Is it only me that thinks the RFL are losing credibility (even more so) due to the constant merry go round regarding the proposed league structure.

I'm actually pleased that a RL man and fan of the game has spoken out and tried to get the RFL to see sense. A change may be needed but the proposal regarding splitting the leagues up after a number of rounds to form 3 separate leagues is not what the clubs or the fans want. What are the teams playing for in leagues 2 and 3, to be middle champs or bottom champs(ooo er)?

[urlhttp://www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/news/12204/8962874/super-league-clubs-voice-opposition-to-rfls-restructuring-plans[/url

There’s a good thread on the virtual terrace board about this.

IMO the current problem in the game as a whole is a lack of money. There’s a lack of sponsorship from outside and on the inside the supporters have a finite amount of it and both have been through the worst recession since the 1930s. As a result many parts of the game are suffering. The latest plan to tinker with the league structure seems to be fiddling around the edges and not really do anything that will address the main problem - a lack of money in the game.

Will 3x12s or 4x8s or any other scheme cause sponsors to get on board that aren’t already? Will fans go to more games? I don’t think it’ll have much effect.

What the game needs is pull together and ensure that all parts of it are complementing each other from tag rugby, student RL, Amateur, Championship, SL and International. There’s no quick easy fix to the problem of being skint but we know the problems and the solutions aren’t difficult to find.

We need fixture lists that complement each other that don’t leave clubs out of pocket. We need an international programme that fans and players want to take part in to get the media and people outside interested (club games don’t sell outside the north). We need to spread the game to new places to attract new fans and players. Some of that requires money, some of it just requires common sense and a willingness to put self interest aside. If the game can show itself to be of interest to more than a few thousand people in the north of England it will get new sponsors and get out of this mess. If it retreats further into itself then it’s doomed.

Trouble is RL is riven with self interest. I only hope the SL clubs don’t decide to go it alone, they tried that in 1997 and it did more harm than good.

To be honest the more I think about the whole 3 groups thing, the more I think it's a good idea, from a fan's point of view.

You play your weekly rounds, the top 8 in SL go into one group to play off for the SL title. The bottom 4 from SL and top 4 from the Championship play off to be in SL the following season (ie whoever finishes in the top 4 spots of those 8 teams after this "playoff" are in SL next year.) Admittedly this leaves the bottom 8 in the Championship with nothing to play for, but even now theres a lot of teams with nothing to play for by that time of the season anyway.

From a fans point of view, so long as your team finishes in the top 2 groups, you have something to play for all year, you end up with more matches to go to (presumably generating more income for the clubs involved) and keeps things exciting.

I'm no businessman though, so I'm not sure how this would effect the Game's finances as a whole, which is obviously an important point to think about.

Edit: This all depends obviously on how many teams are in each league, 3x8's or however many you'd need to split it into.

If the whole bottom four are included in the play off it means that some kind of league format is will have to be used, which again is going to be to the benefit of the pro sides as it will make any 'giant killing' result worth less than it might have been a straight knock-out system.

Well I am going to be really selfish; this should safely see possibility of relegation chucked through the windows of Red Hall.

COYB.

It's going to be hard to sell season tickets to clubs in and around 8th, such as ourselves, if the 2x12 then 3x8 system comes in, as we won't know which teams we're playing in the second part of the season. I'd rather play the likes of St Helens and Leeds than Batley and Sheffield. In effect, you'd be buying a season ticket without knowing what your fixtures are for a part of the season.

Think under current favored proposal you play league you start season in home and away. So basically same as now but with only 12 teams instead of 14. Where it differs is you then go into a league to determine either league your in following year, in case of middle group of eight, albeit you only play each of other teams once, or play other seven top teams once to determine which four go into playoff series which is effectively just a pair of semis and a grand final. Bottom group of eight is only one with nothing to play for unless they bring in some form of p&r for bottom end of that group too.

Yes the bulk of the season is the home and away fixtures in the division of 12. I'm not a fan of playing each of the other 7 teams once. Some home games would generate more revenue than others depending on away supporters. I'd prefer a nice simple, promotion and relegation system.

Yeah, agree with that.

As I pointed out previously, you can't seriously have a league where some clubs are training full time and paying a near £2 million, playing against part-timers. It's rubbish and the fans will see it as rubbish. I'd rather have games against the likes of Wigan and Saints etc, where yes, we may well lose more than we win, but quality, competitive football like that is infinitely better than than games where we run up silly scores against lower level opposition.

I get your point but if we're in the bottom 4 of the top 12 maybe we're not competitive with Sts and Wigan and actually we're closer to the top group of clubs in the bottom 12. As it's a one off game against each of the top 4 from the bottom 12 who's to say how close those will be, assuming to get in the top 4 those clubs will have been playing well and are high on confidence while the bottom 4 will have been playing badly and low on confidence.

I don't think this is about structure. The clubs agreed the 12 team structure.

From what I've heard from there is a concerted move on the management of the RFL both from the SL and from within the RFL.

The key issue is obviously money from the failure to get a sponsor for the SL or RLWC and Lenaghan has also raised the issue of how money is distributed. Apparently there are voices regarding why the RFL are holding England's opening game in Wales and the double header semis are in London.

It doesn't surprise me that clubs are becoming disillusioned.

