Jump to content

Improving the structure


Recommended Posts

After this year the clamour to change the 3x8 structure will become deafening. Here is my suggestion to retain the better parts whilst reducing games for the top players.

Top 8 simple format - no league at all straight into play-offs 1 v 8, 2 v 7 etc then semi finals and final. Give 2 week break to final to sell more tickets.

Middle 8 - retain points from league matches against others in your league - then play other 4 sides once apiece, two home and two away. Best championship side replaces lowest sl side. Second best plays second worst in million pound match.

Bottom 8 - season stops except 2nd bottom plays off with 2nd best in league 1

Rugby League is a sport that desperately needs to expand its geographical supporter base and its player base. This imperative means that all other requirements are secondary until this is done.

All power in the game should be with governing bodies, especially international governing bodies.

Without these actions we will remain a minor sport internationally and nationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I think the Academy structure is the one which needs to be improved, I favour a 16's, 18's & under 20's. I also think there needs to be a reserve grade or A team comp.

Everything under the sun is in tune

But the sun is eclipsed by the moon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about leave it alone and stop messing about with the structure? We've only gone through one iteration - you don't know what this years 8s will throw up yet

reduced crowds, too many matches and tired players with an added dose of disillusionment when the slow club win the million pound match easily.

I'm usually the first to say leave it and let it bed in but this was always a bad idea and will reduce our effectiveness internationally by over-playing the better players

Rugby League is a sport that desperately needs to expand its geographical supporter base and its player base. This imperative means that all other requirements are secondary until this is done.

All power in the game should be with governing bodies, especially international governing bodies.

Without these actions we will remain a minor sport internationally and nationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Academy structure is the one which needs to be improved, I favour a 16's, 18's & under 20's. I also think there needs to be a reserve grade or A team comp.

 

U18s and 20s with a reserve team above it. U16s seems to cause community sides at that age group to fold... too much stress on the player pool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

reduced crowds, too many matches and tired players with an added dose of disillusionment when the slow club win the million pound match easily.

I'm usually the first to say leave it and let it bed in but this was always a bad idea and will reduce our effectiveness internationally by over-playing the better players

It would be better to investigate the reason for the reduced crowds., rather than fiddle with the system in hope without good reason. It could be argued the 3 X 8 helped maintain attendance levels due to the larger number of important/big fixtures.

 

Too many matches, cannot see the clubs wanting to reduce the number of matches and TV contract is most likely tied to the number of rounds of games. So it is not easy to get around that.

 

Regarding tired players, that is the responsibility of the clubs to take care of their assets. There is nothing to stop them rotating their squads, this is where the RFL and the players association should step in.

 

As for the "slow" club winning the million pound game easily this is up to the leading championship sides to improve. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top 8 simple format - no league at all straight into play-offs 1 v 8, 2 v 7 etc then semi finals and final. Give 2 week break to final to sell more tickets.

 

Hell no !

In a league of 12, giving the 8th placed team such a good shot at the title just rewards mediocracy. A team finishing 8th just needs to scrape into that position and only needs 2 good games to then find themselves in a GF, tis makes a complete mockery of the whole league.

 

I'm not convinced the 3x8 is absolutely the right solution but it at least rewards the teams that work the hardest throughout the whole season and ultimately only gives a title shot to the best 4 when the regular league is all done.

St.Helens - The Home of record breaking Rugby Champions

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After this year the clamour to change the 3x8 structure will become deafening. Here is my suggestion to retain the better parts whilst reducing games for the top players.

Top 8 simple format - no league at all straight into play-offs 1 v 8, 2 v 7 etc then semi finals and final. Give 2 week break to final to sell more tickets.

Middle 8 - retain points from league matches against others in your league - then play other 4 sides once apiece, two home and two away. Best championship side replaces lowest sl side. Second best plays second worst in million pound match.

Bottom 8 - season stops except 2nd bottom plays off with 2nd best in league 1

Change the structure again. How professional would that be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope the faith shown in the current system pays off, I really do but the issues around it are too great imho.

Clubs will not voluntarily protect players, that has to be mandated.

If no one gets promoted this or next year then the middle 8 and million pound game will struggle for any traction.

If Sky have told us to play the extra games or see funding drop so be it, but we will harm our international side playing all the extra games every season

Rugby League is a sport that desperately needs to expand its geographical supporter base and its player base. This imperative means that all other requirements are secondary until this is done.

All power in the game should be with governing bodies, especially international governing bodies.

Without these actions we will remain a minor sport internationally and nationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hell no !

In a league of 12, giving the 8th placed team such a good shot at the title just rewards mediocracy. A team finishing 8th just needs to scrape into that position and only needs 2 good games to then find themselves in a GF, tis makes a complete mockery of the whole league.

 

I'm not convinced the 3x8 is absolutely the right solution but it at least rewards the teams that work the hardest throughout the whole season and ultimately only gives a title shot to the best 4 when the regular league is all done.

just have a top 4 play off at the end of the regular season then. I think the 7 extra matches are the issue.

