its not exactly thriving at this moment although you may think so..still we are all entitled to our opinions ....even you

The answer is simple, find loads of money from somewhere and give it to 20 clubs.

Best idea to me would be 2 leagues of 10 or 12, with 2 teams promoted and relegated this year, this would make every game in the season a big game, the bottom of sl 2 still works as a lisencing system, thiswould increase attendences all around in my view e.g. widnes are dominating sl 2and get high crowds, plus then a promotion tobe back at the top, bottom of sl1 wakefield and hull kr (theoretical) are scrapping for points every week, keep the magic weekend it was by far the best away day last year, one idea from the rfl I loved as long as it stays at the etihad

Looks like Tony Smith isnt impressed by it all, that and he reckons salford should have points docked... www.warringtonwolves.org/tv/?v=512

Looks like Tony Smith isnt impressed by it all, that and he reckons salford should have points docked... www.warringtonwolves.org/tv/?v=512

Thought he was on shaky ground with his comments about Salford.

Did we not get a late winner against Wakey last year with an extra man on the pitch?

Agree with him re: the lack of firm of firm leadership from the RFL on certain matters but with regard to the farcical changes to the youth system, the majority of the clubs have a lot to answer for.

If our extra man was a French referee then yes, he gave us an extra tackle which we scored off.

Ah yes now I remember.

This is why I don't post much.

Back in my box for another few months.

I think the comment on strong leadership is slightly unfair.

Is the Warrington chairman, going to lead the way for Tony Smith, by Warrington giving up their right to vote on changes suggested by the RFL???

If we want strong leadership, then there needs to be less democracy and power more concentrated in the RFL. If you want democracy with the SL chairmen making decisions, then you have to accept a lack of leadership as the chairmen will each have their own idea's on what is best for them or for SL.

The RFL is a useful scapegoat for fans, but the real power lies with the clubs, not the RFL. The RFL is more akin to an advisory body for the SL chairmen.

Above posting is spot on.

Just watched Tony,sounded like a pitch for his next career!! could he be the strong leader the rfl needs?

Definitely time for change at the RFL. Nothing seems to be going particularly well at the moment - other than RLWC2013 which from what I've seen is being run pretty well by a specially created team.

Franchising has clearly had its faults but it did have some benefits too so I was a supporter of it coming in. However, it has now had its day and lack of P&R is clearly stifling competition in SL and killing ambition below SL. On top of that, the Academy changes voted in by some short-sighted SL clubs is ruining the good progress that had been made in youth development.

So, problems we have:
- lack of competitive games in SL;
- lack of clear reward for ambition below SL;
- youth development gone backwards;
- waning media profile (from an already low level);
- lack of sponsorship interest;
- declining crowds.

Some pretty big problems. However, do we really need to throw away everything we have and start again with some baffling, bizarre format? No, for me, all we need to do is:

- stick with 14 SL clubs;
- introduce 1 up/down automatic P&R;
- reduce playoffs to top 5 or 6;
- implement the u23s teams that the RFL review recommended;
- bring back the Great Britain team to play every 2 or 3 years.

Job done - all the above problems are in some way addressed by these solutions, which whilst will bring about change are not too drastic and simple to understand.

If you elect a leader you empower them to make decisions, SL chairmen make the calls based upon self interest - fact
The top 6 are not affected by P&R, they have the most money, the best juniors, the best players and we rely on them to fill the intl squad
The bottom 6 are most effected, produce few players and have thee same voting rights
Turkeys, Christmas .........

One of the best things that Super League did was get rid of promotion and relegation and bring in a licensing system. Straight up/down is incredibly in a sport that it is looking to develop its players and clubs.

The licencing system came off the back of the whole game review which led in turn to the need to build better stadium.
The whole game review culminated in a very good report
The fudge of the authorities was to give too many clubs a way out NOT to develop their stadia and facilities and increase their attraction to the public.

The other fudge was in regards to the 'financial stability' of clubs. How on earth could they give Bradford a 3 year licence based on financial health? It beggars belief - or shows that the accountants used by the clubs are cleverer than those employed by the RFL.

All we now need is (further) wholescale breaking of the salary cap....

I am concerned about Koukash's statements on this and in my view there should be draconian measures taken on any who transgress.
The previous 'slaps on the wrist' that I seem to remember kept some (including Wigan) in the top flight many years ago simply won't do.

Fudge is an appropriate word.

Best for whom?
Financial stability? Wakey,Bradford, Salford, Crusaders are fine examples
Even up the comp? Would you put your house on Wigan, Wire, Leeds not winning this years GF ? So since SL began we have had four GF winners and since frAnchising two
Increase the player pool? Yip, scrap teams and DC's says it all
Increase intensity? HKR 4 - how many Wigan
Salford, London, Cas, Widnes already have nothing to play for
Championships are dead and the heartlands amateur game is struggling
Is it all franchising-no but franchising has divided our sport and we are not big enough to be divided

If P&R does come back, would it be a good idea for the promoted team to meet a minimum standards criteria to enter the league. Such as in the Aviva Premiership?

why has Franchising and no Promotion and relgation affected the amateur game....surely that has little bearing on what the pro or semi pro game does..... ???

what appears to me is tinkering with the Amateur game has affected numbers....When it was in its pomp (in my era anyway) I'd say back in the early 90's I played in the North West counties 4th division with Laportes there were divisions five and six below us and then two reserve divisions thats nine leagues and then in addition to that was the National conference which The Woolston Rovers side dominated for a while.... It was a clear simple structure. play for your local team in the north west in the winter or play nationally in the Conference in the winter .
then they dicked about running a crappy summer competion which was crap and local lads went and played back to back rugby playing for Crewe wolves or something like that and then the Wizards came along and the great woolston side just seemed to get lost in it all?.... and now the games gone completely summer and they are down to six leagues with the last league just about a league with 7 teams in it...and some old familiar club names long gone...

maybe there's a lesson here for someone ............... dont dick around with the format otherwise people get ed off

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.