Yes but most other competitions like football have a bigger league underneath them . we have smaller competitions holding up the biggest , our pyramid is upside down

I think I missed the obvious - let's have a 2 team Premiership Man U and Chelsea with guest appearances from Liverpool, City, Arsenal and Spurs because no one else stands a chance of winning and bring bog all to the game.

Because they won promotion.

Have never been bottom.

Have an average gate of 6,000.

Produce championship winning Academy teams.

Produced more SL players than most including three of our best in Brough, Ellis and Westwood.

Have a new ant ambitious BOD with the money to back them up.

Have a first class heritage.

Play RL in the only city in the UK without a Football team.

Are 4 month away from a potential new stadium.

Against - the stadium issue which I accept but you have happily included a club with similar issues.

I mean it always used to be enough to warrant a place, your team managed it for the first 10 years in SL but hey now your there you kick the ladder away in true SL style. Would you like me to make you look any sillier?

It's not about numbers particularly its about the quality of the matches and the standard of the clubs. At the moment we embarass the sport by having clubs like Wakefield, Quins and Crusaders as they bring nothing but empty stands and poor performances.

A lot of those on here who don't want a reduction will no doubt have been those trying to say Super League wasn't a good idea and that summer rugby wouldn't catch on. We need to put club loyalty aside for the sake of the sport and focus on improving the competition. Super League is at an alltime low currently and there is only one way that can go as the cap can't go up because millions are spent propping up the five or six rubbish clubs I want left out. Give the sky money to the proper clubs and let them provide a quality competition.

Wakefield have won six games including beating Hull, I can only assume there was no quality in any of that - you're an idiot and the reason so few real fans bother with the VT.

People like you spouting the rubbish you do has ruined a game I loved, a game based on who won how many games, the only way any sport should be based on IMO.I really wish you'd take your elitist poison elsewhere.

Nothing stopping Wakefield have the time of their lives in a promotion based first past the post system in the Non-Super League is there?

You talk about RL being ruined? It was headed for the scrapheap and fast before Sky got involved.

I have no problem with that if P&R existed and we finished bottom - but that's not what you're on about is it. You just want to jettison clubs who currently don't meat your expectations. Not so long ago this would have included Warrington and Hudds but you're not bright enough to see that.

So what happens in the Super 8's when say Bradford and Hull for instance continually finish bottom, does it become a Super 6!

What loons like you don't get is that there has to be a bottom set of clubs like there is in the NRL. The only difference is that the teams change position more often but as the loss of P&R really kicks in that will change. Get a grip.

We don't have enough quality players to sustain so many teams. It leads to watered down competition and it is a vicious circle as the few elite players are not tested in a high intensity environment week in week out.

You mean Championship 1 ?

So why do teams at the top lose to teams at the bottom, your argument gets more ludicrous by the post. Unless there are teams being thrashed by 50 points every game then there is competition. The winning points margin in SL is about the same as the NRL. What you clearly can't seem to grasp (because and I know it's not PC your a bit thick) is that there will always be top teams and bottom teams. That's how leagues work, or are you suggesting every team must win exactly the same number of games by the same margin to be competitive - now think about it.

Quins were top of the League at the start of the season whilst Wakefield finished top 6 and reached a CCup final a few seasons ago. In 2009 Wakefield finished 5th and Warrington finished 10th - should we have binned Warrington who were clearly letting the side down - you don't have to answer that as I'm afraid it's beyond you and it's unfair to pick on you.

Now stop making a fool of yourself.

I think 12 is a pretty good number really. 14 doesn't keep the second flight strong enough IMO and 8 is just too few, like people have said people are used to watching football with 20+ teams in each league.

So I would go for a 12 team league. I don't want to say I would prefer P&R because we are not going to get it for a good few years anyway. I think the franchise system is helping clubs develop both in and out of super league.

I would go back to the top 5 play-off...
Relegation if you go into administration...

Wigan
Warrington
Leeds
Hull FC
St Helens
Catalans
Hudds
Widnes
Bradford
Hull KR
Quins
Salford

I reckon the second tier needs a criteria as well though but only having 12 teams in super league would make it much more competative. 6 of those teams have been in super league within the last decade and the other 3 have potential to make the step up. Not sure which other teams could be in this league but I think it should be decided based on the potential for super league.

Castleford
Wakey
Crusaders
Barrow
Halifax
Leigh
Sheffield
Toulouse
Featherstone
.....

Wakefield are gone either way. Stay the same as you are cut for Widnes, change to my proposed system and you are cut.

It's too late for Wakefield, people should have thought about stadiums, crowds, youth facilities etc years ago.

You know all this as fact do yo

these arent things they have brought to SL
That isnt an amount to be proud of

That isnt SL but a completely different league.

More than most? more than Leeds, Hull, Saints, Wigan, Cas, Les Catalans, Warrington, Bradford. To be more than most, you would need to be more than 6 of those clubs. Which 6 do you think you have produced more SL players than?
All clubs would say they have an ambitious board, and the money to back them up remains to be seen. The idea Glover is one of the richer men in SL isnt correct.

Really? They have a heritage comparable with Leeds, Wigan, St Helens, Bradford? even Widnes? Even though their sole success in the last 50 years has been a solitary Yorkshire Cup?

And has been for umpteen years and this has never been turned into an advantage.

Im 4 month away from potentially shagging Megan Fox. Im also 4 month away from potentially not.

There is realistically only one club with similar issues. A club which isnt harking back ten years to think of quality players it has produced. A club with better attendances, and a club which didnt go bust at the start of the year.

Standards have improved. It is a fact of life that when standards improve, those who cant keep up are left behind. It is necessary.

Indeed. 8 teams at the top flight? That's not a sport, it's a hobby.

Without a massive hike in the SC how would these 8 clubs support all the elite players who currently play in the entire SL? And what happens to the clubs who lose all these elite players to the Super 8? How would that affect the gap between the top flight and the other tiers?

Not wishing to be pedantic but the City of Salford doesn't have a professional football team

Halifax doesnt have a league football team either.

Is Halifax a city ?

It is as big as the area Wakefield fans argue is their 'area'. The term 'city' is essentially meaningless. An area can simply decide it is a 'city' if it wants ala Perth.

But if we are being pedantic, whilst Halifax wouldnt count as it isnt a City. In that context London doesnt have a football team

The term was a city , Halifax isn't a city , I wasn't being pedantic , the previous posters weren't being pedantic , it's just you not reading things before posting that is the problem

And as I said, the term 'city' is essentially meaningless.

Though thinking about it now, it seems obvious we should have expected you to get yourself caught up in the pedantry of something essentially meaningless.

I've witnessed your pedantry with regards the geography of Yorkshire citys,towns and villages before , and have no wish whatsoever to get involved in any discussion about it

The previous poster said city , you said Halifax , Halifax isn't a city , end of

No.

Yet he still manages to squirm and than explain the term City is 'meaningless'

What a joke.

Doesn't half make me laugh the VT sometimes. If its not broke don't fix it. More youngsters in SL than ever before and the lower clubs imo are slowly but surely improving each year.