IMG Are Seeking Your Views Rugby League supporters have been invited to contribute to the ‘reimagining Rugby League’ consultation currently being conducted by the sport’s strategic partner IMG. A survey has been launched today through the RFL and Super League digital channels Rugby League Fan Survey (qualtrics.com), and will close at the end of August. It covers a range of key areas such as viewing habits and preferences, competitions, and overseas clubs. READ MORE ON THIS STORY...

IMG Are Seeking Your Views Rugby League supporters have been invited to contribute to the ‘reimagining Rugby League’ consultation currently being conducted by the sport’s strategic partner IMG. A survey has been launched today through the RFL and Super League digital channels Rugby League Fan Survey (qualtrics.com), and will close at the end of August. It covers a range of key areas such as viewing habits and preferences, competitions, and overseas clubs. READ MORE ON THIS STORY...

So there is a question in this regarding French rugby league and should they be in Super League and before tonight’s match between Toulouse and Catalan there was a Twitter poll and 77% said yes they should be in.

Well allegedly some one from Huddersfield says the French should not be in the comp, well my point is who ever said that needs to take a look at the size of the crowd at the game tonight for their derby game.

My understanding is the the results show the majority have a beef with loop fixtures/Magic Weekend. The 14 team league is fast approaching, Toulouse to stay up and two teams promoted for 2023.

Thar would certainly take the pressure off Wire for next season.

I'm absolutely for France having a place in SL and even expanding the number of clubs in the SL / Champ pyramid, however at some point hey do need to start contributing to the pot, the size of that crowd puts nothing in to the 'British' game financially, other than some additional exposure for sponsors in to a non M62 market. A French TV deal is an absolute must, then that along with the UK TV deal should be distributed amongst all SL teams.

I think 2x tens is also on the table, both have their positives & negatives.

1x14 means the end to loop fixtures, however it makes promotion and relegation difficult as the strength of the Championship is weakened by losing its best 2 clubs - probably Leigh & Featherstone. You would probably have a 1 league franchise comp, with growth outside that, London / Newcastle / Sheffield / York etc difficult. Plus how do you increase the strength of RL in France (Critical I'd say for international game growth & development). Would also need some additional TV money to fund it.

2x10's gives potentially another competition to sell a tv package for maybe package 1 having 2x SL1 games and package 2 having 1x SL1 and 1x SL2 - needs someone willing to buy package 2 though and would need significantly more TV investment than a 14 team comp. Promotion & Relegation is also easier in a 2x10 comp, the big caveat is you'd need a big increase in TV money, so no Package 2 offering meaningful investment, it falls on its backside. Gives the benefit of adding expansion clubs to SL2 when suitable, additional French teams if a French TV deal turns up.

A 14 team league is probably most likely, I'm just not sure what message this sends to the likes of London and York & Newcastle especially who have grown nicely over the past few years and have ambitions of SL.

They build so strong a case that expansion to 16 or 18 is inevitable. Look at the NRL for the way to do it.

In the 1994/95 season there were 16 teams and 30 games.
+ Regal Trophy
+ Challenge Cup

What was wrong with that?

The current Super League teams don`t want to dilute their share of the Sky money, by sharing it with the new teams being introduced to the league.

Yeah they probably want it reduced to 8 teams watched by nobody.

For me, as a dinosaur, I'd like to see

- A format where we play a team home and away in the league.
- The reduction of the number of interchanges both in personnel and frequency and transition the game from a robotic cardiovascular attritional exercise back into a skillfull contact sport. This would have the benefit of reducing squad size.
- Encourage the physical gladiatorial contest in the pack. Crowds like biff and aggression.
- Zero tolerance of feigning injury (cannot believe this is in our game)
- Zero tolerance on artificially slowing the play the ball. It's stifling attacks and making the spectacle boring.
- Strict adherence of 10m on side rule.
- Corner flag as 'in touch' to force more creative play.
- 1 marker defender
- Contested scrums

Nail. On. The. Head.

The only way the game can move forward is to take the league up to 16/18 teams. The only way this will happen is if IMG bring new revenue streams / sponsorship into the game to supplement the Sky money.

I think the above will come from the addition of a 2nd cup tournament, like the Regal trophy being re-introduced, and the introduction of a new format like Rugby 7's or 9's to run side by side the Super League like the 100 does for Cricket. But the controversial part would be running it with Rugby Union consisting probably of about 30 teams (Super League & the Union Premiership teams).

Now I've mentioned the inclusion of a 'hybrid rugby' 7 / 9's comp I'll put on my tin hat and retreat to a bunker. But hopefully the clubs will buy in to what IMG come up with, otherwise the game will continue to shrink and die. But if they do it will be exciting times for rugby league, and rugby in general.

