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

[Scubby]

I have this worry about clubs 9-12 in SL. We could get a situation where the top 7 places (or even 7/8) are sewn up pretty early each season. Then it simply becomes a task for the 9-12 clubs to keep the cash pot for the following season. Hence, my earlier post (about 20 pages back lol) about lower SL clubs giving away the last half a dozen games in the 23, resting their best players and sending out the academy.

 

All the emphasis will be on winning the first few games of 2x8 and securing their cash pot for next year. SL play-off ambitions will never enter their planning.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Scubby

[GaryO]

Because they have agreed as Martyn Sadler outlined to drop their public differences for the time being for a show of public unity whilst the season tickets are on sale an TV are interested in upping the contract.

 

Chairmen from top eight clubs Davey, Moran. Lennigan, Pearson and Hudgell actually did not want this. They wanted a 12 club Superleague with a half shut door of a P & R play off every two years. They still do not want the change but will accept it for control of Superleague. They can still scupper things.

 

I note Terry likes your post but I would implore both of you to read Mr. Sadlers "behind the Public Relations" reality of the situation in his Monday editorial.

 

Favorable announcements from chairmen smiling through gritted teeth, because they don't believe a word of what they are saying but have to say it don't mean anything against the reality of their actual stance.

 

Sorry Parky, but I find reading Mr Sadlers reports does not give transparent coverage of a situation, he is like a traffic cop who wants to take you down his road of thinking, nothing at all wrong with that if you are a disciple of his, fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be I am not.  

[thundergaz]

Sorry Parky, but I find reading Mr Sadlers reports does not give transparent coverage of a situation, he is like a traffic cop who wants to take you down his road of thinking, nothing at all wrong with that if you are a disciple of his, fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be I am not.

+1

[Terry Mullaney]

Because they have agreed as Martyn Sadler outlined to drop their public differences for the time being for a show of public unity whilst the season tickets are on sale an TV are interested in upping the contract.

 

Chairmen from top eight clubs Davey, Moran. Lennigan, Pearson and Hudgell actually did not want this. They wanted a 12 club Superleague with a half shut door of a P & R play off every two years. They still do not want the change but will accept it for control of Superleague. They can still scupper things.

 

I note Terry likes your post but I would implore both of you to read Mr. Sadlers "behind the Public Relations" reality of the situation in his Monday editorial.

 

Favorable announcements from chairmen smiling through gritted teeth, because they don't believe a word of what they are saying but have to say it don't mean anything against the reality of their actual stance.

Parky, has it ever crossed your mind that the said chairmen may well have preferred the alternative but are flexible enough and open minded enough to see the merits of the adopted plan and be happy to give it their full support?

[Martyn Sadler]

Sorry Parky, but I find reading Mr Sadlers reports does not give transparent coverage of a situation, he is like a traffic cop who wants to take you down his road of thinking, nothing at all wrong with that if you are a disciple of his, fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be I am not.  

If you read my 'Talking Rugby League' column in League Express, you'll see that the column is an opinion column on the various issues that arise within the game.

 

It is out in the open, and in that sense is highly transparent.

 

As such, you are obviously entitled to disagree with any of the points I make.

 

And I am always interested to know where and why you believe my opinion is misguided.

 

I'm always happy to debate with readers, or members of this forum, as you can see.

[Dave T]

I have this worry about clubs 9-12 in SL. We could get a situation where the top 7 places (or even 7/8) are sewn up pretty early each season. Then it simply becomes a task for the 9-12 clubs to keep the cash pot for the following season. Hence, my earlier post (about 20 pages back lol) about lower SL clubs giving away the last half a dozen games in the 23, resting their best players and sending out the academy.

 

All the emphasis will be on winning the first few games of 2x8 and securing their cash pot for next year. SL play-off ambitions will never enter their planning.

 

SL 5 - Rd 19, teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 6 - Rd 19, teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 7 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 8 - Rd 19 teams 9&9 can still make top 8, teams 11 & 12 are adrift.

SL 9 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can technically still make top 8 (although 10/11 are some way off) , team 12 are adrift.

SL 10 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 11 - All teams can make the 8

SL 12 - All teams can make the 8

 

This is a sample of when we had a 12 team comp. After 19 rounds as you can see, the majority of teams could still make the 8, suggesting to me that they will still be going all out for the 8 with 4 rounds to go.

