Quite simply we dont have enough money in the sport

The clubs need more games to finance themselves [ Which it seems isn't even enough at the moment , but the top players need less games to be competitive internationally

Unfortunatley success means the best players play more games , that is quite simply a fact of life

So sorry Jamie , either live with it or go and get another job at a less successful club

A successful national team would generate more money for the clubs than the clubs themselves could do. The clubs would need to take a chance to allow this to happen. International RL attracted these record crowds in the UK in recent times:
1) 73,631 - 1992, Great Britain vs Australia, RLWC Final, Wembley.
2) 66,540 - 1995, England vs Australia, RLWC Final, Wembley.
3) 57,034 - 1994, Great Britain vs Austraia, Ashes 1st test, Wembley.

Far in excess of any average round of Super League fixtures, and attracted TV audiences that would not watch SL or the Cup. Meanwhile, since the Grand Final crowd peaked at 71,352 in 2007, it has declined.



The problem is that they aren't the only two choices. Players like Jamie could go to Rugby Union, play fewer games, earn more money, play in more countries, and play for the England RU team at Twickenham, just like Jason Robinson, Andy Farrell, his son Owen, Vainikolo, Henry Paul, and now Chris Ashton and Shontayne Hape.

Peacock couldn't go to RU.
Completely the wrong build for any position, the Farrell issue if you will

No, Peacock is the right build for blindside flanker, number 6. Farrell also played that position for Saracens, and did so reasonably well. The reason he didn't stay in the position is that England had significant depth in the backrow, but not at inside centre. Farrell wanted to break into the test team, but also fancied himself to be a playmaker.

My point is that while Peacock may not go (he's near the end of his career), younger international players might e.g. Eastmond.

Top flight Union Players play more games if you count the Hienekan Cup, thier playing schedule includes a similar number of league games, "challenge cup" and Hienekan Cup it's about 5 games more and that's before any international call ups.

I agree with what you say , but stating what is without suggesting an alternative is pointless

So what is the answer ?

Have a look at my earlier posts on this thread, I've given my suggestion there:
* post 42 (4th last post on page 3), and then
* posts 46 and 49 (1st and 4th posts on page 4)

In a Galaxy far far away.....

Eastern SL conference
Hull FC
Hull KR
Toulouse
Les Cats+Barcelona
Cas
Leeds
Bradford
Hudds
Wakefield
(one day Gateshead and York)

Western SL Conference
London (Quins)
Sth Wales Scorpions
Wrexham Crusaders
Wigan
St's
Warrington
Manchester (Salford)
Widnes
Cumbria

Top flight players in England, Australia, NZ, and those based the Celtic nations all play fewer games than English RL players. In 2001, the RFU and Premier Rugby struck a [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/1454059.stmLong Form Agreement[/url that stipulates the workload of test players:



The LFA was further explained on BBC Sport Online in the article [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/1455513.stmBlueprint for England rugby success[/url.
In 2008, [url=http://www.rugbynetwork.net/main/s245/st122929.htmthe RFU and PR extended the agreement[/url, and the [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/english/7910306.stmgame limit was kept[/url

Some players may play more if they:
a) were not initially in the EPS at the beginning of a season
b) play less than 40 minutes of a match (under Premier Rugby's definition, apparently playing <40 does not count as playing a game)

Even so, English RU and French RU test players played fewer games on average for their season 2007-2008 then English RL or Super League based French RL test players in seasons 2007 or 2008. 2 rounds of the GP are held during the Autumn Internationals, and 2 hed during the 6N.

Not sure about your play-off format. I'd stick to a format similar to the current top 8 (just without the club call as it wouldn't be possible in two conferences, there isn't a highest ranked team)...