I'd prefer a 14 team league with no relegation, playing each other once home and away, with no loop fixtures. This is what i'd prefer but who knows how it will look. But i do think the NRL have it right for developing players, if you can't be relegated there is no fear to blood youngsters and not have to rely on Aussies. I think it would definately improve English players in the long run and help secure sponsorships etc.
Spread the game in the UK, have London,, featherstone and a club further up north like Newcastle. Not as simple as that i know but with the channel 4 coverage it is starting to expand rugby league already

Announcement's today as to the make up of the next 12 years



14 team SL or 20 teams split into two leagues with no promo or relegation into the 20

A massive decision to be made, let the debates begin

We might hear what is presented by IMG, but the votes won’t be till later in the year I believe.

Both options have their downsides.

14 shuts out some promising clubs and restricts any further growth in France (although I wouldn't be allowing any more French teams in to the system without a TV deal). However it gets rid of loop fixtures and is a cheaper option than 2x10's I would expect whilst growing the amount of professional teams in the game.

2x10 allows us to widen the footprint and gives us an obvious way to add clubs to the SL system by expanding eventually to 2x12 as the teams and funding allow, BUT it means is more loop fixtures for the foreseeable. Loop fixtures don't bother me too much to be honest, I'd rather see us play Leeds / Saints / Wigan / Catalan 3 times a year than play Featherstone (or Batley if you take current results).

I can't see 2x10's working without a significant improvement in TV money and broadcasters willing to pay to televise SL2.

14 is probably better for right now, but 2x10's is the best way to grow the game for me, if people can get over the loop fixtures. Whatever they choose it needs to be stuck with and there needs to be a plan for the next 10 years plus, rather than just the here and now, we've become to reactionary in structure changes.

Sorry but the loop fixtures are disastrous for the game

I agree with you rather than Alffi. Playing Wigan and Saints (in our case) three times is OK,

However, it isn't usually just three, when you factor in Magic, The Challenge Cup and (ahem) the Play Off's. It can quite easily be five times, (will we be paired with Leigh next year?), but it soon becomes boring and devalues that 'big game' tag, including the build up.

I get why we have them from a resource POV but it does skew the league (yeah yeah yeah Old Trafford Leeds from 5th.....)

Agree with this, I can't stand loop fixtures the league is not a fair system when you don't play the same fixtures as everybody else. That doesn't necessarily affect the top team but around the bottom of the playoffs and relegation if the points are tight it leaves a bit of a sour taste IMO. I think 2 leagues of 10 would really put me off rugby league.

Plus I think it devalues the big game feel between us and our nearest rivals a little. It's all just a bit too familiar a routine.

As I said, plenty don't like them, I personally don't mind them. As a Wire fan I'd be confident we would get a better home attendance for Hull FC at home for the second / third time (taking in to account play offs / challenge cups) than Featherstone at home and I'd look forward to it more too.

Maybe that wouldn't be the case for Wakefield, maybe playing Wigan for the second / third time at home would get a lower home crowd than Leigh at home?

What happens to Bradford, London, Sheffield, York, Newcastle & Widnes in the 14? if as expected franchising comes in, they are left kicking their heels trying to be in a position to get a licence in 3 years time, when they get one having to recruit an entire new playing staff. What happens to Wakefield if they are bottom of the pile when the next round of licences are given out and we have a resurgent Bradford replacing them with a new stadium in the bag (ok unlikely!), where does that leave Wakefield for 3 years? You could keep P&R I guess, but the gulf between the two comps would be huge, its big now, so would only get bigger with 14.

I understand the feelings about playing teams 3 / 4 / 5 times a year, but there is no silver bullet here, we need the structure (and IMG will be focussing on much more than structure of course) that gives the best option for growth.

My idea for Super League is somewhat radical. And some of the concepts are adjusted from the NFL.

But the first thing I'd do is extend the number of Teams to 24. Lower the cap space to help the Championship clubs that move into the League at first, so top players from Super League can then be spread around the League, and lower the squad sizes. So for example, with a lower cap we might not be able to keep Daryl Clark on the books, but Halifax Panthers can now pick him up and add a top class player to their spine. And this can happen for all other teams. 3 Teams up and down every 3 years. And every 3 years we can also look at the value of the game and see if clubs can afford to increase their salary cap. The NFL Salary Cap changes year by year according to the value and profits of the game.

Play each team once. 11 home, 11 away, 1 Magic Weekend. Show 1 game live on YouTube for free on a Saturday and Sunday. Change from a point system to a record system. So if you win all 23 games you don't have 46 points, you're 23-0. This is another NFL concept which I think has a positive effect on how we view team progress year by year.

