The never-ending League Restructure debate (Many merged threads)

[Keith T]

That's exactly right. This system is designed to placate Championship clubs by seemingly offering them a straightforward shot at promotion but, in reality, a promotion will be rarer and more infrequent than getting to SL under licencing.

Time will tell, but I think one team every four or so years might get promoted.

Guaranteed promotion for the championship winners ( subject to minimum standards being met ) is better than a stacked playoff ###### shoot against higher financed and battle tested opponents.

I am a staunch advocate of p and r but this hybrid heath robinson contraption with more questions than answers will be a disaster for Championship clubs.

 

The system may have been designed to placate some Championship clubs but the reason that the Championship clubs unanimously agreed to support the RFL with their 3 x 8's, IMVHO, was the very generous increase in many of the clubs funding under this new system.   That was sold to them as part of the package with the bottom club in the Championship collecting £60k more than any of them received this season.  

Edited January 19, 2014 by Keith T

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

That is how you come across

I disagree, I argue the point especially when I think there is a wrong.

 

You have just recently used the words 'Fev paranoia'.  I personally do not have a problem with this, however I had some goading comments deleted the other day. So you have to say what's the difference?  You often have a go at Flatcappers again I really don't have a problem but the fact people get banned and warned for the same thing is just wrong and that's what gets my goat up.

 

In my job I travel all over the UK and meet all kinds of people.  I have some friends in the South where we have a big disagreement on all kinds of things especially politics, does this mean that I do not listen to them or like them?  Of course not.  We are all entitled to our opinion as long as we are all treated the same, that's all I ask for.

 

You think I'm paranoid some people who post on here disagree.

[Keith T]

No because a knock out cup is exactly that. A regular competition is different. And I am only taking about what suits RL.

 

I am surprised that it hasn't been mentioned that also included in this 3 x 8's system the top 8 are exempt from the Challenge Cup until the 5th Round (i.e. the last 16).

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

No because a knock out cup is exactly that. A regular competition is different. And I am only taking about what suits RL.

In what way is it different?  If a one sided game is garbage then why have the earlier rounds?  Lets just go for the creme de le creme of close SL games, oh hang on a minute. 

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

It's different because it is a draw based tournament. Hence York Acorn might get Wigan in the cup. But these teams meeting in a regular league would be ridiculous.

In my opinion a licensing system is ridiculous.  You seem to be of an opinion that each SL round produces 7 close games every week and this just does not happen. 

[gingerjon]

I am surprised that it hasn't been mentioned that also included in this 3 x 8's system the top 8 are exempt from the Challenge Cup until the 5th Round (i.e. the last 16).

 

It's been mentioned a lot by me.  I think it's pretty damn important.

[bobbruce]

I am surprised that it hasn't been mentioned that also included in this 3 x 8's system the top 8 are exempt from the Challenge Cup until the 5th Round (i.e. the last 16).

Interesting and another clue that this system is actually about creating an 8 club SL.

[jannerboyuk]

This thread is so long it deserves it's own theme tune: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DpGdLsG87qo

[The Parksider]

does anyone feel that despite all the championship clubs seemingly falling over themselves to embrace the 3/8 s system, it will make promotion to super league a lot harder than a simple one up one down system. That everyone would understand and give a championship clubs a straight forward route to sl rather than just a chance to play a few sl clubs at the end of a hard season. I can't see anything other than the rare upset as in the c.c., over 7 games it will be very hard for part time to beat full time!

 

I don't think that the Championship clubs were looking for a system to give them promotion to SL. I only know of one Championship club making a genuine and concerted effort to get an SL place and apparently they have liabilities of around £800,000.

 

I know of 15 tiny clubs who can't get an 800 crowd, I know of another 12 not all the same who have been acting as Superleague club "A" teams, I know of three failed SL clubs who still mouth off about destination Superleague despite having nothing to back a serious bid up.

 

Keith T may have the answer? most Championship clubs voted for this because they are brassic, skint, penniless, and it's not just them as Wakefield, Bradford and London have all held cut price sales "everyone must go" of their playing squads.

 

Given only two championship clubs may make the 8 I don't think these changes are about "ambition", as always they are IMVHO about  money and survival. I had an idea that the middle 8 would be a sterile predictable competition, but I don't think so now.

 

I think we will see a championship club or two go up. But I also think that it won't be because they have "grown organically" have "built" and become "ready for Superleague" it will (and recent events support this) be more likely promotion by default over some bankrupt club or even some club closing down.

