Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 4.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

We've been told that the plan was always to have 2 leave SL1 at the end of the forthcoming season and that P&R proper will start in the 2015 season.

 

That's my understanding too.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've been told that the plan was always to have 2 leave SL1 at the end of the forthcoming season and that P&R proper will start in the 2015 season.

 

Mr. Sadler states in his editorial "The RFL have insisted two clubs will be relegated from SL this coming year come what may" they are able to do this as they have the right to determine policy on P & R.

 

SLE on the other hand have the final say on the number of clubs that make up Superleague. They can still stick with 14 in which case the RFL can force a P & R policy of  two up and two down.

 

I'd say after reading the Editorial Monday nothing is really decided.

 

If there's a stand off between the RFL and SLE apparently nothing changes and this may not be what anyone wants so again nothing is decided?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Play-offs - the question mark is telling.

 

As to Scotland, the funding gap isn't so big.  Remember this is between divs 2/3 and 3/4 - not 1/2.  To be honest, I can't say whether it works - I've no idea whether the higher division club retains its status more often than not.   Nevertheless, I'd be confident it would become a barrier, rather than a vehicle, to promotion in RL.

 

Not sure what you mean by "top playing bottom", though.

 

Well who knows if they are play-offs or a continuation of the season!

 

It depends on the marketing season tickets etc....

 

It would be worth looking to see if there was more mobility in Scotland, but i would agree that it will further ring fence the top clubs!

 

(top of 2 playing bottom of 1...etc...) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I'd see Twelves and Eights going would be the top eight getting more gate money and becoming a permanent top eight, the middle eight getting more central funds and becoming a permanent middle eight and the bottom eight becoming more marginalised. Far from easing the road to promotion, I'd expect a club to need an even sweeter sugar daddy to get into the top division.

 

As to your first point, I don't think you can regard the first and third eight as play-offs if they're carrying forward points.  The middle eight - hmmmm, maybe.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I'd see Twelves and Eights going would be the top eight getting more gate money and becoming a permanent top eight, the middle eight getting more central funds and becoming a permanent middle eight and the bottom eight becoming more marginalised. Far from easing the road to promotion, I'd expect a club to need an even sweeter sugar daddy to get into the top division.

 

As to your first point, I don't think you can regard the first and third eight as play-offs if they're carrying forward points.  The middle eight - hmmmm, maybe.

 

There is also the real possibility that the top 4 of the top 8 is all but decided when the split occurs leaving 4 clubs with nothing to play for! (extreme I know but at least 1 club in 8th will have virtually no chance)!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also the real possibility that the top 4 of the top 8 is all but decided when the split occurs leaving 4 clubs with nothing to play for! (extreme I know but at least 1 club in 8th will have virtually no chance)!

I'm not sure this is an issue. If we look at the season just gone, after 22 rounds (not an exact comparison) the team in 8th were 9 points adrift of 4th. Now this may mean that it is difficult for them to make top 4 (I am assuming the top four would make the semi finals - I can't remember the details now!) but not impossible.

 

Also, in the current format, London were 12 points behind the Top 8 this season meaning that they did have nothing to play for. Hull FC finised 8th, but they played in some decent games and took some points from the others in the 8.

Edited by Dave T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team in 7th and 8th have nothing to play for the general consensus is they won't try and wont take points off anyone, its hard for a comparison but I may look back to old seasons data before they played the teams for a third time in the old 12 team league to see how far off the top 4 they where after 22 games. ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team in 7th and 8th have nothing to play for the general consensus is they won't try and wont take points off anyone, its hard for a comparison but I may look back to old seasons data before they played the teams for a third time in the old 12 team league to see how far off the top 4 they where after 22 games. ....

 

Think you're kidding yourself there.  There is always the win bonus to play for and nobody wants to finish bottom.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Sadler states in his editorial "The RFL have insisted two clubs will be relegated from SL this coming year come what may" they are able to do this as they have the right to determine policy on P & R.

 

SLE on the other hand have the final say on the number of clubs that make up Superleague. They can still stick with 14 in which case the RFL can force a P & R policy of  two up and two down.

