Because it wont make the whole sport go bust. The problems with this system are mainly around the fact it focusses the middle and bottom of SL to focus on staying up instead of growing and the instability that breeds. A fair few clubs wont be affected by it, Leeds, Wigan, Wire, Saints Hudds, aren’t going to finish out of the top 8. The difference to them is they swap a few games against the SL stragglers for a few more games against each other. This is a good thing. Hull, Hull KR, Catalans, Salford are all capable of joining them and strong enough financially to take the ‘hit’ of having 7 games against lower SL sides and championship sides and there is no way they will get properly relegated.

The clubs who will see a disastrous effect are Wakefield, Cas, London, Bradford and possibly Widnes from SL, and everyone else down (who have yet to notice the gifts those kind greeks have brought) who will struggle to deal with the instability of a possible huge drop in revenue from ‘proper relegation’ and will drift further and further away from the bigger teams.

The net effect will likely be we will have 6 or 7 strong SL level clubs, 1 or 2 on the brink of being strong SL clubs with the rest too far away. We will have a natural gap, a natural line to draw for a 10-12 team ringfenced SL

I don't think it will be as simple as that. The top 4 championship clubs will still have recruitment difficulties that are similar to what stops promoted sides being able to compete, and therefore still mainly struggle to compete against the bottom 4 SL sides. How many players given the choice will opt to start the season at a Championship club aiming for the mediocre league at best over a SL club with an outside (however small) chance of the big boy finish, where their worst case scenario is already the best they could have done at the Championship club? All the decent players will still mainly gravitate to the same clubs, so I don't see it improving Championship clubs that much.

That's essentially what we already have. Have a look at the predictions thread and see how many people have broken SL up like that already, and it's true. The only real change will probably be more poor gates at the end of the season, similar to Challenge Cup earlier rounds against lower division opponents.

Very well put ands animates I guess what a lot of us have been trying to say about our fears for the lower Super league teams for some time. It does however beg the question of why did Cas Wakey, Widnes and London vote for the change? Are Wakey and Widnes under GH's influence, are Cas and London indebted in some way to the RL our do they all genuinely have illusions of grandeur?

I don’t massively disagree with that, I think from the bottom though, the gap between the top 4 championship bottom 4 SL is far bigger than the gap between 9th and 10th in SL. You could make an argument that Widnes and Bradford are capable of play-off RL, if not now but long term they are set up for it. I think the difference will be that there becomes a natural league of 10-12 in SL and a natural league of 10-12 below with a bigger gap between them where as we don’t really have that now. We have groups of 4 or 5 with a gap between each. I think we will see those groups expand to groups of 8-12 but the gaps between them grow.

I think the opposite, I don’t think they have delusions of grandeur I think they dare not admit they have given up.

I think London have pretty much gone under this guise. Unless their new owner pumps lots in to them they are dead in the water. I think Widnes and Cas have seen the size and quality of growth at the top of SL and seen it as a mountain they cannot climb. So are seeing this SL1.5 proposal as a chance to realistically drop down a league without dropping down a league, they struggle to justify their position at the top table under franchising (though Widnes have done a lot of good work) and think a return to semi-pro will destroy them and I think Wakefield are just hanging on for their new stadium, they see that as a bit of a panacea. They don’t really see themselves challenging for anything for the next 5 years or so, so they see a situation where they simply limit the downsides of possible relegation, it become much less likely for them, and the drop in funding is not as large.

I agree with that, but I just don't see this proposed structure really changing that, for the reason outlined to Graham Richards. Players will still predominantly pick the incumbent SL clubs where they can, so the top 4 Championship sides will still be feeding off the rejected scraps.

EDIT: After a second read-through of your post, I see you think exactly the same regarding the gap between the 2 divisions not closing. I'm not so confident that we'll see the loss of gap between top contenders and the middle fodder, however.

For me it’s a question of focus. Say you are running Cas. You have a limited budget to work with and a limited potential with that budget. Do you spend the full cap to try and sneak 8th, then get pounded for 7 games? Or do you spend 75% of the cap and put together a squad which isn’t going to finish 8th, but isn’t going to be beaten by the championship clubs either? If you are a club like Cas, why try to spend as much as you can to qualify for a competition you can’t compete in when you can spend much less and not get relegated. This new system means you can literally win 0 games in the first part, 4 games in the 2nd and continue to be an SL side. That’s why I think it will bring the bottom of SL closer to the top of the championships. The primary focus for SL clubs changes from competing in SL to being better than the championships.

This will be exacerbated by the facts that the championships will get higher revenue as a gift from SL, the Top SL clubs will be going further away, and the middle 8 group will be a levelling down.