 

I also suspect that teams would rather try and keep playing to try and work some form back prior to the 7 games.

[sweaty craiq]

Tremendous posts, I take the points entirely.

Just have a problem that the gap between 1-8 and 9-12 may well leave us with an eight club SL.

Craiq suggests cash "will come into the game the second tier becomes a flowing river and not the stagnant pond it is now" .

I have a problem with that wishful thinking, but we can live in hope??

Entering a new dawn it would be very disturbing if those with most to gain are not a least half full types, I do believe we can be optimistic because we have a great product we just happen to be poop at selling and have divided our customer base

[Scubby]

SL 5 - Rd 19, teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 6 - Rd 19, teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 7 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 8 - Rd 19 teams 9&9 can still make top 8, teams 11 & 12 are adrift.

SL 9 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can technically still make top 8 (although 10/11 are some way off) , team 12 are adrift.

SL 10 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 11 - All teams can make the 8

SL 12 - All teams can make the 8

 

This is a sample of when we had a 12 team comp. After 19 rounds as you can see, the majority of teams could still make the 8, suggesting to me that they will still be going all out for the 8 with 4 rounds to go.

 

I also suspect that teams would rather try and keep playing to try and work some form back prior to the 7 games.

 

Thanks for the info Dave, very interesting, but I would imagine that changes quite dramatically with 2/3 games to go. IMO player rotation and resting will be commonplace in the last few rounds, the carrot is too important to drop games in the 2x8. In the end it will all be about retaining the SL cash season in and season out.

[sweaty craiq]

I have this worry about clubs 9-12 in SL. We could get a situation where the top 7 places (or even 7/8) are sewn up pretty early each season. Then it simply becomes a task for the 9-12 clubs to keep the cash pot for the following season. Hence, my earlier post (about 20 pages back lol) about lower SL clubs giving away the last half a dozen games in the 23, resting their best players and sending out the academy.

All the emphasis will be on winning the first few games of 2x8 and securing their cash pot for next year. SL play-off ambitions will never enter their planning.

Do they keep the cash pot by not paying players and staff on contracts? If not how do they do it

[sweaty craiq]

If you read my 'Talking Rugby League' column in League Express, you'll see that the column is an opinion column on the various issues that arise within the game.

It is out in the open, and in that sense is highly transparent.

As such, you are obviously entitled to disagree with any of the points I make.

And I am always interested to know where and why you believe my opinion is misguided.

I'm always happy to debate with readers, or members of this forum, as you can see.

Martyn you are correct we all have opinions and media will always show bias

I do not buy the Telegraph expecting them to sing the praises of all things liberal and the socialist worker was never a fan of Maggie

[The Parksider]

Sorry Parky, but I find reading Mr Sadlers reports does not give transparent coverage of a situation, he is like a traffic cop who wants to take you down his road of thinking, nothing at all wrong with that if you are a disciple of his, fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be I am not.  

 

That's fine but Mr. Sadler did not take the view, and is not pushing the view that five of the top eight clubs and Mr. Koukash do not want 2x12=2x8. He reported the fact they wanted a 12 club SL with a partly close door.

 

He may push his idea of which way this is going you may wish to push with Terry your idea these six have seen the light.

[Scubby]

Do they keep the cash pot by not paying players and staff on contracts? If not how do they do it

 

The difference in the cash pot (hand out each season) will be 2:1 by the time the SL clubs have thrashed it out. The whole season for those in positions 9-12 will be about a 1.4m pot (guesstimate) against 700k. Not to include loss of sponsors and probably some gifted young players with relegation release clauses.

[The Parksider]

Parky, has it ever crossed your mind that the said chairmen may well have preferred the alternative but are flexible enough and open minded enough to see the merits of the adopted plan and be happy to give it their full support?

 

Yes sir, please see My post above to Gary. I am however a Sadleryte so I am biased......

Edited January 22, 2014 by The Parksider

[The Parksider]

I have this worry about clubs 9-12 in SL. We could get a situation where the top 7 places (or even 7/8) are sewn up pretty early each season. Then it simply becomes a task for the 9-12 clubs to keep the cash pot for the following season. Hence, my earlier post (about 20 pages back lol) about lower SL clubs giving away the last half a dozen games in the 23, resting their best players and sending out the academy.

 

All the emphasis will be on winning the first few games of 2x8 and securing their cash pot for next year. SL play-off ambitions will never enter their planning.

