Lenegan.v.Hetherington

[The Parksider]

Mr Lenegan wants changes decided upon before the end of the year as talks commence on the league structure. This is on the basis of the "three year" cycle clubs were to give the system, before review. Lenegan suggests a decision in a few months from now. "June or July". His problem is "not knowing the last eight fixtures"  and suggests the Saints game in this supereights lost out on 7,000 fans.

He speaks about "Maybe award the league leaders trophy after 23 rounds" with  the rider "IF" you stay with the structure, he reminds us that "there are arguments for having 12 clubs one up one down and a top four or five" this from League Express.

Mr. Lenegan took the lead in arguing this latter suggestion when the clubs debated the structure to a 7-6 vote for the current structure.

League Weekly adds more in that they picked up a "preference" from Lenegan for "scrapping the split after 23 rounds and and perhaps a four team relegation play off" I assume that on last years positions this would have meant HKR, Huddersfield, Leigh and London in a late season promotion play off whilst I assume the top four SL clubs would have played the same semi finals then finals for the Grand final.

This would last year have given HKR.v.London and Huddersfield .v.Leigh. On the results of those ties then a HKR.v.leigh final and of course Leigh won that at HKR so maybe Lenegan, who feels the chances of other clubs (HKR) chances of emulating Leigh's success last year under the current system would not be diminished through an identical play off for Promotion system, to the Grand Final play off.

No restarting SL after 23 rounds is on the table, that's already off.

Mr. Hetherington - who championed the current structure and led seven clubs to vote it in defends the "Two twelves, three eights system" he says "I can't think of a better system to replace it". To be fair his club were can we say "victims" of it so fair play, if he believes that and doesn't simply oppose Lenegan for the sake of it.

Hetherington gives a nod to the eights split in which fixtures are only known very late, but says "That is one of the downsides but our attendances are generally down in August regardless of the structure"

So Hetherington has no designs on any change and his ace cards appears to be "It adds tremendous interest to the championship" and a killer point? that "We are contracted to deliver this system to SKY" Whether these statements are true, as well as the August attendance drops being normal, well people can make their own mind up. 

7-6 to Hetherington last time but he's lost London and Bradford votes, Lenegan has lost HKR's vote and Leigh are a new vote but one can only assume Beaumont will ask Koukash what to vote. 6-5 to Lenegan if nobody else changes their minds and of course that is entirely possible.

The bottom line is no mention whatsoever of Licensing.........It's apparently on a par with the Monty Python Parrot.

 

  

[The Future is League]

46 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

Mr Lenegan wants changes decided upon before the end of the year as talks commence on the league structure. This is on the basis of the "three year" cycle clubs were to give the system, before review. Lenegan suggests a decision in a few months from now. "June or July". His problem is "not knowing the last eight fixtures"  and suggests the Saints game in this supereights lost out on 7,000 fans.

He speaks about "Maybe award the league leaders trophy after 23 rounds" with  the rider "IF" you stay with the structure, he reminds us that "there are arguments for having 12 clubs one up one down and a top four or five" this from League Express.

Mr. Lenegan took the lead in arguing this latter suggestion when the clubs debated the structure to a 7-6 vote for the current structure.

League Weekly adds more in that they picked up a "preference" from Lenegan for "scrapping the split after 23 rounds and and perhaps a four team relegation play off" I assume that on last years positions this would have meant HKR, Huddersfield, Leigh and London in a late season promotion play off whilst I assume the top four SL clubs would have played the same semi finals then finals for the Grand final.

This would last year have given HKR.v.London and Huddersfield .v.Leigh. On the results of those ties then a HKR.v.leigh final and of course Leigh won that at HKR so maybe Lenegan, who feels the chances of other clubs (HKR) chances of emulating Leigh's success last year under the current system would not be diminished through an identical play off for Promotion system, to the Grand Final play off.

No restarting SL after 23 rounds is on the table, that's already off.

Mr. Hetherington - who championed the current structure and led seven clubs to vote it in defends the "Two twelves, three eights system" he says "I can't think of a better system to replace it". To be fair his club were can we say "victims" of it so fair play, if he believes that and doesn't simply oppose Lenegan for the sake of it.

Hetherington gives a nod to the eights split in which fixtures are only known very late, but says "That is one of the downsides but our attendances are generally down in August regardless of the structure"

So Hetherington has no designs on any change and his ace cards appears to be "It adds tremendous interest to the championship" and a killer point? that "We are contracted to deliver this system to SKY" Whether these statements are true, as well as the August attendance drops being normal, well people can make their own mind up. 

7-6 to Hetherington last time but he's lost London and Bradford votes, Lenegan has lost HKR's vote and Leigh are a new vote but one can only assume Beaumont will ask Koukash what to vote. 6-5 to Lenegan if nobody else changes their minds and of course that is entirely possible.

The bottom line is no mention whatsoever of Licensing.........It's apparently on a par with the Monty Python Parrot.