 

I'd say after reading the Editorial Monday nothing is really decided.

 

If there's a stand off between the RFL and SLE apparently nothing changes and this may not be what anyone wants so again nothing is decided?

 

Just a couple of things to throw in.  I read Martyn's editorial and I agree, it would seem that nothing is decided.  On the subject of the stand-off between RFL and SLE, League Weekly "understand" that the rebellion has cooled somewhat, read into that what you will.

 

With regard to Martyn's idea about P&R on a three yearly cycle, sorry Martyn, not too keen on it.  While it is without doubt more interesting than what we have now, it still makes it very hard for anyone to actually achieve promotion.  For example, you could have team x having two fantastic seasons in which they'd be promoted under annual P&R, then have a dog awful season through injuries etc in year three and be stuck for another three years. 

 

It seems to me like an unholy fudge of the worst elements of licensing and 1 up, 1 down.

 

3x8 for me (still).  It lets every team find the appropriate level and provides the best opportunity for ambitious clubs (heartland or "expansion") to progress up the ladder. All of course IMVHO

 

Of course there is only one way to find out if it will work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the team in 7th and 8th have nothing to play for the general consensus is they won't try and wont take points off anyone, its hard for a comparison but I may look back to old seasons data before they played the teams for a third time in the old 12 team league to see how far off the top 4 they where after 22 games. ....

generally 8-12 pts max.

I also think the point the teams may not try is nonsense.

The games may be less attractive to fans, but this should be balanced out by them playing the bigger and better teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

generally 8-12 pts max.

I also think the point the teams may not try is nonsense.

The games may be less attractive to fans, but this should be balanced out by them playing the bigger and better teams.

I agree that a side will try to win every game, it's nonsense that gets posted on this forum that teams don't try under licensing, if you are 8th going into the post season you will try but will have no chance of top four

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that a side will try to win every game, it's nonsense that gets posted on this forum that teams don't try under licensing, if you are 8th going into the post season you will try but will have no chance of top four

I don't think the issue is that players won't try, more that the games aren't that attractive to fans and partners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I'd see Twelves and Eights going would be the top eight getting more gate money and becoming a permanent top eight, the middle eight getting more central funds and becoming a permanent middle eight and the bottom eight becoming more marginalised. Far from easing the road to promotion, I'd expect a club to need an even sweeter sugar daddy to get into the top division.

 

I have no axe to grind, and would fine such a radical plan fascinating as it plays out regardless of the outcome. But I can't get away from some simple principles. Firstly the "top eight" for me naturally becomes the real Superleague.

 

As you say these will be the eight cubs with the best players, most resources and the rich men who will spend their own money to ensure they stay in the eight. You can almost name those eight now.

 

Six SL clubs have money problems and Chairmen in doubt to some extent. How it will help them to become strong SL clubs relegating them into a second tier I haven't a clue. We know from the World cup, and from divisional RL over modern times that second rate RL does not attract the fans. I can only think the truth is it will allow them to shed the financial burdens of banging their heads on the glass ceiling Hudgell speaks of. The readjustment is down.

 

At least the moves will rescue the best couple of championship clubs sinking into the mire with annual fixture lists full of DR clubs with no fans. This plan viewed from a distance seems the be a first division of eight and a second division of eight

 

The advertised effects of these moves hyped by KPMG and the RFL, may well be just history repeating itself, shades of Ralph Rimmer extolling the virtues of Licensing allowing clubs to build resources in SL.

 

IMVHO the reality is the move is a reduction of SL clubs, and an equal reduction of the second tier to meet the financial constraints a lack of really wealthy private investors creates, and also to cut the number of clubs chasing finite resources.

 

Whatever happens in the top tiers may excite who knows, but watch out for all the clubs shut out of the 16 something that has been given little thought on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are they having win bonuses for all games or just the post season?

 

Hey - maybe sometimes you're just not good enough.  Doesn't mean you let the other team win.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

generally 8-12 pts max.

I also think the point the teams may not try is nonsense.

The games may be less attractive to fans, but this should be balanced out by them playing the bigger and better teams.

