Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Super League 2 leagues of 12


  • Please log in to reply
561 replies to this topic

#101 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,051 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 03:22 PM

So, basically the idea that Scottish football rejected recently, and that supporters were totally against. And the league system that Swiss football tried for a few seasons before dumping it as unpopular and damaging.


The Scottish football league rejected it and the alternative they have came up with has led to clubs threatening to resign from the top division.

People won't know if it will work until it's tried. People can have logical guesses but realistically we won't be able to tell what will happen until it is properly tried.

#102 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,447 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 03:34 PM

14-14-10 then if that was next year. To 12-12-14 then in 2015?

 

edit: then from mid-2015; 8-8-8 and what, 4-4-2-3-1...?! ;)

 

 

No, I think it would be 12 - 12 -----------------------------------------------14.

 

No mention whatsoever about access to the second tier from below, so I guess that wouldn't be allowed. The remainder would become nursery clubs then I guess?


Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#103 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 03:34 PM

The Scottish football league rejected it and the alternative they have came up with has led to clubs threatening to resign from the top division.

People won't know if it will work until it's tried. People can have logical guesses but realistically we won't be able to tell what will happen until it is properly tried.

 

No, the Scottish Premier League rejected it. It needed an 11 to 1 majority but St Mirren and Ross County voted against. The Scottish Football League, therefore, didn't put it to the vote.

Today's development is that ten clubs (not including Rangers, by the way) are offering to resign from the SFL to make up an SPL2.


"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#104 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,071 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 03:36 PM

Probably best comment on here for some after mine of course! ....and I suppose Hindle will want to be rocgnised too.

Woo! Name-check... not sure why though!


On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#105 Tonka

Tonka
  • Coach
  • 693 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 03:41 PM

I don't like the proposal and hope it doesn't get passed.



#106 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,533 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 03:41 PM

It is just a proposal. They haven't endorsed it yet or even made it public.


No, it's a tragically flawed idea that's been lifted from the SPL (hardly a good start!) that should never have reared its ugly head in public.

#107 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,425 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 03:47 PM

I seriously cant see how this will improve the game at all. All it is doing is watering the standards down further. The game is in a mess at many levels. This will just add to it. I would love to have my team Halifax in SL and I do believe they could do a better job than some right now. But not under the system proposed. Whats wrong with keeping things as they are, but have 1 up 1 Down only if Clubs meet the minimum Standards? Maybe even drop SL down to 12 teams for now until a later date. The system proposed is a crazy system and one that will weaken the game and product. How can that be good?

#108 nadera78

nadera78
  • Coach
  • 2,939 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 03:57 PM

The more I think about this proposal the worse it seems.

 

Assuming there is an even split of central income, it would essentially mean reverting to a sport played by 24 village teams. If there is not an even split of income then the bottom four in SL would all be full time and they'd play the majority of their season against part-timers from the top four clubs in SL2. They'd be almost guaranteed promotion back to SL at the end of each year. What good does that do for anyone? I suppose it would give the pretence that there is P&R.

 

I'll say it again, we do not have the finances, the players, the spectators, the corporate support or the media coverage to sustain anything more than a 12 team elite competition. And the key word in that sentence is elite. The most likely outcome of this proposal is that the game in this country becomes nothing more than a nursery for the NRL. Or worse, rugby union.


"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

#109 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,784 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 05:38 PM

Isn't this what they're proposing for the SPL?

To be honest, I wouldn't mind seeing how it pans out. It's quite interesting and allows 4 Championship clubs the chance to be promoted every year. Keeps things fresh.
Posted Image

#110 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 05:45 PM

Seems an overly complicated and frankly bizarre way to organise things.

It could be of advantage to the ambitious championship clubs, but only if they were allowed the same or similar cap restrictions as the top tier, otherwise the second half of the season would just be a bloodbath.

On the whole, I think it's a silly idea and hope that it's one of many options on the table

Edited by Ponterover, 03 May 2013 - 05:45 PM.


#111 HKR AWAY DAYS

HKR AWAY DAYS
  • Coach
  • 1,374 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 05:55 PM

I know things are a bit tight money wise in RL, but surely reducing the league to just the two teams, and getting rid of an extra player is a bit of an extreme measure to shore up the game?

 

Which two will it be?

