When an organisation carries out a consultation exercise, then tinkers with the result to introduce another option that looks a bit like the one that's already been rejected, it's a pretty clear indication that they're not consulting in any meaningful way at all - rather, they're just going through the motions to get what they always intended to get from the outset.

For me, this is an attempt to reduce the number of clubs at the top table so that the haves can have more and the have nots can have even less; they'll get their 8 club SL and as has been alluded to, the lower tier will be cast adrift, with little or no chance of ever catching up, without a mega-rich owner coming on board.

I wish they'd just be straight with us - tell us what you want, why you want it and how you're going to implement it, then we can decide for ourselves whether to support it, or not.

Thats my way of thinking on this one.

If or when we do get blown out don't expect any support from the lower league clubs, they have seen us feasting at the top table and ignoring them for years.

And they are right.

Here is a novel idea how about they do a vote on one round of super league fixtures and get the opinion of those who put the money into the game and I am sure attendances would jump on that week so either the loyal fans take that on the chin or clubs devise a system where so many games have to be attended or leave it open to season ticket holders only which would discount me and many others who don't buy season tickets due to work and other commitments just a thought, at least this would identify our game as a peoples game good publicity for the game and each individual club collectively. Just a thought.

92% of the players don't want it, it's got a less than great reception from the supporters for the views I have seen.
It's popular with the bigwigs at Red Hall and some of the chairmen at the bigger clubs who only have personal interest at heart.
That sounds like what is known in RL as unanimous...motion carried!!!!

For the last paragraph,

"Discussions between all rugby league clubs, players’ unions and other interested parties will continue until the vote is taken."

Read,
"Discussions between all rugby league clubs, players’ unions and other interested parties will continue until we get the decision we want"

Just like they did with the Wembley statue!

It's tough for any sport outside of Premier League football to find funding for so many professional clubs. I understand the players have voted against the 8's, but I wonder what exactly they do want in the future.

Peacock and Wilkin are quick to moan about burn out, but with a smaller league, will they also accept smaller wages for less work?

To be honest, I think the 8's one has some merits and gives more teams something to play for at different points in the season. With the best will in the world, losing out in the Challenge Cup has ended our season, as if we scrape into the top 8, we hope very little hope of getting close to Old Trafford bar passing it on the way to an away game at Wigan, Saints or Warrington.

Quote ="t-r-i-n-i-t-y"I understand the players have voted against the 8's, but I wonder what exactly they do want in the future.'" John Wilkin's player union have indicated they want a simple 12 team SL. 92% voted in favour. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... 6/8783786/

Quote ="t-r-i-n-i-t-y"I understand the players have voted against the 8's, but I wonder what exactly they do want in the future.'" John Wilkin's player union have indicated they want a simple 12 team SL. 92% voted in favour. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... 6/8783786/

To me ,it seems to be a complicated system ,which at the end of the season will result in the same top clubs getting to the grand final.

Quote ="Tigerade"John Wilkin's player union have indicated they want a simple 12 team SL. 92% voted in favour. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... 6/8783786/'" They'll be happy they'll have less members in the future and that the team promoted will just sign all the players from the team relegated.

Quote ="Tigerade"John Wilkin's player union have indicated they want a simple 12 team SL. 92% voted in favour. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... 6/8783786/'" They'll be happy they'll have less members in the future and that the team promoted will just sign all the players from the team relegated.

.....just like it used to be.........

Is the full stop key on your PC broke Mary??

........................................................no................................................................

..................................just for you.....................................................

...........................

I would keep the number of teams as it is, with automatic promotion and relegation; the promoted team should however be protected from relegation for one year, to prevent the stupid yoyo situation that would otherwise ensue.

I think the challenge cup has suffered tremendously since the move to "summer" rugby.
Just like the FA Cup, it used to be the show piece event at the end of the season but, due to TV schedules and the move to a grand final, the CC has dropped down the pecking order.
It used to gather some momentum and finish with the final at Wembley, nowadays it has become devalued and squeezed in before the season has got going.
The Wembley final still has more "romance" than the grand final and the day at Wembley is the best RL event of the season and still beats the GF or the Magic Weekend as a stand alone event.

Regarding the 3 x 8 split part way through the season. Although this does mean that 24 teams have something to play for at the latter end of the season, it will not be to dissimilar to the play offs and do you really want to play for a 2nd or 3rd level "plate" trophy.
Surely, its better to strive for the top 8 in SL and then throw the kitchen sink at trying to make progress ?

I know I very rarely agree with you B2K but that is the perfect solution for me.


I would basically be just like when Catalans came into the SL. Cas Tigers couldn't complain - we knew the rules that if they finished botton the 11th place team would go down. No complaints.

Keep it 14 teams with promotion and relegation. No exemptions from relegation if you finish bottom your down simple

I would also reinstate the U20's with effect from next season and tell those clubs who complain that they can't afford it, tough t1ts; developing young players is part of the deal when you enter SL - reduce your expenditure on 1st team to cover it, or get the hell out of Dodge.

To go with the above, I'd also look at limiting the number of first grade games each player can participate in per season, thus forcing clubs to go deeper into their squad; to support that in terms of cap, I would make 50% of the salary of club-trained youngsters who play first grade exempt from the salary cap. I would also enable each club to pay one MVP whatever they wanted, exempt from the salary cap.

Finally, I would levy a % of Sky money from every club and ring-fence the proceeds of that levy to support community clubs with, for example, coach education and facilities development.

Have you put the above in your application for Big Nige's job Bren ?
You realise that it's all far too sensible to be considered but, it sounds bang on the money

Another idea would be to bring back the Yorkshire and Lancashire cups as a pre-season tournament - something Gary Schofield mentions regularly in his League Weekly column. Brings more money into the game.

Indeed, I'm sure he'd be able to find a better Taylor too.

There's an article on the SL website about Catalan Dragons backing Toulous's bid for SL in 2015.
Assuming they are successful (and French TV cash will be difficult to turn down), which team would drop out of the "24" ?

Considering there's 14 teams in both SL and the KPC a total of five teams will need to drop out of the 24 if Toulouse are included in the new structure. At a guess the bottom four as they are now would be the most likely. The other could perhaps be Dewsbury.

Toulouse bid is looking even stronger after the Catalan vs KR game was held there with an attendance of 14858, which regardless of which side of the expansion argument you prefer, is an excellent effort and it's starting to look nailed on that they will be in SL in 2015 (perhaps in place of London ??)

Toulouse should be given a chance, so should other clubs who have been overlooked for years.


Let them see if they can make a better fist of it, get rid of clubs who have failed to move forward.