 

Of course all teams will try.  But surely the importance of the game impacts with the focus and hence level at which a team may perform. Otherwise why do we think that a team playing in a semi or Grand Final or some other important game talk about the magnitude of the game and hence must impact the focus, desire and level of commitment that extra few "degrees".   Its not a question of not consciously trying, of course they will, but the importance of the game must imho often diminish the level of intensity a team brings to bear.    I mean how often does the level and sheer despration of defence improve in play off type games or games with more meaningful outcomes than standard games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no axe to grind, and would fine such a radical plan fascinating as it plays out regardless of the outcome. But I can't get away from some simple principles. Firstly the "top eight" for me naturally becomes the real Superleague.

 

As you say these will be the eight cubs with the best players, most resources and the rich men who will spend their own money to ensure they stay in the eight. You can almost name those eight now.

 

Six SL clubs have money problems and Chairmen in doubt to some extent. How it will help them to become strong SL clubs relegating them into a second tier I haven't a clue. We know from the World cup, and from divisional RL over modern times that second rate RL does not attract the fans. I can only think the truth is it will allow them to shed the financial burdens of banging their heads on the glass ceiling Hudgell speaks of. The readjustment is down.

 

At least the moves will rescue the best couple of championship clubs sinking into the mire with annual fixture lists full of DR clubs with no fans. This plan viewed from a distance seems the be a first division of eight and a second division of eight

 

The advertised effects of these moves hyped by KPMG and the RFL, may well be just history repeating itself, shades of Ralph Rimmer extolling the virtues of Licensing allowing clubs to build resources in SL.

 

IMVHO the reality is the move is a reduction of SL clubs, and an equal reduction of the second tier to meet the financial constraints a lack of really wealthy private investors creates, and also to cut the number of clubs chasing finite resources.

 

Whatever happens in the top tiers may excite who knows, but watch out for all the clubs shut out of the 16 something that has been given little thought on here.

 

The stars must be in alignment because I agree with all that. This 3 x 8 scheme is designed to perpetuate the elite in the top eight and placate the championship clubs into thinking they might get promoted but I think, by and large, the middle eight will end up with the SL clubs at the top and so remaining in SL.

 

P and r should be 1 or 2 promoted and relegated subject to standards being met by the promotees. The 3 x 8 is a smokescreen and will hardly ever result in a promotion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course all teams will try.  But surely the importance of the game impacts with the focus and hence level at which a team may perform. Otherwise why do we think that a team playing in a semi or Grand Final or some other important game talk about the magnitude of the game and hence must impact the focus, desire and level of commitment that extra few "degrees".   Its not a question of not consciously trying, of course they will, but the importance of the game must imho often diminish the level of intensity a team brings to bear.    I mean how often does the level and sheer despration of defence improve in play off type games or games with more meaningful outcomes than standard games.

Yep - so surely a  league with more jeopardy (as it's being branded) will create much more importance around games. There will always be a couple of dead rubbers, but this structure would have fewer I expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep - so surely a  league with more jeopardy (as it's being branded) will create much more importance around games. There will always be a couple of dead rubbers, but this structure would have fewer I expect.

 

Maybe, but off the top of "me head"  I can't think of anything more jeopardizing than being in the relegation zone without a 2nd bite of dropping into another tier, starting again against teams that have a lower budget nor experience of the higher league and hence more likely to be one of the x4 that continue to stay in the 1st tier in the next season.  So accepting being realistically consigned to the bottom 4 of the first tier of 12, the team may get ready for the 2nd tier by resting key players, not breaking every sinew once the club and coach recognize they will be dropping into the 2nd tier,  etc etc, so that they are better prepared for the next set of 2nd tier play-off games (or whatever they are called) to maximize being in the top 4 and hence still in the top tier league the following season.

 

Personally I agree with those contributors who see it as making it harder for championship clubs to be promoted than the simple P&R as distinct to the so called jeopardy of the 2nd tier x8..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 clubs with 1 up 1 down, maybe top of championship play off with bottom of SL?

Or a radical approach, championship winners to 'call out' any SL club outside the SL playoffs that they think they can beat and play over two legs, winner takes the SL place....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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