 

  

Oh joy more infighting in Rugby League with key players joslin for position

[GaryO]

So Mr. BEAUMONT is seen as the power broker in this, if the electing clubs vote as previously, then maybe come June or July Mr. B will take stock, look at his teams position and decide what is best for him.

If Leigh are in the top Eight it may be irrelevant which way he votes, if they are in the bottom 4 then would they not have a better chance of success of maintaining their SL status under the present format, for starters they would play against 4 clubs from the Championship as against only 3 from the SL and if then they find themselves in the MPG they should have accrued enough points to secure home advantage.

[phiggins]

How can you have a bottom 4 relegation play off as stated above?

" This would last year have given HKR.v.London and Huddersfield .v.Leigh. On the results of those ties then a HKR.v.leigh final and of course Leigh won that at HKR " So, are 3 teams relegated in this scenario? Losers of the first two games, and the loser of the so called final?

[Spidey]

I think a relegation play off would work as follows:

Semi Finals:

Winners stay in SL Losers to Final

Final:

Winner Stays in SL, loser relegated

[GaryO]

8 minutes ago, Spidey said:

I think a relegation play off would work as follows:

Semi Finals:

Winners stay in SL Losers to Final

Final:

Winner Stays in SL, loser relegated

So would a SL team have a better chance under the present format of 7 games plus 1 (MPG) or two games under the proposed 4 team play off?

[Spidey]

18 minutes ago, GaryO said:

So would a SL team have a better chance under the present format of 7 games plus 1 (MPG) or two games under the proposed 4 team play off?

No idea. Just how I would have a 4 team play off for relegation.

i think this would work for the bottom 4 of SL to determine who gets relegated, with a more tradition top 4 play off for promotion in the lower division. 

If you're doing cross division games I don't see a problem with the existing set up

[GaryO]

14 minutes ago, Spidey said:

No idea. Just how I would have a 4 team play off for relegation.

i think this would work for the bottom 4 of SL to determine who gets relegated, with a more tradition top 4 play off for promotion in the lower division. 

If you're doing cross division games I don't see a problem with the existing set up

Ah, but this is different from how Leneghan percieves it, as described in the OP, he is calling for cross division but only involving the two bottom clubs in the SL, or from your suggestion of a bottom four play off woukd that be better, realistically the Championship  clubs have no say in the matter, and it could be that they would have a better chance of gaining promotion if it was as you say a top four play-off.

And what happens after 23 rounds, in Leneghans suggestion with only 2 clubs in the relegation battle, is there a top 10 play off, or is that the end of the season for the clubs outside of the top 4?

[bamfordsbeans]

It  seems like licensing  is off the agenda. As we only have about 6 teams who would qualify under realistic guidelines,this can only be a good thing.

Under Lenegans thinking it would seem that some clubs would only get 23 fixtures,whilst the status quo gives us 30.A compromise would probably be 27 which can be achieved with a SL of 10 teams.The possible downside of this is everybody playing each other 3 times and whether or not a SL2 of 10 teams is viable?

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, GaryO said:

Ah, but this is different from how Leneghan percieves it, as described in the OP, he is calling for cross division but only involving the two bottom clubs in the SL, or from your suggestion of a bottom four play off woukd that be better, realistically the Championship  clubs have no say in the matter, and it could be that they would have a better chance of gaining promotion if it was as you say a top four play-off.

And what happens after 23 rounds, in Leneghans suggestion with only 2 clubs in the relegation battle, is there a top 10 play off, or is that the end of the season for the clubs outside of the top 4?

Without him detailing what he actually is proposing it's hard to guess

Id be on the Heatherington side - better the devil you know. 

We need to go stick with what we have and have a strategy built upon that or go to a simple 1/2 up 1/2 down structure - going to another convoluted structure will just open it up to be tinkered with in another three years and the same debates will come up again

[Dave T]

I think much of my issue with this discussion is that usually the proposal being made by the person complaining has as many flaws and pees as many people off.

[sweaty craiq]

Imo the structure has succeeded in that a club has been promoted, granted Wakefield would have been the one most wanted replacing but it shows if you attract money and use it you can win your way in, and as a result get up to speed much quicker than straight p&r from a PT comp, which sees you straight back down.

structures are designed to meet goals, expansion, stability and growth - two FT tens does that with a 3 year application period

[paulwalker71]

I know people might accuse me of being a sour Bradford fan here, but the system seems all wrong when its the SL chairman alone who seem to make the decision.

We won't be at the top table for many years, if ever, so it makes little difference to us right now. But it just seems wrong that because Gareth O'Brien kicked a late drop goal, Koukash get a vote and Hudgell doesn't. And because Beaumont is loaded, he buys his way in (NOT that I begrudge Leigh being in SL at all) and gets a vote that can be used to suit his own situation.