I think having more teams gives the League Leaders Shield more value... But then have 12 teams for playoffs, with the top 4 getting a BYE in the first round. Then you get 5th vs 12th, 6th vs 11th etc, so the extra teams that qualified have to get to the next stage on merit against tough opponents, whilst the best teams earn a rest and extra progress into the bracket.

Overtime should always find a winner. Teams get 2 straight sets to score points. This is another NFL-like concept I'd love to see... We get possession of the ball and we can either get a drop goal, penalty, try or try + conversion. After our possession, the other team gets their chance. If they don't match the points we got, we win. If they equalise, we start the process again. If they score more than we did, they win the game.

And finally, a new thought I've had on sin bins and red cards. I honestly think it ruins the game. I know old-school fans will say it has always been fine, but I think big games are ruined by cards. Take the GF between Wigan vs Saints for example, when Ben Flower was a bit naughty. He made the error but the team didn't, so I think a better solution would be to also copy the NFL on this and simply eject them from the game. Wigan put another man on the field but they now have to deal with having 3 subs, and they may have to change the structure. So with a Yellow or Red Card, the player is off, but the team still retains 13 players on the pitch. The player is either still gone for 10 minutes or the rest of the game and the team at least have to make changes and deal with some of the issues of missing a player in the squad. And I think teams winning as 13v12 makes wins less valuable/meaningful, since it can cause teams to win or lose matches they otherwise wouldn't if not for a card. Like when we beat Leeds in the first game of the season. Leeds would and should have won that game, but I wasn't even happy when we won. It just felt like a hollow victory.

We keep talking about new people/groups running Super League every few years. But it always feels like the game is getting smaller. Personally, I want to see a radical change to the 'product' and just try something new.

Well, the IMG proposals are in, and it sounds an awful lot like a return to the already tried-and-failed licensing system: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549

Well, the IMG proposals are in, and it sounds an awful lot like a return to the already tried-and-failed licensing system: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549

Quote ="The Speculator"Well, the IMG proposals are in, and it sounds an awful lot like a return to the already tried-and-failed licensing system: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549'" The licensing system failed as it was powerless. The clubs had the say in what happened and voted everything down. The franchise system should have seen every club in SL with a modern facility and a youth system. The sport would have been so much stronger. Instead the likes of Cas, Wakefield and Bradford got away with ignoring all the 'framing the future' requirements and refusing to progress the sport. The problem is that the same will likely happen now. The tinpot clubs are so numerous that they'll vote against everything, but in general the overall vision appears sound. They're trying to encourage clubs to invest and improve to achieve a category A status. If they can fill the top 12 places in SL with category A sides it closes the drawbridge to automatic promotion and relegation, but if they get to that point it will mean incredible progress from what we have now. It means clubs who achieve category A can focus on the long term and not panicking over short term decisions in order to stay up. The likes of Warrington will get a category A licence and won't have to worry about relegation. So blooding youngsters during a rebuilding season like you had last year would have been far easier. We just to see what the categorisation is based on and how enforceable it is. In reality the most likely thing is the clubs voting it down or arguing over it for so long IMG get bored and move on.

Quote ="The Speculator"Well, the IMG proposals are in, and it sounds an awful lot like a return to the already tried-and-failed licensing system: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63063549'" The licensing system failed as it was powerless. The clubs had the say in what happened and voted everything down. The franchise system should have seen every club in SL with a modern facility and a youth system. The sport would have been so much stronger. Instead the likes of Cas, Wakefield and Bradford got away with ignoring all the 'framing the future' requirements and refusing to progress the sport. The problem is that the same will likely happen now. The tinpot clubs are so numerous that they'll vote against everything, but in general the overall vision appears sound. They're trying to encourage clubs to invest and improve to achieve a category A status. If they can fill the top 12 places in SL with category A sides it closes the drawbridge to automatic promotion and relegation, but if they get to that point it will mean incredible progress from what we have now. It means clubs who achieve category A can focus on the long term and not panicking over short term decisions in order to stay up. The likes of Warrington will get a category A licence and won't have to worry about relegation. So blooding youngsters during a rebuilding season like you had last year would have been far easier. We just to see what the categorisation is based on and how enforceable it is. In reality the most likely thing is the clubs voting it down or arguing over it for so long IMG get bored and move on.

Also a middle finger to any aspiring French teams by the looks of it

It just says a cap. That might be 0,1, 2 or 3. Until there is more detail it's hard to say.

Yeh, so a limit. A limit that isn't placed on English teams, infact it actively states it will focus on domestic growth.