Rugby League is a sport that desperately needs to expand its geographical supporter base and its player base. This imperative means that all other requirements are secondary until this is done.

All power in the game should be with governing bodies, especially international governing bodies.

Without these actions we will remain a minor sport internationally and nationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change the structure again. How professional would that be?

How professional is keeping a system where crowds drop year on year?

Rugby League is a sport that desperately needs to expand its geographical supporter base and its player base. This imperative means that all other requirements are secondary until this is done.

All power in the game should be with governing bodies, especially international governing bodies.

Without these actions we will remain a minor sport internationally and nationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How professional is keeping a system where crowds drop year on year?

The 8s have only be going a year. Are you blaming a drop in attendances to the 8s?

IMO their needs to be a reduction in regular season games, introduction of a competitive 'selection' series and/or more internationals. Changing a system now would be unprofessional and unfounded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hell no !

In a league of 12, giving the 8th placed team such a good shot at the title just rewards mediocracy. A team finishing 8th just needs to scrape into that position and only needs 2 good games to then find themselves in a GF, tis makes a complete mockery of the whole league.

ST I dont agree with 1 v , 2 v 7 proposal as I think the existing one is fine.

But for the many, many, many years before SL was born did you think the top 8 play off (and some years it was the top 16) leading to the Championship Final made a complete mockery of the game.

I am assuming that you were around pre-SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ST I dont agree with 1 v , 2 v 7 proposal as I think the existing one is fine.

But for the many, many, many years before SL was born did you think the top 8 play off (and some years it was the top 16) leading to the Championship Final made a complete mockery of the game.

I am assuming that you were around pre-SL.

Been watching long before SL (though not that long to ever remember a top 16). But yes I do think those systems were awful. No-one who finishes in the bottom half of the table should get anything like a shot at the title because they simply haven't earned that right.

At the worst I would like to see us return to just a Top 6 play-off with a league of 12, but my preference would be for just a top 4. I just don't buy the whole "it keeps the fans interest" stuff spouted by Wood to justify keeping so many teams in with a shout of the title. If you haven't earned that right over 23 rounds then tough.

St.Helens - The Home of record breaking Rugby Champions

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the worst I would like to see us return to just a Top 6 play-off with a league of 12, but my preference would be for just a top 4. I just don't buy the whole "it keeps the fans interest" stuff spouted by Wood to justify keeping so many teams in with a shout of the title. If you haven't earned that right over 23 rounds then tough.

 

Agreed - having a straight top four play off after 23 rounds I think would increase the intensity of the competition as teams would have to fight every week to get into one of those positions. But we have what we have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After this year the clamour to change the 3x8 structure will become deafening. Here is my suggestion to retain the better parts whilst reducing games for the top players.

Top 8 simple format - no league at all straight into play-offs 1 v 8, 2 v 7 etc then semi finals and final. Give 2 week break to final to sell more tickets.

Middle 8 - retain points from league matches against others in your league - then play other 4 sides once apiece, two home and two away. Best championship side replaces lowest sl side. Second best plays second worst in million pound match.

Bottom 8 - season stops except 2nd bottom plays off with 2nd best in league 1

Slight flaw there regarding middle 8's - there would only be 3 'other' sides in your league so you'd either get 2 home games and 1 away or 1 home game and 2 away :-)

 

I posted in another thread a suggestion whereby the bottom 4 Super League sides form a mini-league at the end of the regular season. They retain points already accrued, and then play each other again both home and away - this would generate an extra 6 rounds of fixtures, just 1 less than the current 7.

 

The top 4 Championship clubs do the same. Then the top Championship club replaces the bottom Super League club.

 

I would prefer something like this simply because It satisfies those that want P/R whilst also retaining some of that element of having important games and something still to play for at the back end of the season.

 

It also means if a club breaches rules and is docked points and therefore finds themselves at the bottom of Super League, they can't then just wipe the slate clean at the end - points deductions can actually have consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope the faith shown in the current system pays off, I really do but the issues around it are too great imho.

Clubs will not voluntarily protect players, that has to be mandated.

If no one gets promoted this or next year then the middle 8 and million pound game will struggle for any traction.

If Sky have told us to play the extra games or see funding drop so be it, but we will harm our international side playing all the extra games every season

Whilst I agree that it should be mandated, some clubs are already voluntarily protecting players. So it is not a huge step to get all clubs to take player welfare more seriously. This has occurred in football voluntarily AFAIK, albeit with clubs with the greatest resources.

 

LeagueThirteen had intended on setting up a player safety and welfare task group, but I am not sure this has been implemented yet since the organisation has been rather quiet for for the last 12 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slight flaw there regarding middle 8's - there would only be 3 'other' sides in your league so you'd either get 2 home games and 1 away or 1 home game and 2 away :-)

I posted in another thread a suggestion whereby the bottom 4 Super League sides form a mini-league at the end of the regular season. They retain points already accrued, and then play each other again both home and away - this would generate an extra 6 rounds of fixtures, just 1 less than the current 7.