 

Neil Hudgell has said publically that Super League should be reduced to 12 teams. I don't think those two teams should be London and Catalans so I can only assume that Hudge believes the Sky money that would be divided up and spread over the remaining 12 teams (inc. the aforementioned London and Catalans) is greater than what 11 league games can generate overall. I hope that makes sense anyway ha!


Edited by HKR AWAY DAYS, 03 May 2013 - 05:57 PM.


#112 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,910 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 06:19 PM



SPOT ON what we need is a straightforward P and R


No, what we need is money.

Everything else is just window dressing.

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#113 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:44 PM

The more I think about this proposal the worse it seems.
 
Assuming there is an even split of central income, it would essentially mean reverting to a sport played by 24 village teams. If there is not an even split of income then the bottom four in SL would all be full time and they'd play the majority of their season against part-timers from the top four clubs in SL2. They'd be almost guaranteed promotion back to SL at the end of each year. What good does that do for anyone? I suppose it would give the pretence that there is P&R.
 
I'll say it again, we do not have the finances, the players, the spectators, the corporate support or the media coverage to sustain anything more than a 12 team elite competition. And the key word in that sentence is elite. The most likely outcome of this proposal is that the game in this country becomes nothing more than a nursery for the NRL. Or worse, rugby union.

Your right that how this would pan out depends on how the TV money is distributed. But in the absence of an answer to that one has to assume there's no money for a second tier.

I disagree on your analysis "we do not have the finances, the players, the spectators, the corporate support or the media coverage to sustain anything more than a 12 team elite competition".

You should wait whilst

a. Wakefield get Newmarket or not
b. Toulouse get civic money and /or a French TV contract
c. Koukash actually spends some mega money
d. Nahaboo delivers on the promise to fund Fev all it takes.

#114 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:46 PM

Whats wrong with keeping things as they are, but have 1 up 1 Down only if Clubs meet the minimum Standards?

Nobody meets the minimum standards, that's what's wrong.

#115 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,159 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:48 PM

Could the movement between the two leagues not be resolved by simply cutting the license period to 2 years, at the end of which the team finishing bottom of SL is automatically relegated provided the Championship winner has met the minimum license standards?

No championship club meets the minimum licensing standards.

#116 The Future is League

The Future is League
  • Coach
  • 6,006 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 11:13 PM

Perhaps we should just keep a 14 team super league, but make the winners of the championship have one off game with the team that finishes bottom of super league to determine the 14th team in super league for the following season.



#117 BBR

BBR
  • Coach
  • 595 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 05:15 AM

Not sure why the mass panic. The reason for lower crowds is the world cup tickets and people veing skint

#118 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 05:22 AM

Just to clarify on what is being proposed.
 
The idea, as far as I understand it, is that the two bottom teams will be relegated from Super League at the end of 2014, regardless of which teams they will be. There could even be three teams relegated if the clubs decide they want Toulouse in the competition in 2015 with a TV deal possibly on the table from BeIn Sport.
 
There will then be two divisions of 12 each, which will play each other once (eleven games) in the first half of the season.
 
In the second half of the season, those clubs will split into three divisions of eight teams, depending on finishing places in the first half of the season. The bottom four Super League clubs will be in with the top four Championship clubs (which may include the two SL clubs relegated the previous season). Those teams will play each other at home and away (14 games) in the second half of the season.
 
The top four clubs in the second tier, at the end of that season, will then return to Super League for 2016.

Crackers. Just crackers.

I hope this is a wind up. Although knowing RL, the back half of this lunacy will probably be brought in this season.

That's me.  I'm done.


#119 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 05:24 AM

Whats wrong with keeping things as they are, but have 1 up 1 Down only if Clubs meet the minimum Standards?

I say this every time, but that was done for several years about ten years back and *everyone* hated it.

I think the current franchising system is fine TBH. I'd leave it exactly as it is, but go back to the old top 5 play off.

That's me.  I'm done.


#120 Mumby Magic

Mumby Magic
  • Coach
  • 3,159 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 05:40 AM

Sorry for going OT, but where did you get 5 matches at Wembley from? They have two there cos the NFL has the stadium booked up the rest of that month.

Ooops meant Olympic Stadium. Needed sleeeeeeeep.

Lilly, Jacob and Isaac, what my life is about. Although our route through life is not how it should be, I am a blessed man.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users