The state of finances in the game is dire. The RFL decided to ditch the Stobart deal with no backup. I have not noticed a Stobart truck with a SL picture for about 4 months. Surely this sponsorship deal would have been better continuing, until a new sponsor could be found. I remember Stevo saying on Back Chat that Stobard wouldn't re-skin their trucks, and i think the RFL hoped this would be true.

I think it's got to the point where even the big clubs (Wigan, Leeds, Saints) are worried about where the game will be in 5 years time.

If this downward trend continues, more home grown talent will be looking to leave for Aus, leaving the clubs with less local identity.

How sustainable is it having possibly 4 full time teams suddenly relegated to part time? It would be a complete disaster.

Guess that is still the great hope for expansion and projecting the image of a national game. Ok if fans fill Cardiff and Wembley but a disaster if there are 40/50,000 empty seats being broadcast.

I suspect D-Day for the game will come when the current Sky deal expires, but failure to secure any sponsorship - even van signage - is a black mark against the rfl

The top clubs will argue that being able hold onto their best players in the elite competition must take precedence over the costs of expansion, when the game's finances are so stretched.

This is only a guess on the basis of what's happened so far but I reckon Woods is on the brink.

Well, we were 9th this time round which puts us effectively in the bottom four had there been 12 clubs in the division and we've been competitive in most games. Our worst performance was probably against Hudds at magic weekend, but we also beat them at their place earlier in the season, which evens it out, I guess. Main point is that we were largely 'in' the games against the top sides and not really 'tonked' all season.

As previously pointed out though, being 'high on confidence' after going ok in a fixture list against semi-pro part-timers is no build up to playing fully professional teams. It [imight[/i happen, once in a while, in a one cup game, maybe [though very rarely does so in reality but in a [ileague situation[/i the chances of the Championship clubs beating, or more importantly gaining more points than the SL clubs, is around zero imo.

I think you also have to ask how are the SL clubs, who might be expected to finish in those lower positions, going to market season tickets? We might be playing Leeds and Wigan or it could be Leigh and Featherstone doesn't sound a very solid basis for selling tickets.

Knowing the RFL as we do, it wouldn't surprise me if they thought that issuing teams a handicap (opposition +"x" points) would solve this, this would be the worst scenario ever!

To be honest I feel the RFL are searching for some kind of 'holy Grail' which doesn't exist. There is no 'best' system for deciding who goes up or down; they all appear, in some way, defective. There might be a least worst system, and maybe, someday, we'll stumble across it...until then we'll flop about from licensing to P&R and back gain until we all forget, or maybe cease to care, where we started.

Maybe, to take another tack, there is too much micro management and the answer is to be hands off? Two divisions, straight P&R, no cap, have as many overseas players as you can get visas for and devil take the hindmost?

Wigan want to stick with 14 SL Clubs according to the Sky report at start of thread (and yesterdays Times). We would not argue against that would we?

At the moment even the elite cannot hold on to players, and there are not enough top clubs with secure finance to make a full "league". From the current SL there are question marks of one sort or other over the Bulls, London, Wakey, Castleford and HKR? Some hot seats at Red House whoever is sitting in them.

The 3 x 8 idea is a nonsense that comes about from looking at the issues the wrong way around. The focus should not be on bringing SL clubs down so Fev and Fax can compete with them but on how to build more full time clubs.

Right now there are issues with every team outwith the 8 who made the play offs. I think yourselves Widnes and Salford have the least to worry about. You would though be in greater peril if funding is cut. The 3 x 8 is a funding cut to full time clubs to fund part time clubs. That just seems wrong. A a professional sport we must support full time clubs and generate more income for the entire sport.

I would like to see a second french team in Super League, Catalans have been a success and I understand French TV would pay considerably more for a second team.

Other than that, though some people may not like it, SL should remain a closed league. It works for NFL & NRL and P&R did not work before. Ask yourself this, is there any club in England that is outwith SL that offers more to the greater game than Bradford Bulls? If there is not (as I believe) why would you introduce the very real chance of swapping them?

If fev Fax or Leigh are to get into SL we need to find a way to bring them up to that level not bring SL down to thiers. The only way to do that is generate more income.

The only real question in the short term is who to swap for more Frenchies? A club down south may be making that an easy answer.

if

The RFL saved your SL skins. A real thankyou is not given with the middle finger.

If only they could copy the model and exemplary way that Bradford Bulls have negotiated their way through this licence period they might start to climb the difficult ladder.

Quite an ammusing response from the Halifax chairman....

Even more reference of a RFL v Super League battle.

[urlhttp://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/sport/halifax-rlfc/halifax-rlfc-news/updated-steele-urges-rfl-to-convene-meeting-of-championship-clubs-1-6123625[/url

Very well written statement by 1eagu3 who clearly feel that the proposed league changes are not welcome...

[urlhttp://www.superleaguefans.com/rugby-league/2013/10/10/1eagu3-statement-regarding-postponed-league-restructuring-meeting.html[/url

Surely the proposed 2 into 3 idea cannot get the go ahead!

Sadly, for the Courier's logic "[ithe five or six clubs who are not as important as they think they are[/i" are the same five or six who are currently attracting more money into rugby than the rest of the clubs. They may, or may not, be 'the best run' but they are the most financially sound as things stand.