Week 1:
1) 1st East vs 2nd West
2) 1st West vs 2nd East
3) 3rd East vs 4th West
4) 3rd West vs 4th East
Week 2:
5) Loser of 1 vs Winner of 3
6) Loser of 2 vs Winner of 4
Week 3:
7) Winner of 1 vs Winner of 6


Winner of 2 vs Winner of 5
Week 4:
9) Winner of 7 vs Winner of 8

A fair, uncontroversial play-off system where the two best ranked teams should meet in the final if they win all their games, and the only possible chance of a repeat game would happen in the final itself (unlike currently where both semis could be repeat games).

My two conferences would be:
Eastern - Bradford, Castleford, Harlequins, Huddersfield, Hull FC, Hull KR, Leeds, Wakefield
Western - Catalans, Crusaders, Salford, St Helens, Toulouse, Warrington, Widnes, Wigan

Home & away against your conference (14 games) and alternate home and away against other conference (8 games) leaves you with 22 games.
Try and get three TV games a week and sell them in these packages: 1 Eastern Conference game, 1 Western Conference game, 1 Cross-Conference game.
Move the Magic Weekend to the Challenge Cup.

Now, just need to find a way to make up revenue for 5 lost games (which we're looking at 60-70,000 people across each round)...

I do believe that IF we were going to adopt this sort of league structure (which I am very sceptical of), this would probably be the best playoff structure, so I agree with you on this point - that is the fairest.



Unfortunately this split is slightly unfair, as the Western league would be at a massive disadvantage here in strength, as as well as including two new additions to the current 14 in Toulouse and Widnes, you also have the two most recent additions, meaning overall this side is nowhere near as established. Also it may be unfair to have the furthest distances to travel on this side. Also how would the promotion/relegation/franchise system work with these in the future?



A similar set of games to state of origin perhaps? East vs West? Although that is not likely to be anywhere near as good for club revenues, which indeed makes it a dilema.

Tbh overall I would not really support this idea.

All these new league formats are fine , except they all need more money to fund them , money we dont have , money we are unlikely to have in the near future 10/15 years

Some are suggesting this money would become available if we started beating the Aussies , we wont it wont , having clubs in Wales and France wont produce it either

The only thing that will produce it is a doubling of the current level of attendances at all levels which will finally produce a competition that nobody knows who is going to win season from season

I believe something like this would come in about 2020 with a bigger European influence.
If not a stronger second division would be nice

Agreed.

How will you achieve this ?

Ive said enough today.
Consolidation with the next tv deal, more money to filter through to the Chp clubs, possibly profits from 4N comps providing the Chp can prove a youth development plan.
Id also offer incentives for youth development at that level.

there needs to be more money entering the championship so it can go pro.its the only way we can produce the depth in quality to challenge the aussies long term.having read alot of posts on the subject of expansion i've come to the conclusion that you've all brainwashed each other into believeing 1 or 2 decent french or welsh teams is going to help england beat the aussies on a regular basis what a load of if your not going to invest heavily in a french and welsh league its never ever going to work

I said that on your board Starbug and thats the killer as to why, currently there isn't the space for all the best Chp clubs to be in SL.
I didn't necessarily mean produce SL quality juniors.
I just meant you should be rewarded for playing Leigh born lads and you should be able to receive additional funding for every junior you produce. If additional money found its way into the Chp then at ages 14/15/16 you would be able to compete a bit better for local talent.

You have spent 3 days telling us how leigh is a dump , the club is a mess , and how good Warrington are , you are now suggesting that a few extra quid will entice the next Shaun Edwards to leigh instead of W1g4n/Wire or Saints

Dont talk utter bollox

Producing junior players at Championship level is a total waste of time and money

Ask Widnes

i'd offer incentives to warrington for youth development

that way the production line can continue to pay for its self or if the powers that be finally realise that expansionism is a load of crap and realise a level playing field is best for everyone in the long term interests of the game.

I'll finish your post for you

Ask Widnes about Richie Myler , either way they would not have been able to hold onto him even if they had been promised a SL spot in 2012

Where's he playing now ?

Like Leigh with Mickey Higham and Stuart Donlan

There is nothing wrong with a 2nd tier producing quality players for the top tier. with no P&R in fact that is all for them to be there for.