IT remains to be seen whether Super League will have 14 clubs in its ranks next season.

There’s a lot of water to go under the bridge before we can be sure that it will have.

But let’s assume that two applicants satisfy the panel and that there will be 14 clubs.

What would be the best play-off format for 14 clubs?

I ask the question because it seems that the strategic review panel chaired by Nigel Wood is proposing that eight out of the 14 clubs should feature in the play-offs.

I think that would be a serious mistake. The idea that more than half the clubs, some inevitably with a losing record in the regular season, should be able to compete to call themselves the Super League champions wouldn’t sit well with me, nor with the majority of supporters, I would imagine.

We currently have six of twelve clubs qualifying for the play-offs, so using the same ratio it would be sensible to increase the number of play-off clubs to seven.

The good thing about the six-team model is that it gives the top two clubs the advantage of having the first week of the play-offs without a game, while teams three to six battle it out on the opening weekend.

There are five games in total, including the Grand Final, and each game has jeopardy, in that the losing side drops out of the play-offs.

That’s why in my view the six-team format has generated strong crowd support in recent years, far more than when we have had an eight-team format.

In fact the creation of a seven-team play-off format would work extremely well over three weeks, with a particular benefit for the club that wins the League Leaders’ Shield.

In week one, the League Leaders Shield winners would get the week off, while the other teams would play 2v7, 3v6 and 4v5 on Thursday through to Saturday.

The winners would go through to the semi-finals and the League Leaders would play the lowest of those three winners, with the other two playing each other at the home of the highest-placed club. The two winning semi-finalists would progress to the Grand Final. 

There would be six games in total, in each case with the losing team dropping out of the race to Old Trafford. It would give us the jeopardy that Sky craves.

On the other hand, I can understand why the RFL might favour an eight-team format, because all the income from the play-off games flows directly to the governing body rather than to the clubs.

The RFL may believe there’s a financial prerogative to increase the number of play-off matches to generate more income for itself.

But do we really want to give a team with a losing record in the regular season a shot at becoming Super League champions, even though that outcome would be unlikely?

The RFL should think very carefully before going down that route.

Grading’s uncertainty

SOMEONE asked me an interesting question the other day.

Should the clubs in the lower reaches of Super League apply formally to the committee to be chaired by Lord Caine to retain their Super League places?

Here’s the problem facing them.

What happens to a current Super League club that is awarded a grade B at the end of the season that puts them outside the top 12 graded clubs?

If they haven’t applied to Lord Caine’s panel to become the 13th or 14th club, they could be out of Super League purely on a technicality.

It may seem ridiculous, but my advice to any club that is in potential danger to put their application in.

Don’t take anything for granted in these crazy times.