 

Yours, Mr, Happy.

[Keith T]

It's been mentioned a lot by me.  I think it's pretty damn important.

Sorry, gingerjon, I hadn't seen it mentioned but I wonder is this something to placate the meeting "walkers"?

[gingerjon]

Sorry, gingerjon, I hadn't seen it mentioned but I wonder is this something to placate the meeting "walkers"?

 

To be fair, I do ramble so I don't blame anyone for not seeing it.

 

It effectively means the big matches in the Cup get fewer.  So a smaller profile on terrestial.  Good work, RFL!

 

I suspect its to placate the players' union as well as it guarantees fewer games for the players who will be playing for the bigger teams and England.

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

Where did I say that? I think that's what *could* happen with enough money and will behind it.

No evidnece that it will?  How many years of licencing and failed promises do you intend to give licencing a go.

[GIANTSTRIDES]

The idea that the RFL is celebrating mediocrity is difficult to understand. The top eight of SL will still be playing off to reach a grand final as far as I can see and below that there is now an intriguing battle to be had involving the rest of SL, who would normally just be playing the season out with nothing at stake, and the best of the Championship plus a similar battle lower down the scale. I'm really struggling to come up with one good reason why this won't capture the imagination and have the potential to increase crowds.

And by the way, if Fev don't make the cut then it will be down to them not being good enough and that's how it should be. I think your comment was uncalled for to be honest.

 

 

Fair enough mate , To be honest i didnt have you in mind when i wrote it, There have been one or two on who seem to have rather a large chip on their shoulder. No offence intended.

 

I do not like this idea at all but i shall still be going to games, I will be surprised if it lasts long , but we shall see.

[John Drake]

I have done nothing of the sort and you know that.  

 

All I have done is ask that all forum members are treated the same when posts are deleted because of abuse or topic derailment.  My PM in July and my deleted posts this week show that this is not the case.

 

I would appreciate it if you would stick to the facts without trying to put words into my mouth.

 

Ian, as we are getting nowhere fast here, and I do not wish to derail this thread further, I have sent you a PM to follow up our earlier communications to which you have made reference here. It may be of interest to you.

[Terry Mullaney]

Fair enough mate , To be honest i didnt have you in mind when i wrote it, There have been one or two on who seem to have rather a large chip on their shoulder. No offence intended.

I do not like this idea at all but i shall still be going to games, I will be surprised if it lasts long , but we shall see.

Thanks for your reply and I might be biased here but I've never met a more passionate band of supporters than the Fev lads and lasses. I think it was Wellsey who asked the question of SL fans about how they'd feel if their club had been shut out for so long as some of the more ambitious championship sides have been, despite their best efforts to comply with RFL requirements. It's not pleasant especially when there's a perception of injustice in that a certain few existing SL clubs seem to repeatedly fail the system but yet retain their status. The rules of licensing weren't adhered to, simple as that and it's not nice.

Most on here haven't had to experience such frustration so I can appreciate their lack of understanding of how our fans feel. Fax, Leigh, Sheffield are all in the same situation but it seems it's the Fev fans who make most of the noise on here on behalf of the championship.

It's a new chapter for the sport with opportunity for every single club and that's just how it should be. If you're good enough you'll reap the rewards. Can't wait for it to start.

[The Parksider]

Interesting and another clue that this system is actually about creating an 8 club SL.

 

Well given that the top eight will play each other 3 times creating a "boring" competition in which crowds will drop according to some, and that the middle eight's crowds will shoot up thanks to "jeapordy" according to KPMG then my new calculator for fat fingers will come in handy. First use will be this years relegation battle - a warm up to the main event 2015. I'll be able to see the RL public's reaction to the battle to avoid going down. There was only two points between Wakefield, Cas, Widnes and Bradford last year with HKR four points above that, some fascinating games to come for absolute sure for me, who will win?? But also who will turn up........

[GeordieSaint]

Interesting read in the LE this morning...

[The Parksider]

Interesting read in the LE this morning...

 

Indeed, TV Contracts, power struggles, no real unanimous vote for the new structure........

Edited January 20, 2014 by The Parksider

[Ian (Pencil) Elliott]

Ian, as we are getting nowhere fast here, and I do not wish to derail this thread further, I have sent you a PM to follow up our earlier communications to which you have made reference here. It may be of interest to you.

Cheers John

Just so it's public I apologies to the mods for suggesting censorship on this forum.

