As I say I think it has had some benefits - the need to meet off-field criteria played a big part in our own transformation of course - and was probably the right way to go at the time. BUT, it hasn't always been handled very well and has proven to be not a way to prevent incredibly poor club management. And it is contributing to a stagnation of competition within SL. Plus a stifling of the Championship.

What we really need to do is stick with 14 and bring back 1 up / 1 down. Then really concentrate on promoting the Championship to help raise standards and income there so that the jump up for 1 team into a 14 team SL is not so massive. What I can't understand is people saying bring back P&R but at the same time cutting to 12 or even 10 clubs. And there is even an option for 2 up / 2 down. How do we expect 2 promoted sides to compete with the top 10 or 8 clubs? Much less of a leap for 1 promoted side to compete with the top 13.

As for the relegated club - I realise it is difficult and perhaps a 1 year parachute payment could be arranged to help cover off-field staff costs (players SL contracts would be voided).

But I have come full circle from previously supporting franchising and would like to see P&R return. But not in some daft convoluted structure.

As interest in the local club drops the sport locally declines, at present east and miners are struggling to turn teams out in some age groups
When a club has no direct and certain path to the elite interest drops, the fan base ages and other sports become far more attractive to kids. Look also at Oldham, Rochdale and others
If wire had gone down and failed to get back up in a decaying wilderspool would its fans think differently?
Sport creates elites today but RL kills the dream that is the lifeblood of sport, wafc won the fa cup but in RL they would have never been given the opportunity to compete and that is wrong

Isn't that the real issue, the number of disenfranchised clubs that seem to have little say on the sport at 'top' level. The sooner we start acting like one sport the better IMO being part of the same structure must be the first step

Huzzah, someone gets it! The way forward isn't an overly complicated competition structure, where every game HAS to finish by a one-point margin.

Keep the league to 14 teams, with Championship clubs applying to enter Super League on an annual basis, whereby they have to meet minimum criteria set out similar to the how it worked with licensing.

IIRC, under the old P&R system the winner of National League One only had to have half-decent facilities to enter SL after winning the NL1 Grand Final, ie, stadia. With licencing they needed much more in terms of off field criteria. If we take all of the standards licencing brought into the game, and apply it to teams coming up from the Championships, the game will grow in the lower leagues making it stronger overall.

If the club that wins the Championship meets the criteria, they get promoted. If they don't meet the criteria, or don't apply for promotion, they don't go up, and the team that finished bottom of Super League gets a reprisal.

Simples.

Think there is more to it than that, as to why playing numbers have dropped off in the amateur game. I agree, a region-wide switch to summer rugby and the teething problems that has caused has put some people off. However we're in one of the worst economic situations ever, and employer's demand on people's time is having an impact, for the fear the players and employees would otherwise lose their jobs if they didn't appear willing.

There was always min standards for promotion but it didn't stop crusaders getting a licence from the hole in Bridgend or SL clubs going bust yet keeping a licence, the problem isn't really licensing its the dual standards and the fact we don't have enough 'super' clubs to be elitist via an exclusive non transparent licensing process

Spot on that SEB. Why can't the RFL see that and instead have to come up with some stupid system involving splitting the leagues half way through the season.


If they do go to one of the formats that split the leagues, I think it'll be my last year as a season ticket holder.

There's a (semi) interesting debate on this issue in the latest 40-Twenty Podcast if anyone can be bothered. Dave Woods, the rotund BBC commentator, gives quite a good defence of it.

I have to say though - whilst I don't think I would go that far, I do understand where Latchford Bob is coming from. When I first heard about this it was disheartening. Not sure that some convulted league structure is the best way to stand out as a sport.