A little nudge to remind them that isnt good enough

No i'm not I was agreeing with tigersteve about the product on the pitch if you must know




Oh and by the way....it's ILLUSION

We didn't, although we might have done had we met them in the cup, qualifying semi and the GF.

Is the NRL really a realistic quality comparator for SL? It'd be nice, but it is a [ulong[/u way off. We should just enjoy what we have - it is entertaining enough for me. I'd accept further reduction in quality to expand the game. Intra-league competition is what makes for quality entertainment to a large extent IMO.

If you want a high quality competition I would do the following:

Reduce the competition to 10 sides
Play each other 3 times with the home/away of the third fixture alternating each year
Top 4 play off
No Edinburgh/Cardiff
Top 8 clubs coming into the CC at the qtr final stage - the bottom 2 the previous round and drawn to play the winners from the previous round - therefore max 3 additional fixtures
Max 3 non GB qualified players in any squad
Salary cap increase in line with inflation

This way you get higher quality games on a more regular basis

My 10
Leeds
Saints
Wigan
Warrington
Hull
Hull KR
Castleford
Catalans
Bradford
Wakefield

or conversely why do you? give me the willows over JJB every day of the week, i accept that belle vue without a roof is not ideal for the elements and atmosphere, but as an away fan at salford i am more than happy

Erm facilities, family friendliness for starters!

Taking up all 8 Q/F places. So the winners of the round before are dumped out of the competition alongside the teams they beat? Radical, I'll give it that.

Also:
- fans were bored with watching the derby games 3 times nevermind playing every club in the league 3 times
- how does the top 4 playoff work so that the team finishing first gets a major advantage
- putting the overseas quota down to 3 straight away will not improve standards
- where will the money come from to make up for no Edinburgh weekend
- and there are quite a few clubs who cant spend the full cap at the moment, nevermind the full cap plus inflation every year.