 

Great post, great reply and anlysis from Dave, and we shall see what tactics the "poor" SL clubs adopt when the new system comes around. Fascinating.....

 

Nice debate today, no abuse/goading or "lock this thread" moaning minnies.....

Edited January 22, 2014 by The Parksider

[Wellsy4HullFC]

SL 5 - Rd 19, teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 6 - Rd 19, teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 7 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 8 - Rd 19 teams 9&9 can still make top 8, teams 11 & 12 are adrift.

SL 9 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can technically still make top 8 (although 10/11 are some way off) , team 12 are adrift.

SL 10 - Rd 19 teams 9-11 can still make top 8, team 12 are adrift.

SL 11 - All teams can make the 8

SL 12 - All teams can make the 8

This is a sample of when we had a 12 team comp. After 19 rounds as you can see, the majority of teams could still make the 8, suggesting to me that they will still be going all out for the 8 with 4 rounds to go.

I also suspect that teams would rather try and keep playing to try and work some form back prior to the 7 games.

Thanks Dave. Saved me a job! I was wondering how many would still be in at so close to 23 rounds in.

So what if some teams decided to rest players and concentrate on a certain part of the season? Does that not happen in all sports (and in our sport currently)? It's all part of the game. Eventually things balance out. If a coach chooses to rest players, they may find that they're not as prepared an get relegated.

What incentive do clubs have to try in the current system when they're not in the play off hunt? It's an equal argument.

[Scubby]

Thanks Dave. Saved me a job! I was wondering how many would still be in at so close to 23 rounds in.

So what if some teams decided to rest players and concentrate on a certain part of the season? Does that not happen in all sports (and in our sport currently)? It's all part of the game. Eventually things balance out. If a coach chooses to rest players, they may find that they're not as prepared an get relegated.

What incentive do clubs have to try in the current system when they're not in the play off hunt? It's an equal argument.

 

No it isn't really because the next phase you start on zero. So when you are out of the play-offs you are literally playing for nothing.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Where did you get those stats from anyway, Dave?

Reason I ask is if like to see how many points off the top four the teams in 5th-8th are after 23 rounds each season. I have a concern that some clubs will not be able to reach the top four from eighth with 7 games to go, since the points carry over.

I suppose one way to rectify this would be to make points for winning a game in the play-offs worth 3 points so there is more chance of displacing a team at the back end of the season.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

No it isn't really because the next phase you start on zero. So when you are out of the play-offs you are literally playing for nothing.

You mean like the current system, like I said?

What were Cas/Wakey/Widnes playing for for most of the back end of the season?

[GIANTSTRIDES]

Steve, sorry to see that your "greymatter" will not extend to the complex intricacies that this new structure will demand

 

 

I know this was said more in jest than anything but it is one thing that is putting many people off,

[RS]

Not sure if this has been raised on this debate but I have seen it said that the 4 Championship teams will play all mid 8 group games against SL team at home. This will mean that either the team that finished 9th or 10th (or both) will play one at home and six away whereas the team that finished 4th in the Championship will have 5 or 6 home games and only one or two away.

 

Surely the above is a ridiculous state of affairs and doesn't reward excellence in a tougher league?

[GIANTSTRIDES]

Parky, has it ever crossed your mind that the said chairmen may well have preferred the alternative but are flexible enough and open minded enough to see the merits of the adopted plan and be happy to give it their full support?

 

It's crossed my mind very briefly and left as fast as it came.

[a.n Other]

Surely the above is a ridiculous state of affairs and doesn't reward excellence in a tougher league?

The clubs would have already been rewarded by receiving higher central funding and having a higher salary cap than the teams they are about to take on.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Not sure if this has been raised on this debate but I have seen it said that the 4 Championship teams will play all mid 8 group games against SL team at home.

You've misread.

It says they will have four home fixtures. It doesn't say they will play SL clubs at home.

[Griff]

Parky, has it ever crossed your mind that the said chairmen may well have preferred the alternative but are flexible enough and open minded enough to see the merits of the adopted plan and be happy to give it their full support?

 

If that were so, they'd have voted for it.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

If that were so, they'd have voted for it.

Why? Just because it wasn't their preferred choice doesn't mean they think it won't work or doesn't deserve their support. It just means they thought that a different route was a better option but this one is still ok.