The SL re-structure, Return of GB, and International Loyalty - Steve Mascord NO doubt some of you will not want me to write about the proposed restructuring of Super League, just because I’m Australian. If that’s you, I kindly invite you to skip to the second and third items of this column which hopefully you will find informative and/or entertaining. To those of you who are still here ... well, where do we start? It seems to me there are two extremes when it comes to competition structures. READ MORE ON THIS STORY...

The SL re-structure, Return of GB, and International Loyalty - Steve Mascord NO doubt some of you will not want me to write about the proposed restructuring of Super League, just because I’m Australian. If that’s you, I kindly invite you to skip to the second and third items of this column which hopefully you will find informative and/or entertaining. To those of you who are still here ... well, where do we start? It seems to me there are two extremes when it comes to competition structures. READ MORE ON THIS STORY...

agree with you Steve 2 12 team comps is the way to go with relegation of one each season no brainer that, salary cap needs lifting and we must market and receive more money for our sport from sky and other channels, its a disgrace the funding which we get when you look at the viewing figures sky get compared to union and what they receive, we need some real business people running the game a deal with someone like channel 5 or 4 would really propel the interest in the sport, the BBC are a disgrace when the only coverage we get in Yorkshire is a 40 min program at 1130 on a night when most kids have gone to bed we need some real leadership in red hall to pull this sport forward

good read mate

The article says "you should not be allowed into Super League 1 unless you can illustrate you can – and will - spend £1.8 million on players each year."

I'd agree 100% with that. The trouble is all three proposals have automatic P&R. There doesn't seem to be any qualification for promotion other then on-field success. We have had this before and it doesn't work.

We also had criteria introduced when we last had P&R that meant some seasons there was P&R and others there wasn't. So one year the bottom club survived and another they didn't. This was just ridiculous.

However you try and do it P&R doesn't work in RL in this country financially and so unless the proposals are accompanied by a huge injection of cash I'll guarantee before long we will back to making the same complaints as before about P&R not working.

Have you forgotten what happened in 1980/81? Worked for us didn't it? So that's ok then.

we were a semi pro team, promoted from a semi pro second division to a semi pro 1st division. super league is full time pro, the championship is semi pro, how can promotion and relegation possible work like that? we need 2 full time leagues, but i cant see where the money will come from, appart from sky, no broadcaster is beating a path to the RFL's door with huge wedges of cash, channel 4 and 5 cant afford to broadcast live events, all there sport is bought in, the BBC only want the challenge cup, so i dont see where the money will come from. BT are a posibility, but t the moment its a risk remember satanta?
This year we cant even get a title sponsor for the league, afetr we decided to give it away last year. i wish i had the answer, then again so does Nigel Wood

Sometimes in life when times are hard you just have to do what's right. We all believe in Rugby League that it is the greatest game. Don't think that we haven't had hard times in the past. Rugby League in this country has a proud tradition and it is remarkably sustainable.

Keep to the principles of fair play. Set your game out based on that. Reward the teams that play well on the pitch. Nothing else should be allowed to be in the equation. Have two leagues with P&R.

All this business about full time and part time doesn't wash. The players have so much time on their hands that they spend all day getting more tattoos and tweeting about having a coffee. Rugby League is a pretty simple game to coach and play. A decent coach would be able to take any group of reasonably fit Championship players and make a competetive team. OK they might go back down - that's fine, give someone else a chance. For every club like Gateshead and Workington you can point to Hull KR, Wakefield and Huddersfield who have won promotion and made a decent fist of things.

And the game was of course full time in in 1980/81 wasn't it. Not.



To be frank you seem fairly clueless on the issues the modern game faces and your comment above illustrates that perfectly.

As does the above! Nonsense from start to finish. Sorry if that seems harsh but you need to get over this dewy eyed fair play stuff and look at the realities.

"All this business about full time and part time doesn't wash." and what follows is probably one of most clueless comments I have seen in a long time. You are talking players livelihoods here not how simple the game is to play.

Read what the likes of Tony Smith and John Wlikin are saying about the restructuring and you might learn something. They can see through the proposed changes and realise they won't do a thing to address the fundamental issues the game faces. Then again I don't think you can see what they are anyway.

[urlhttp://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/jon-wilkin-restructure-wont-solve-3817482?[/url

Apparently Blake Green expressed similar views at the Riversiders meeting on 14th that the RFL think these proposals will fix the problems when in fact it is problems of unprofessionalism, lack of foresight and planning and things like that.

His view was instead of keep changing the game they should be sorting out selling the game to blue chip companies as well as getting better sponsorship & tv agreements.

That is exactly right and at least the likes of Green, Wilkan and Tony Smith can see through any return to P&R and any other restructuring.

Thanks for enlightening me...you win

Always preferred P&R, not a fan of franchising so would prefer the 12 team and one up and down option (even if it was us to go down).

Would love the old Lions tours to be re-instated, nothing like a GB v Aus test match

P& R from a full time League to a part time League doesn't work and we have proved over the past seasons.

Licencing has had its critics and rightly so over the Crusaders debacle yet we now have two teams in Wales where as prior to Crusaders we had none.
P & R would have been a disaster for Widnes. In fact had it existed Steve O'Connor would not have bought the club.
It would have been an even bigger disaster for Catalans Dragons when they finished bottom under Steve Walters. Had they been relegated all that money invested in France would have been wasted. That would have been a disaster for French RL and RL as a sport.

The idea of 2 x 12 then 3 x 8 sounds a bit complicated but in theory might work. In practice it wouldn't.
Under that system teams would end up playing each other 3 times. We all know what fans think of that! Answer, not a lot. That was one of the reasons we went to 14 teams to stop the 3 times in a season. Then they brought in the Tragic Weekend. I think one season Wigan played Saints 5 or 6 times. Complete over kill!