I completely get your argument and agree that it is likely to pan out like that. But in effect SL will become even more of a closed shop than it is now. At least in the past when Wakefield, London and Cas have made the playoffs they have been able to live the dream. OK it probably hasn't worked to their long term benefit, but a SL with only 5 or 6 quality teams is no better than we have now, maybe even worse.

If the governance and structure of the game was improved and we had a SL with twelve teams who each season were able to grow their revenue and all spend at the cap wouldn't that make for a better league long term. This could be achieved by maximising the revenue brought in to the game, getting a good sponsor for the league would be a start. Then with one up and one down there is always the chance one of the lower league teams can climb the leagues and compete with the best, can you see that happening if the lower SL teams decide to spend to 75% of the cap as they have settled for mediocrity. These SL will be to good for the lower league teams but not good enough to really call themselves SL quality.

The problem with P+R is that you wont ever get a 12 team league where everyone grows. You will, at the very very very best(and overly optimistic imo) a situation where 11 clubs grow and one is hugely damaged.

A 10-12 team ringfenced SL where clubs work together to fight for a bigger pie, rather than fight each other for a bigger piece is the only way the game will get to where it wants. You are right that this depends on the governance, but I think it also depends on the structure of the top division and what are actually setting out to achieve.

True the likely hood in a 12 team league is that 8, 9 or 10 teams will be healthy and 3 teams may struggle, but with only one relegated teams can survive promotion if managed well then build over the next few years. If clubs aren't run correctly and enter administration then the points reduction should be sever enough to guarantee relegation, that way natural selection will often take care of the weakest clubs anyway.

If you take the idea of the league being ring fenced to its logical progression then why not push for a closed shop league with the lower league clubs becoming feeder teams. So in effect do the licensing thing properly and create franchises like the NRL or American sport.

I would. I would look to have centrally negotiated sponsorship, kit manufacturers, website design etc. great economies of scale there.

I would remove the youth development from SL clubs entirely, divert that funding to the amateur game and RFL centres of excellence, remove masses of duplication and waste in clubs fighting for players. Move them through an RFL development structure to 17, then put them to championship and C1 clubs for at least 2 years, before a draft at 18/19.

I wouldn’t necessarily see it as a closed shop, it would simply be add clubs when they are ready and the league can support them.

I think copying the Football league but without any money is a hiding to nothing. If the game is to grow it has to carve out its own market by being run differently.

I really like all your suggestions, it is very easy to see the reasoning behind it. I would definitely back a structure like that, but then again we are supporters of one of the teams that would benefit. It would be so difficult to sell it as a concept to RL fans as so many would miss out. However, if you want to be revolutionary and do something that is truly beneficial to the game I see all the positives. Although would I feel the same if Hull RL fans were asked to support one SL team ?

It's strange, I guess, but I can't think of anything worse!

My attitude towards those clubs who were against it, and their fans is simply that I understand they are against it, I understand that their club may lose out, but if enough people felt how they did to matter, we wouldn’t need to do it. The facts are that most clubs in the lower leagues aren’t ready for SL, aren’t ever going to be ready for SL, and don’t actually ever aim to be SL clubs. The likes of Batley and Dewsbury don’t want to be SL clubs, they do a fantastic job as semi-pro community clubs. We are talking about a very small amount of relatively small clubs.

Well, they've gone for it! 12 teams next year with the 3x8 !!!

Stunned at this decision, a decision which I feel will decimate season ticket sales which are the lifeblood of most clubs (including our own)

who is going to want to pay for a season pass when you don't know who you are playing when the league splits in 3?

You could pay expecting to see the likes of Saints, Wigan & Leeds, and end up playing Sheffield, Featherstone & Leigh. The majority of fans will keep their season pass money and pay on the day, and soon as a club hits a bit of poor form, or a game is on TV crowds will dip.

Will the rfl stick to poor grounds & crowds to kick the 2 out or bottom 2? If so London & who? Cas,bulls,wakey?

I would agree,

I can't say I like the idea of the split, all I really want is to see FC play.

If you're in the bottom 4 of SL, 3 home games will be against SL teams, and 4 against Championship sides.
And the fact that you're in the bottom 4 should mean the games are reasonably competitive, and relegation is at stake.

So is buying a pass really such an issue??

I won't be a season ticket holder any more for that structure. I've loved rugby league but it just seems to be more and more intent on making itself the novelty item non-fans regard it as.

Well i will be considering whether to renew next season. Promotion and relegation all fine but the 3x8 is stupid. Imo its a case of the tail(championship clubs) wagging the dog( SL Club)

Am not prepared to pay hard earned money to end up watching low quality sides

Fully agree , 3x8 is a Ridiculous decision and one which may see more clubs go t1ts up .

....and of course, 2 of the Championship sides will probably have been SL teams in 2014. So you'll only play 2 "new" teams at home.

Hardly earth shattering.

Do we as the ordinary fan of our teams matter any more?

It would appear not,