I’ve no problem in principle if 2 leagues of 10 providing we finance the second tier enough for them to be full time pro.

What I don’t want is the loop fixtures.

As a sport we should be striving to increase the quality of the competition which has been on a downward trajectory for a while now. We need to reduce the number of games to allow the players to rest, recuperate and train properly between games and reduce fatigue.

I’d like to see a league of 10 with 18 games, play each team home & away plus playoffs.

We’d then need something else to provide a few extra home games for each club. I like the suggestion Castleford made. Run a 9’s competition throughout the season. This could involve all 20 clubs split into groups of 4 at a time so 6 matches at each venue. Maybe 8 weekly rounds so each club gets 2 home fixtures out of it. The 9’s league can then culminate in a play off to replace the magic weekend to determine the winners. I hope it might take off like 20-20 in Cricket. Clubs to name a squad of 14 for each fixture allowing players with niggles to rest up a week.

Surely the rationale of two tiers of ten should be home and away once against everyone in your tier...18 matches, plus a blended fixture list home and away (5 home, 5 away) against the clubs in the other tier....playing them only once to avoid too many blow out scores etc.
So you have a real 20 team league with 28 games. Top of tier two replaces bottom of tier one every year!

It’s actually the structure I suggested in a letter to the rugby leaguer about ten years ago!!!

18 games plus a few play off games wouldn't yield enough revenue to sustain a club.

Nothing has been confirmed yet has it ?

Complete self interest.. The game is now officially dead.

The five teams you mentioned are still a minority of the 12 teams in SL, and wouldn’t win a majority vote, therefore, some of the so called bigger clubs must be voting against any change at this time. I would imagine most RL fans believe whatever decisions are made, it’s the CEOs /Chairmen of the top six clubs who make the real decisions.

The up to 14/down to 10 proposal was inherently a bad idea so it's no surprise if some of the larger SL clubs voted against it. Anyone with a brain would understand very few fans wanted a 10 team league.

The league structure is not the problem with the game. It's amazing that people still think tinkering with this will fix up the real problems the sport faces. If anything yet another change just further reinforces the impression of drift and malaise some people think the game has.


This however....

What complete BS. Accusing other people of self interest because a very bad proposal which would have benefited your club more than almost any other didn't go through. Unbelievable.
And please stop using the "game is dead" crap too. It's lazy and tedious in the extreme.

These sort of suggestions are just wish lists with no regards to the commercial realities.

Inventing a league that would see the season ending pretty quickly won't suit SKY

Inventing some other comp to fill the gap won't suit SKY

avoiding loop fixtures that often have produced massive gates and great TV like Leeds and Bradford clashes won't suit SKY

Don't some people realise if you don't provide what SKY want then that will be that for the game.

Same blind nonsense we had when people were inventing a cross atlantic league that wouldn't get tv coverage from here of from North America.

McManus noted if at least 9 top English clubs were not in it SKY would pull the plug.

Had no effect, the dreams still flowed thick and fast.............. And now they are back,,,,,,

Is having 3 league games against each of the other clubs any better than "loop" fixtures"
It would be a "balanced" fixture program of sorts but, playing every other club a MINIMUM of 3 times a season (plus cup games and play offs) doesn't really improve things.

Having a 14 club top flight would do though



As Sky keeps reducing their investment, how long before the 10 club top flight becomes 8.

The "soft sell" and pretense that the 2nd tire will still be Super League shouldn't fool anyone but, already, plenty seem happy with the Championship "re branding".
How can SL 2 have any level of serious funding ?
The main reason for change is to allow SL 1 to maintain a similar level of funding for a reduced number of clubs in the league.

This purist idea that clubs must only play each other twice is ridiculous. It totally ignores the commercial realities.

So Lenegan & co, say to SKY [i"we are only playing each other twice, take it or leave it"[/i so SKY says "We will leave it" and the game collapses.