I'd say keep the 14 from 2015. Of the teams at the bottom of the SL, Salford have a new money bags owner. Widnes are progressing. Cas are in real trouble and London, are well London.
I'd favour the RFL/SL going with 14 but only one SL team in the Wakefield MDC. Favourite to go at present would be Cas. Wreck of a ground and broke!
To maintain 14, if we lose one then we have to bring one in, Toulouse! That would be a real challenge for the future.
Over the last 6-7 seasons the number of overseas players has reduced massively and the number of British players in SL has gone up from approx 160 to roughly 290. It is that increase in British players playing in SL that is the future. Let's build on that good work and not "re-structure" for the sake of it.

I think we only changed it because of that SKY clown Brian Carney.

Because of his 'hatred' of the UK, he used to do the 'head thing' when the national anthem was played. So we meekly became GB and Ireland.

I have no idea where he originates from in Ireland, but his behaviour seems to suggest Irish republican .

I would like to ask him that very question being as he gets most/all of his wage from the UK.

Ah yes..he's from Cork. A bastion of UK support.



p.s. I served with the British army in Northern Ireland.

Still get to many meaningless games in a 2x12 league structure, fancy the 12x12 8x8x8.

What happens when it goes 8x8x8? Do the play-offs start at that point or are there any further fixtures to determine final standings in each 8 prior to the play-offs starting?

Does this mean that we play each team once in the first 12 rounds?
Then play the seven others twice in the eight format?
If so then we play seven teams three times.
Surely that can't be right?
If that's what they are suggesting they are out of their bloody minds!
They know fans don't like playing teams three times in the league.
Out of those top eight they are the ones most likely to get to the quarters, semis and finals of both knock out comps so you could end up each season playing teams four or five times.
The only thing they are looking to do then is destroy the sales of season tickets.
If anything will persuade fans to select games they watch that format will.

I would leave the leagues as they are, but have P&R based on bottom of SL playing top of Championship on a home and away basis with aggregate scores deciding if Championship club comes up or stops where they are.
At least we would get P&R without too much upheaval.
Knee jerk reaction is no good, as Cas, Salford or London could be fighting to get in the top eight next season, and some other club propping up the league.

Well my view is that options 2 & 3 were put out there to make option 1 more palatable. Just a load of spin a politician would be proud of. Hint that something pretty awful is about to happen and then use that to sell a less awful (but still worse than we have now as P&R is back) alternative.

What prompted my question about the 8x8x8 stage was if the teams have to play each other in further matches to determine final standings for the play-offs I can't think of a more meaningless set of fixtures!

[uALL[/u the the clubs in the 8 will be in the play-offs already and as we have seen its not hard to win it from 5th so what would be the point of busting a gut to get higher up the final 8?

The only way any fixtures in the top 8 prior to the playoffs would have any meaning if not all 8 could quality - so reverting the the top 5 or even going to a top 3 (winner to final, 2 & 3 play off to join them).

The middle 8's fixtures would be more meaningful as that determines who is in the 12 the season after but the top 8 could just stop playing until the play offs.

What if we went with the 2x10 option, played each other twice with a 4/5 team play off, then used the extra time to introduce a local cup? We could have the following leagues, everyone plays each other twice first past the post.

East Yorkshire Cup
Castleford
Featherstone
Hull FC
Hull KR
Wakefield

West Yorkshire Cup
Batley
Bradford
Halifax
Huddersfield
Leeds

Lancashire Cup
Leigh
St Helens
Warrington
Widnes
Wigan

International Cup
Les Catalans
London
Salford
Sheffield
Toulouse

I've not really decided what I think of it myself to be fair. I think every game would become more important when the leagues are smaller though. You could have the winners of the four cups competing in an expanded World Club Challenge too instead of the SL champions.

It wouldn't be a top 8 playoff system if the 2->3 league structure was adopted.

Is that how it has been put forward? I couldn't find any information about what happened after it went 8x8x8 and how many teams would be in the play offs.

Whatever system is adopted the money issue hasn't gone away. With 24 teams in the 2-> 3 league do the top 12 get all the Sky money and pay to the current salary cap level and the bottom 12 work to the same financial constraints as the Championship?

Would any team who finished in the last 4 out of the top 12 who didn't retain their place the season after be faced with all their players becoming free agents? If a couple of teams failed to retain their places that is over 50 players who would be in effect unemployed!

Is that how it has been put forward? I couldn't find any information about what happened after it went 8x8x8 and how many teams would be in the play offs.

Whatever system is adopted the money issue hasn't gone away. With 24 teams in the 2-> 3 league do the top 12 get all the Sky money and pay to the current salary cap level and the bottom 12 work to the same financial constraints as the Championship?

Would any team who finished in the last 4 out of the top 12 who didn't retain their place the season after be faced with all their players becoming free agents? If a couple of teams failed to retain their places that is over 50 players who would be in effect unemployed!

Just like a lot of other info, they never explicitly stated what the playoff structure would be; but there will be a GF somehow, and no chance of it being a top 8 playoff. I can see it being anywhere from Top 2 to 5 though.



Whereas these are perfectly valid problems that I really can't see them being able to handle with current resources. RL does not have enough players, or continuously distributed playing strengths (aka there's a massive drop off in quality below SL) for squads to move up and down divisions. Even if these players did become free agents, they almost certainly wouldn't leave SL, they'd just have to move to the promoted clubs to the expense of the lower 2/3 of their squad.