Did anyone see the part about the Top 8 entering at the 5th Round of the CC?

Will the top 8 be decided by then? 23 rounds plus round 4 of the cup is near as damn it 6 months, get you to August. I thought the 5th round was June/July?

I think it means for the next seasons Challenge Cup.

I think it will be interesting to see it in practice and it might make a lot more sense when the teams are out there. Branding is the key here;

The RFL talked about the Super League brand in the policy document (which I doubt many people on here have read)


This is interesting and poses the question of how the RFL are going to integrate a new league into the SL brand. Will there be a new brand, Super League Two? Or will they retain the Championship as something football fans will recognise?

What's also interesting is how clubs react to the new structure on the pitch. That's where it often is the case, because players know how to get the new system to work to their advantage. With a simpler Top 4 play off, I think accumulating points will become much more important in the Super League Play Offs, but not so much towards Rd 23 for a club in, say, 11th and certain to be in the Qualifiers. I'll be interested to see also how clubs like London react to the changes.

What cannot be argued is that the jeopardy of the new system is favourable to RL. I think it will be simpler in practice and the idea of a Top 4, straight knockout Final 4, to use an American term, will be epic. It's what the game has definitely been missing over the past 5-6 years, sudden death, elimination games in the playoffs. For the top clubs, it certainly benefits. It also creates bigger games at that end of the season. We've been bored senseless with Widnes vs Wigan on the TV at Round 26 simply because they have to play as it has an effect on them finishing 4th or 5th (which doesn't really matter anyway). [i(Widnes vs Wigan was actually super this year)[/i

I think fans of the Top Clubs, undoubtedly want to see the best teams face up at the end of the season. We'll have another Hull Derby or another Huddersfield vs Leeds and it'll add excitement for the fan. For the Qualifiers, it'll mean more competitive fixtures, at the end of the season. Maybe not initially, as Championship clubs reacclimatise to playing professional outfits. But lets not forget, two of SL clubs will be part of the new Championship. Castleford, during their Championship title campaign had an average of over 5,000. If we can get clubs having something to play for in the Championship, it could do wonders for Second Tier RL.

Some issues are raised, however;

1. How are we going to pay for this? We currently have no more money coming in and are we relying on hypothetical increased interest from the World Cup? If we can negotiate a proper television deal then we can fund this. Currently I fear their isn't enough money for this. Funnily enough, the RFL said;



So will it be a situation of trickle down competitiveness? Starting with one or two teams being competitive and hoping through increased gate money, bigger games and more income flowing through the sport generally, they can garner more competitive clubs? First we'll start with Featherstone and Sheffield being more competitive, then Halifax and so on.

2. What will happen to the Magic Weekend? The extra fixture replaced the weird "sometimes we play you twice, sometimes it's three times" fixture method we used to use to get the games up to 27. Now we have more games, 29 if my maths is correct and we have no need for the filler. Nevertheless, does this mean we should give up on a popular and entertaining weekend? Here are some options for the Magic Event;

a) Play it at Round 23 and have everyone play each other with First Stage places up for grabs. Seed it so 1st plays 2nd, 3rd plays 4th, and so on. Hopefully, this would have excellent games with a lot to play for, and all the games would be competitive.

b) Play it with the Quarter Finals of the Cup and potentially, have 4 superb games in one day.

c) Play it late on after the split. Have it as 8 games over 2 days.

Lots of questions, but these will be answered over the next two years.

So clubs will now play a 30 game season rather than a 27 game regular season. Me thinks the sweetener that has turned the likes of Pearson is extra games and probably a higher SL grant.

Was initially undecided but the more I read on the pros and cons and seeing all the arguments offered I'm in the FOR camp.

The intial 12 team 2 league structure will see people going tooth and nail to be in certain positions and avoiding others.
The spilt will in theory rid us of blow out scores and give the higher lower league teams realistic indications of were they are playing the lower end of SL, also scope for heavier lower league investment.

I don't buy the loading teams full of journeymen argument either, if you're good enough you're old enough, franchising hasn't exactly made us any better on the international front either, if anything this new structure gives more options to the young guys without having to find another job in the semi professional set up, more teams will be able to go fully pro, slowly but surely.

Reducing dead rubbers in the round of 22 games.

Middle Tier Round 2
SL Team A finish joint fourth on 9 points
SL Team B finish joint fourth on 9 points

Give fourth place to the team who finished highest in the first round of games.

If one of the tied teams is from the Championship settle fourth by another method relevant to the second stage only.