So Lenegan says "we will invent some other competition to fill July and August, (and in that competition like a 9's clubs still end up playing each other a third time or more

)

Season 2003

Leeds.v.Bradford 71,000
Bradford.v.Leeds 22,000
Leeds.v.Bradford 23,000
Bradford,v,Leeds 21,000
Bradford.v.Leeds 20,000 It's the entertainment business, if we want "sport" try the Pennine league.

Oh brilliant



Split the already reduced TV money 14 ways and you will end up with clubs who can't compete, with a return of clubs who will only manage to get a few wins against each other, Leigh can't win a game, will London compete, can TO compete will Fev compete? No chance.

SKY won't want these clubs on Television they get far bigger returns and we get far bigger crowds with Loop fixtures as you can see from the Leeds,v,Bradford stats.

Late in a season an RL punter thinks "shall I watch Saints and Wigan, they have been on TV twice before playing each other"...."nah I won't bother!"

It's not that people even think like that, they may not have seen the two other games. Don't people get that this is about audiences and money.....

Remember the godawful Wakefield Trinity side of 2015? Did people think "[iOoooh Wakey are playing wire for the first time this year. I must watch that [/i

Result Warrington 80 Wakefield 0........... That's your 14 club disaster........

I remember one season where London stuck 70+ twice on widnes and again once on wakey....there was the legendary shirt burning incident when we stuck that number on Warrington when we were pastel......the sky didn't fall in. It happens....
If you can't survive on 8% less tv money you've no place in soooooooper keeeeeeeeeeague.

If it is about attendances and money then just build a SL based on this best attendances and richest clubs. So Salford would be out. No place for London no fans or Bradford no money. These factors tend to determine leaguer position anyway. Sport should give everyone opportunity that is what it should be about the biggest stories are about surprise successes. Will we have a story like Brentford beating Arsenal?

This

I think 3 'commercially attractive' games a year is ok, but 4 is overkill and there is a risk of further Cup and Playoff games against the same team. But that is of course luck of the draw, the Hull Derby hasn't been played in the Cup in the SL era and we've only had it as a playoff tie once and that was 11 years ago.

I do think they have overkilled the derbys at the Magic Weekend, this years strategy of teams expected to be in a similar position in the table seems to be a good one. Only Rovers-Leigh appears a mismatch so far and that's because Rovers have exceeded expectations, its in the dead last thing on Sunday slot anyway.

The game needs Bradford back in SL, they are now improving a bit on the field and Odsal is at least having a bit of a tidy up. No other club will instantly bring in that many fans and there is loads of history for the media to bring up in their TV coverage.

I'm confused by your post.
You firstly say that playing each side 3 times a season isn't too bad and then follow by saying they "overkilled the derby games" by having them at Magic.

Remembering that there is the cup and play offs, clubs will meet a MINIMUM of 3 times in the 10 club league and this could easily ramp up to 5 or 6 by the end of the season.

The old saying about too much of a good thing springs to mind.

There seems to be the same thought processes going on as there was for the contrived MPG every season.

It was the rarity of the first MPG that made it special.

If FC played Rovers every few weeks, the derby would lose some of it's appeal.

For me, the problem isn't with the number of clubs in the top flight, in fact, it would benefit from having 14 clubs. It is the lack of cash in the game and reducing to 10 clubs isnt going to add a penny to the money coming into the game.

Also, with 2 French clubs in the top flight, there will be another game without any away fans, further reducing clubs' income, especially if a club cops 2 home fixtures against either or both of the French sides.

Those that don't like repeat fixtures are happy to speak loudly about it, but as the crowds in the grounds show, a second home game against a big team draws more than the first home game against a small team.

So even though the repeat fixtures may see lower crowds, they are more attractive to club owners.

One thing I can’t understand is the idea that a reduced number of clubs improve quality. The way to improve quality is to get more people to play the game then the pool you choose from has more quality players. Sports that have significantly increased participation such as cycling has achieved more. The countries that do the best in the olympics have the biggest populations. If we reduce the amount of SL teams and also the amount of academies. We make the path harder so people will choose to participate in others sports. We are in a pattern of ever diminishing circles. Less teams, less players, less fans, less money!

