County cricket's most watched and most money-spinning competition is played on a licensed system. No relegation or promotion.

And I'm not picking a fight. Just pointing out the obvious.

Oh, and you never answered my question.

Whoever takes the 12th spot,should be given a season's grace to establish,and then that should be the system thereafter.. The team who finishes in 11th will be relegated if the promoted team finishes bottom in their first season.

P.S. Maybe i should have posted this on the future of the game thread.

That would be p!ss funny after the amount of slaver we get off some Wigan fans on here

I like the idea but disagree with one aspect. What if the newly promoted club is bottom, way off the chase, and the club in 11th has been very competitive perhaps just a few points adrift from 6th or 7th ? Why relegate a relatively successful team that’s adding value to SL.? I would give 3 years grace with any promoted club that finishes bottom within their 3 years staying up, no team relegated. Promote the top team from the Championship and grow Super League.

That's the idea, if you finish bottom you have one more season to get your act together. As for the club who finishes 11th and being competitive, well that's what the fans want to see (competitive games). It would certainly give an incentive to play well and try not to finish in 11th place and that would also avoid meaningless games.

The point with al the promotion/relegation v licensing/franchising is that whichever system is put in place, there will be plenty of clubs that are unhappy.
After all, this is precisely why P & R was reintroduced.
Of course the system isn't perfect and of course it destabilases the clubs who are battling for promotion or, battling to avoid the drop.
However, a closed shop in our sport wasn't right either.
It didn't work last time, apart from protecting those clubs who may usually be under the threat of relegation and it wont work in future, for exactly the same reasons.
Taking Donny's side of the argument (for a change), why on earth should aspiring clubs, Newcastle, York, Widnes, Leigh be prevented from ever getting their chance in the top flight and if we are ever to expand the game further, either in the UK or overseas, what happens then.
IF there are so many "worthy" clubs vying for a spot in SL then, why on earth not increase the number of clubs in SL - certainly going from 12 to 14 seems eminently sensible and would allow us to get rid of the ridiculous loop fixtures.



By doing this and keeping 1 up, 1 down, there is a greater chance of any promoted club surviving the dreaded first season. Yes, there will still be issues for any relegated club but, isnt this what sport in the UK is all about.
A battle for supremacy at the top and some jeopardy at the bottom.

So, not County Cricket then?

The RFL and clubs need to increase the player pool, not fudge a sporting competition.

Seriously, how do you increase the player pool, as we are already struggling to find enough quality to warrant having 12 teams?

I've already read someone suggesting increasing the league from 12 to 14 - that will just dilute further what is already a poor quality of RL... More realistically, the league needs cutting to 10 and the division below needs to be a feeder for that higher league.

I saw a quote the other day that said that the most dangerous person is the one who cannot imagine that they might be wrong. That would seem a fair summary of some posters on here. Different sports have other criteria for organising the playing structure. Most of us were brought up with promotion and relegation which is at least simple and obvious but as sports science has moved on the promoted team has almost no chance of staying up without a big cheque book.
Franchises provided a certain amount of stability but without the possibility of earning promotion and are frequently called unfair on here.
We also do not have enough big backers to be really radical and think outside the box now our one flashy display, Toronto, seems to have gone down the pan.
We seem to have come back to the idea that we would be best served by promoting a team that lies so close to at least one other SuperLeague team that away fans could make the on foot.
Personally I like the idea of Toulouse. If not Toulouse then a large urban area like Newcastle could provide new supporters. We seemed to be doing so well in London but managed to make a mess of that by never fully settling.
Ultimately I worry that The Championship is too cash poor to support development of players and to afford promotion. It is a shame than the game as a whole cannot afford a much expanded SuperLeague with a funded Sl1 and SL2 to allow both ring fencing as well as promotion and relegation. Sadly, at the end of the day, what do I know?

Give it to Fev where hopefully I'll be able to see them take a few hidings.

A darn sight more than the trolls on here that's for sure.

When backed by significant funds Newcastle playing as Gateshead came fifth in Superleague in 1999 winning 19 of their 30 matches, 6,600 for Bradford.

Kurdi is a multi-£Millionaire and has developed a sizeable player development system that could go on top of that sort of performance. If people want expansion that is it.

If Kurdi is ignored when Argyle got flagged all the way into Superleague with his phoney club and couldn't care less attitude, then you can safely say expansion is dead. What more do so called "expansionists" want?

Do post more........

Oh dear.When Gateshead parachuted a squad of players from Australia into Super League people like yourself were very critical of them.
The incompetent and inept governing body,at that time,wanted to rescue a M62 club,so Gateshead were swallowed up by Hull FC.
You do recall your comments about the other code in Canada? Well Kurdi owns a union club and the much maligned Argyle has spent more,over the past 3/4 years on rugby league, than Kurdi has.