It just smacks of those who have all the power voting to keep it for themselves, whilst the rest of the game get no say at all. Doesn't feel right. The sooner we have an RFL who actually 'run' the game, led by a powerful Commissioner who has real decision-making powers, then we might get some far-reaching, strategic thinking that isn't dominated by self-interest.

[LeeF]

7 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

I know people might accuse me of being a sour Bradford fan here, but the system seems all wrong when its the SL chairman alone who seem to make the decision.

We won't be at the top table for many years, if ever, so it makes little difference to us right now. But it just seems wrong that because Gareth O'Brien kicked a late drop goal, Koukash get a vote and Hudgell doesn't. And because Beaumont is loaded, he buys his way in (NOT that I begrudge Leigh being in SL at all) and gets a vote that can be used to suit his own situation.

It just smacks of those who have all the power voting to keep it for themselves, whilst the rest of the game get no say at all. Doesn't feel right. The sooner we have an RFL who actually 'run' the game, led by a powerful Commissioner who has real decision-making powers, then we might get some far-reaching, strategic thinking that isn't dominated by self-interest.

One vote per member club?

 

[sweaty craiq]

You can't have 8 blokes 4 whippets and a ferret who amount to the fan base of most clubs outside SL having a vote, they are more likely to be turkeys voting about Xmas than the SL chairmen. Maybe the votes should be the sum of the previous seasons average attendances, i.e. Wigan counts as 12500, Leeds as 15000, Dewsbury as 1000 etc

[roughyedspud]

Super league season

22 games plus magic game (23games)

Top 6 ,4 week long,playoff system

SL bottom 2 v Championship top 2,4 week long,relegation playoff,play each team once, then 2nd v 3rd £1m game,imo thats the only decent thing to come out of the stupid 8s

It really doesn't have to be anymore complicated than that!

And it frees up 3-4 weeks to do as we please...add a couple of international weekends?, add a 9s weekend?, add a "blockbuster round"  where we take a big game or a double header to a bigger stadium,elland rd,etihad,villa park,olympic stadium,milleniumstadium etc...for example

 

[Dave T]

Who funds the missing rounds?

[shaun mc]

And what do positions 7 to 12 in SL do?

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, roughyedspud said:

Super league season

22 games plus magic game (23games)

Top 6 ,4 week long,playoff system

SL bottom 2 v Championship top 2,4 week long,relegation playoff,play each team once, then 2nd v 3rd £1m game,imo thats the only decent thing to come out of the stupid 8s

It really doesn't have to be anymore complicated than that!

And it frees up 3-4 weeks to do as we please...add a couple of international weekends?, add a 9s weekend?, add a "blockbuster round"  where we take a big game or a double header to a bigger stadium,elland rd,etihad,villa park,olympic stadium,milleniumstadium etc...for example

 

Was going to say similar, though I'd keep the middle 8s it works quite well imo. Full play offs how it happened before.

Basically end of july/August could be devoted to international RL and Cup. England games sold through clubs to part recompense the couple of lost fixtures. Guarantees an international window which northern hemisphere RL needs desperately.

[Padge]

The current system needs scrapping, even if it is replaced by the insane 1 up 1 down P&R, even that has got to be better than this nonsense we have now.

This is not defence of P&R, far from it, but the current nonsense has to stop.

 

[GUBRATS]

So we still all agree , we don't have 12 ' Super ' clubs so licencing is off the agenda , we have people suggesting the middle 6 clubs only get 23 matches but not explaining how they can survive on that number of games ( or if a TV company would match or better our current deal for it 

We stick with the current system , it gives the most number of competitive games we can have in a season , end of 

[nonbelievers]

7 hours ago, The Parksider said:

 

Hetherington gives a nod to the eights split in which fixtures are only known very late, but says "That is one of the downsides but our attendances are generally down in August regardless of the structure"

IMHO this statement sums up what's wrong with RL in the UK. Accepting they are down in August is one thing, Ignoring this is another thing, but using at as excuse to keep a system that is pretty flawed is worse.

 

[sweaty craiq]

It's very likely +20% of your fan base will be either away or about to go away in August. When we get a proper TV deal we can massively drop ST prices to keep published crowds high during this period or put huge deals on or both. this is also when we should have magic weekend and move CC back to May/June

[Spidey]

2 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

It's very likely +20% of your fan base will be either away or about to go away in August. When we get a proper TV deal we can massively drop ST prices to keep published crowds high during this period or put huge deals on or both. this is also when we should have magic weekend and move CC back to May/June

How do you fit in all of the rounds of the cup before May? There's currently 6 rounds in the cup before the Top 8 of SL enter. Some Amateur teams are already having to play 6 weeks before the start of their season

[Trojan]

1 hour ago, Padge said:

The current system needs scrapping, even if it is replaced by the insane 1 up 1 down P&R, even that has got to be better than this nonsense we have now.

This is not defence of P&R, far from it, but the current nonsense has to stop.

 

Why?