This is my theory people go on about a pool, well the pool grows to the size of the fish it has to sustain we increase the amount of fish ergo opportunities and in time the pool will grow. It won't happen overnight tho.

If the restructure is a starting block and SL2 is to be credible then it would need its own TV deal with assurances of games broadcast weekly. I would prefere a 2 up 2 down system with the 10 teams, this will improve the quality in both leagues, and also keep the two leagues linked there will be 4 sides moving between the leagues eascj year so especially in SL1 every game will count a few bad games and you could be drawn into the relegation battle.

some one has to sit back and review the where damage has been done with the lack of players making it through the system it so bleeding obvious that its as junior level why we are not achieving this, if schools aren't allowing RL to flourish within the curriculum then junior clubs away from the schools have to be supported, flood the junior levels with the players then over the years the will be more, the stop gap is at the age when they reach 16 to 18 when they decide the career direction, not all want to take continue suffering injuries, in my personal situation having recovered from a broken leg I then had enough when I broke my ankle in which I was just left at the hospital to sort my self out and then paid a pittance in insurance to cover my time away from work, It was this that at the time made me thing about finances and chose not to continue something I do regret

:yep63tf4

[i:yep63tf4[i"More people playing the game"[/i Is of course what we want plus more fans watching, more money men buying into clubs, and more media outlets buying into Rugby League.

But with respect you offer a solution without a plan to get there.

Most kids don't want to play Rugby or Soccer any more, nor do adults, the world has been changing and they don't "run off to other sports"

Now that parents can see the head knocks, and see the damage done to RL players RU players and Soccer players they are less enthusiastic to encourage or support their kids in these sports. It's not the game that makes the path harder it's social change, and health awareness.

Playing rugby and soccer is now a choice, people are free not to choose to do it.

Think my solution is not a quick fix that the RFL looks for.
1. All teams should be supported in building academies.
2. Clubs should be supported in community engagement summer and holiday rugby camps. Take you point about the head knock concerns so touch rugby could be the start for the kids.
3. Focus on building the support back up at all clubs after COVID so some marketing around this to pull fans back in.
4. More money into marketing generally if you don’t oromote and product you won’t sell it.
5. Get the World Cup scheduled for 2022 now .
6. Set up a 9s tournament that can be sold to another network.
I don’t have a magic answer but the moves we make seem to be wrong.please stick with a structure so clubs can plan.
With regards to sky what do they want be good to explicitly know their view.

RL is played primarily in one not very wealthy region of England and is heavily reliant on money from a medium (television) that is starting to diminish in importance and value. On top of that there is the general economic malaise that has already lasted more than a decade now and doesn’t look to be ending any time soon, with the fallout from the pandemic.

Agonising about about 2 x 10 vs 12 vs 14 is a bit like being chained to the tracks as the train speeds towards you and wondering what type of sandwich you should have for lunch.

Agree with all apart from the 9s. We used to have a 9s tournament. No club took it seriously.

Main way to increase quality is increase numbers. Only way to do that is for clubs/rfl/whoever else to do some advertising. Only a few weeks from one of rl biggest events and nothing/v little on social media/radio/TV (though I get TV would prob be too expensive). Clubs seem to think by sending an email to subscribers they will fill stadiums. They need to be targeting schools/colleges/unis/wherever groups go

Main negative for me though is sky. Yes they pump in money but get exclusive rights to games they have no intention of showing. Why buy championship rights if you only show the summer bash? With the new deal being less its time imo to get some games on free to air TV. When challenge cups on BBC a lot watch, but there are too few cup games to make a supporter.

Agree with you about Sky has been great but too much power over the game.Think a new marketing strategy is key I hear about events as I am an RL fan but neutrals see no publicity at all. Radio advertising would be good and more use of social media, breaking out of the current fan base should be the target.