You will need another private conversation with Lenagan to gain the support for Thunder.With Mick Hogan being on Tyneside there may be a slight chance.There again,with the money invested into Bradford by the governing body there may be opposition.

The M62 folk really have given the sport the air of respectability.The decisions in 2020 continue to make the sport a laughing stock.

How will the attendances improve in 2021?

Someone suggesting something isn't really anything more than a personal opinion probably based on what they would like to see. For a better indication of where it could go, go back to Superleague's publicly announced and voted on plan to create a Superleague of 2x10 clubs with P&R between. The new SKY deal may well bring this back on the table.

Not about me at all, and your wrong anyway. Richardson may have had to use a lot of antipodeans to get started, but the club now has a full English player development system and a backer with a great track record. What Newcastle offer fits the bill in all ways especially "expansion" and "local player development" plus some more SKY Sports subs from the North East.

Put simply people scream expansion only when it involves pie in the SKY fantasies. When it includes all the things the game wants from an expansion club [i"people like you"[/i don't wanna know

End of conversation.

You admit it then? about time.

Disagreeing with you does not make anyone a troll, starting multiple anti-expansion fantasy based threads does.

A good idea, if only we had the required pool of quality players and financial backers at the various clubs in order to make it happen.

Unfortunately, all we would probably get is what we have now, which is 2 or 3 clubs yo-yoing between the divisions on a regular basis, because the more financially stable clubs in SL1 would tie up the top level players in order to ensure their place in the elite league, while your 'mid-level' players would simply play out the annual promotion/relegation merry-go-round at the mid level clubs.

Ultimately, our choice appears to be a small elite league of high(ish) quality RL, supported by a feeder system below, or an over inflated, low quality top league - pretty much what we had become pre SL.

SL1 & 2 is merely a reduced SL and a reduced Championship, albeit under a new name.

SL2, Championship, 2nd division, there is no bloody difference.

All that this would be is a reduced top flight and a little bit of money for the 2nd tier but, just how long would it be, before SL1 wanted all of the money

Given that SKY are happy to show Saliford v Castleford at 14:30 on a Thursday, will there be any Money next season?

In a way, with Sky being able to show games at different times, there is a case for demanding more cash.
However, with the massive, unprecedented issues, following covid, I would think that SL is just happy that it wont have to give some money back.
Worth remembering that the fixtures are only taking place to secure the remaining Sky payments for the rest of this season.

IF we were to continue into next season, without fans, things will become increasingly desperate for ALL clubs and even as we are, it just seems a matter of when there will be some clubs going bust (either in SL or lower down the leagues.

Basically clubs have, Sky monies, sponsorship, season tickets already purchased and some merchandise, plus the goodwill of their owners but, no "regular" income.

Agree with all of that, some people are behaving as if it's "business as usual", not in RL, but life in general, it really isn't!

There is a big difference which you miss. But if you think it's "bloody crazy" then that's entierly up to you ..............

The proposal to go to SL1 and SL2 was all about Superleague taking control of the game. The actual "change" proposed was that 8 clubs split from the RFL and leave the championship to join 12 clubs in Superleague 1 & 2. At that time (couple of years back) there were 38 clubs in the whole league set up. Had eight Championship clubs broken ranks and joined the 12 then the vote would have been won 20 to 18. The championship clubs sided largely with the RFL. I don't know exactly why.

Superleague could have fully controled P & R and could have stopped the march of the phoney American club(s) had they won the vote. Superleague don't like how the RFL still have some power over SL clubs and their decisions. An example is the RFL allowed Les Catalans to sign Folau which Superleague were dead against, and were not allowed a vote on it. Another example is the RFL pushed TWP onto Superleague when Superleague did not want them one little bit.

There's a lot of unseen conflict, TWP are talking about getting back in Superleague once they agree a deal with a new owner whilst at the same time Superleague are pushing the RFL to work out a replacement for that 12th. place. This is another example of the conflicts going on.

Always been in favour of a London club being in Super League, the game needs a presence in the capital. Hopefully a settled one.

The North Anerican marketing team should be incentivised to get 9000 gates at London. (May be easier if they were closer to central London and not ground sharing with the enemy)

All the moans about Rugby league being a restricted and parochial game along the 110 mile long east to west M62 can be wiped out by a Superleague containing clubs 280 miles apart north to south on the M1/A1. A true national league.

But put this to the the moaners and they'll find any excuse to tell us why London and Newcastle should not be in Superleague. Both clubs easily fit the bill a far sight better than Salford. which is not to have a go at this fine club, but both the London and Newcastle clubs can take SL out of their Northern enclave.