I also apologies to other memebers for derailing the thread.

I do think I've had a point in the past but do appreciate that the mods work hard to ensure that the forum is fair and fun for all.

Looking forward to the RL future and proper RL debates.

Cheers Ian

[Bob8]

So, we are now up to 196 pages and there is agreement.

 

The clubs i like should be assessed for Super League by how much Super League will benefit them (be that Toulouse or Leigh)

 

Other clubs should be assessed for Super League by how much they will benefit Super League (be that Toulouse or Leigh).

 

Is that about it?

[gingerjon]

So, we are now up to 196 pages and there is agreement.

 

The clubs i like should be assessed for Super League by how much Super League will benefit them (be that Toulouse or Leigh)

 

Other clubs should be assessed for Super League by how much they will benefit Super League (be that Toulouse or Leigh).

 

Is that about it?

 

Typical Euro arrogance from a Copenhagen Black Swan supporter.

[Derwent]

Some interesting points from the Swiss regarding this league format...

From the 10th game the pressure began [to be involved in the top eight] and this pressure made the clubs really careless - signing players, changing the coach and taking financial risks. Apart from the few big clubs, it was not sustainable.

They intended to make the whole thing a little bit more interesting for the public. But in the end, the difference between the teams in the 'championship' league and the teams from the second division was too big, so it wasn't interesting at all.

Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change

Switzerland did not have the strength in depth to increase the size of their top flight to 16 or 18 teams. And while two leagues of 12 with an 8-8-8 split was viewed as a compromise, sponsors were not keen to be associated with the bottom 16 after the split.

“It was very complicated for television and sponsors who didn’t want to be associated with any meaningless matches. It is much easier to have two separate divisions.

“The second part of the season, with eight clubs playing for the title, was as successful as the current system. But fans were not turning up in the same numbers, especially at the start of the season or when the games didn’t matter as much."

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/swiss-football-chiefs-slam-scotlands-1524036

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313899

[The Parksider]

Some interesting points from the Swiss regarding this league format...

From the 10th game the pressure began [to be involved in the top eight] and this pressure made the clubs really careless - signing players, changing the coach and taking financial risks. Apart from the few big clubs, it was not sustainable.

They intended to make the whole thing a little bit more interesting for the public. But in the end, the difference between the teams in the 'championship' league and the teams from the second division was too big, so it wasn't interesting at all.

Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change

“The second part of the season, with eight clubs playing for the title, was as successful as the current system. But fans were not turning up in the same numbers, especially at the start of the season or when the games didn’t matter as much."

 

As conveyed in RL&LE today

 

Some of the biggest players in SL did not want this. It was not "unanimous" and the politics go on.

 

This is why people on here beyond those buoyed up by the idea the new structure may see their own club now get in SL, can sense it's just a transitory phase leading to an "all change" again a few years down the line.

Edited January 20, 2014 by The Parksider

[gingerjon]

Some interesting points from the Swiss regarding this league format...

From the 10th game the pressure began [to be involved in the top eight] and this pressure made the clubs really careless - signing players, changing the coach and taking financial risks. Apart from the few big clubs, it was not sustainable.

They intended to make the whole thing a little bit more interesting for the public. But in the end, the difference between the teams in the 'championship' league and the teams from the second division was too big, so it wasn't interesting at all.

Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change

Switzerland did not have the strength in depth to increase the size of their top flight to 16 or 18 teams. And while two leagues of 12 with an 8-8-8 split was viewed as a compromise, sponsors were not keen to be associated with the bottom 16 after the split.

“It was very complicated for television and sponsors who didn’t want to be associated with any meaningless matches. It is much easier to have two separate divisions.

“The second part of the season, with eight clubs playing for the title, was as successful as the current system. But fans were not turning up in the same numbers, especially at the start of the season or when the games didn’t matter as much."

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/swiss-football-chiefs-slam-scotlands-1524036

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313899

 

Doing a little bit of reading around this.  It seems the Swiss carried their points slightly differently in that for the championship section of the top division points gained during the regular (qualifying) season were halved before the final section.  As per the RFL plan, those in the second 8 started on zero.

[sweaty craiq]

My views on this are that this will be in play for about 3 years, during that time I expect 20 clubs to become full time (Toulouse and a welsh club in that number), and will have had 2/3 years to tune the back office/academies etc. At that point we change to two full time tens with straight p&r, what we should have done now but I can understand why we haven't

Edited January 20, 2014 by sweaty craiq