The top 4 Championship clubs do the same. Then the top Championship club replaces the bottom Super League club.

I would prefer something like this simply because It satisfies those that want P/R whilst also retaining some of that element of having important games and something still to play for at the back end of the season.

It also means if a club breaches rules and is docked points and therefore finds themselves at the bottom of Super League, they can't then just wipe the slate clean at the end - points deductions can actually have consequences.

if Leeds finish bottom they would play Leigh, London, bulls and fev. They would not play hudds, hull kr or Salford.

Rugby League is a sport that desperately needs to expand its geographical supporter base and its player base. This imperative means that all other requirements are secondary until this is done.

All power in the game should be with governing bodies, especially international governing bodies.

Without these actions we will remain a minor sport internationally and nationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be better to investigate the reason for the reduced crowds., rather than fiddle with the system in hope without good reason. It could be argued the 3 X 8 helped maintain attendance levels due to the larger number of important/big fixtures.

 

Too many matches, cannot see the clubs wanting to reduce the number of matches and TV contract is most likely tied to the number of rounds of games. So it is not easy to get around that.

 

Regarding tired players, that is the responsibility of the clubs to take care of their assets. There is nothing to stop them rotating their squads, this is where the RFL and the players association should step in.

 

As for the "slow" club winning the million pound game easily this is up to the leading championship sides to improve. 

 

 

Was reading Lewis Jones biography some time ago the amount of domestic matches they played plus international tours makes this current League structure pale in comparison. 

 

 

You are wrong about no club wanting less matches...Gary Hetherington  in the  YEP was stating he had not known this many injuries ( not just Rhinos) in a season...maybe the way forward would be smaller number of matches but bigger squads.. 

 

Even as a Leeds fan I would question this...less games ..bigger squads ..you would have more disgruntled players wanting game time ..they would not want to go out on duel reg... IF he genuinely wants a bigger squad then you need a reserve team...he doesn't ( I argued with him on this) ..I wonder though if we were not in our current predicament whether he would say the same ? Doubt it....

When he was in charge of Carnegie ... SIGM now at full helm...he said the structure of league was perfect..he wanted the same in union...ring fence the top division for 3-4 years this stops yo -yo effect gives a club the opportunity to gain stability by finding sponsors ...IF you only have a year in top flight for certain convincing players, sponsors to come to a particular club is exceptionally difficult as there is always uncertainty...this also effects those under contract...I was very surprised when with league he went in other direction.  My view whilst I like the new structure if Championship side is to gain promotion...have proper P  n R ..but then ring fence the team coming up give them proper time to get foothold in SL .ie that 3-4 yr period...

 

As for the number of injuries..yes a club has duty of care to player....Mac admitted he was bringing players back before ready....they then get injured...then fans go is this player really injured or is there mutiny afoot....bring in a reserve team..make it a rule this will assist players coming back from injury..rather than sending on dual reg..where they train under different regime...not wearing parent clubs jersey...believe reserve worked well for Lomax...:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've come round to a top 5, league winner goes straight to final, and then one down and one up in all leagues.

PROUD TO BE A MEMBER OF http://www.rugbyleaguecares.org/ and http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/article/8790/join-team-wales-for-2013

Predictions for the future -

Crusaders RL to get a franchise for 2012 onwards -WRONG

Widnes Vikings also to get a franchise - RIGHT

Crusaders RL to do the double over Widnes and finish five places ahead of them -WRONG

Widnes Vikings NOT to dominate rugby league in years to come! STILL TO COME

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/cardiffdemonsrlfc/

http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/

I promise to pay �10 to the charity of Bomb Jacks choice if Widnes Millionaires finish above the battling underdogs Crusaders RL. I OWE A TENNER!

http://www.jaxaxe.co...89/Default.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One up one down is not enough to allow sufficient movement between the leagues, and also offers little hope for promotion.

I still think this structure is better and it offers a lot of big games for second div clubs. Effectively they already have a little bit of the SL cherry by playing in the middle 8s. Sooner or later at least one SL will be relegated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've come round to a top 5, league winner goes straight to final, and then one down and one up in all leagues.

Wouldn't work the league winner would have virtually three weeks off before the grand final. The best system we had was the top five we used to have though. Every position up in the league gained a slight advantage whether that was a week off or a home draw or a second chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need the number of games that the Super 8s provides commercially, and for credibility we need to stick with this structure for a good few years.

This string was started under the premise that opposition to the Super 8s is reaching fever pitch. It's not. The Total RL survey currently running has current structure as pet peeve of only 13% of responders, so lets stick with it and enjoy what's on show.

SLis great this season as everyone are desperate to make the 8, the Championship has been reinvigorated by it, and I can't wait to see the Rhinos taking on Championship teams, but wouldn't really want to lose them from SL unless they are proven unworthy by some amazing defeats at the hands of those teams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.