Why is it so hard for promoted teams to stay in Super League

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

Like I posted above. I think this is a Leigh issue, they seem to be the only club who have the problem

You follow Widnes don't you Spidey ? , How many times have they ' won ' promotion ? , And the circumstances of ' that ' promotion ?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

11 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

You follow Widnes don't you Spidey ? , How many times have they ' won ' promotion ? , And the circumstances of ' that ' promotion ?

Didn't they win promotion in 2001 and manage to survive for 4 years, only being relegated when there were 2 relegation spots?

[Harry Stottle]

23 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

If P&R is so attractive why have Sky slashed their money for broadcasting then ?

If there was no P&R to give Sky something else of interest to screen towards the end of the season I would say that there would have been a bigger reduction in the funding, the race for the top 5 being competed for by 6 club's gets pretty boring 

[Harry Stottle]

23 hours ago, Damien said:

Poor licensing, as seen previously, protects the weak. Proper strong licensing with strict requirements certainly doesn't.

What would proper Licencing consist of Damien, who would write it up, and how would it be policed?

Just curious to see your suggestions Damien.

[GUBRATS]

5 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Didn't they win promotion in 2001 and manage to survive for 4 years, only being relegated when there were 2 relegation spots?

Correct , but I asked for the circumstances , which were the season finishing nearly 3 months before the SL season ended , meaning they had time to recruit 

Yes I know that then gives the relegated team the problem of recruitment , more so if they are moving to part time , although most have continued full time in a usually successful attempt at getting straight back into SL 

 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

21 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Correct , but I asked for the circumstances , which were the season finishing nearly 3 months before the SL season ended , meaning they had time to recruit 

Yes I know that then gives the relegated team the problem of recruitment , more so if they are moving to part time , although most have continued full time in a usually successful attempt at getting straight back into SL 

 

Sorry, I didn't follow what you were getting at. I'd made a similar comment on page 1 about how the season finishing earlier gave the promoted team the best chance of survival (and thrival!) in SL.

Parachute payments could be made to support the relegated club in paying off remaining full time contracts, which would obviously give them an unfair advantage but at the same time they would have recruitment issues.

The Championship season starting in December could actually make it more valuable to TV companies trying to fill the gap between internationals and the start of the SL season. I suppose there are then player welfare issues for some who might not have a close season period.

[Chris22]

The problem with promotion and relegation is that the top league is a full time one and the second league is primarily a part time league. The gap between playing part time players and professional athletes is enormous.

The problem with licensing is that lower Super League sides have little purpose aside from to fill fixtures for a season and Championship clubs have no meaningful prize at all and it dilutes the competition to near-meaningless status.

Having a structure comprising part and full time clubs so close together makes squaring that circle near-impossible. It's why P&R and licensing have both been seen to have failed and (one of the reasons) why licensing would fail again if re-introduced.

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

Like this is a new phenomenon. Oldham, as far back as I can remember, have been up and down more times than a brides nighty.