That is to operate on a one season delay. The top 8 from 2014 will enter the cup at round 5 in 2015. The top 8 from 2015 will enter at round 5 in 2016 and so on.

It has not been mentioned whether the other four top 12 teams would enter at round 4 as now or at round 3, or whether the teams in the second tier of 12 would enter at round 3 as the championship teams do or at round 4 as the SL teams do.

The only major issue I see with the new system is the resetting of points after the split for the middle tier.

Magic Super Beetle has suggested that maybe more advantageous home ties for the higher placed teams could balance this out. Or maybe the highest placed SL1 team getting to play all the championship clubs first. So giving them the advantage of racking up points against the 'easier' sides.

I still think a 9th placed team would be extremely unlucky to get relegated. I just can't forsee it, especially given they will be likely spending £1.5 - £1.8 million compared to those spending £900k tops.

Well I know SL is not very good at fairness but the only way the kiddle tier can work is by zeroing the points and just to pee you off a little more, the Champ sides will get 4 home games

*middle

Thats just it though, if they lose to 3 othe Sl sides and at least one championship one, they deserve to go down. But as you say, given that a team in 9th (think it was HullKR last year) will be a hald decent side, they're very unlikely to lose to evry team that they came above in the SL and a championship side as well.
The system is quite good as for a championship club to get promoted, they dont just have to be consistantly good in their league, they Have to beat SL opposition as well.

Don't forget, in the middle tier 4 v 5 playoff for the fourth promotion spot. To be automatically relegated you'd need to finish below not one but at least two champ teams.

The second twelve should, if they can afford operate with the same salary cap as the first twelve otherwise it's a stacked competition. Say for instance Batley get a beneafactor that enables them to buy far better players and can easily compete salary wise with Leeds why should they have to operate with a lower cap.

If the whole of the second 12 could then this would be fair enough, but as it stands the competition is going to be stacked somewhere. With the amount of money coming in now it just isn't going to work how you suggest.

What about quota rules, how will they work?

then what's the point in them being in it?

Because people would complain if there were 9 teams in "the playoffs"?

I agree 9th falls into the awkward category of not good enough for the playoffs but probably too good for relegation. In an ideal world 1 - 8 would continue to compete and 11 and 12 have a playoff with the championship clubs.

Unfortunately that would leave 9 and 10 only playing 23 games which has been deemed not enough financially.

Seems like an inherent flaw in the system. If the 9th and 10th teams are going to be comfortably good enough to stay up, then their games are likely to be blowouts, almost certainly against the 3rd and 4th placed sides.

I think every system will have flaws, no doubt, but then the reality is, if a club is looking for promotion they're going to need to be able to play teams far better than 9th, so they might as well test themselves. This isn't of benefit to the team finished 9th - but then reward those who finish in the top half of the table!

This makes interesting reading on why the Swiss ditched the system the RFL thinks will save the game www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/foot ... ds-1524036 The most concerning part is this Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change

This makes interesting reading on why the Swiss ditched the system the RFL thinks will save the game www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/foot ... ds-1524036 The most concerning part is this Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change

A bbc article in far more depth giving the pros and cons www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313899 This quote is very telling From the 10th game the pressure began [to be involved in the top eight and this pressure made the clubs really careless - signing players, changing the coach and taking financial risks. Apart from the two or three big clubs, it was not sustainable And another at the end, the difference between the teams in the 'championship' league and the teams from the second division was too big, so it wasn't interesting at all. There are also comments about how the smaller 2nd division clubs liked being in the promotion dogfight, because then they knew they would not be relegated. However at the same time they weren't interested in getting promoted due to their financial structure and lack of on pitch playing quality. Wonder how that will go down with RL fans from the likes of fax, fev and Leigh if they achieve promotion, but then find their club owners turn it down.

A bbc article in far more depth giving the pros and cons www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313899 This quote is very telling From the 10th game the pressure began [to be involved in the top eight and this pressure made the clubs really careless - signing players, changing the coach and taking financial risks. Apart from the two or three big clubs, it was not sustainable And another at the end, the difference between the teams in the 'championship' league and the teams from the second division was too big, so it wasn't interesting at all. There are also comments about how the smaller 2nd division clubs liked being in the promotion dogfight, because then they knew they would not be relegated. However at the same time they weren't interested in getting promoted due to their financial structure and lack of on pitch playing quality. Wonder how that will go down with RL fans from the likes of fax, fev and Leigh if they achieve promotion, but then find their club owners turn it down.

Quote ="The Chair Maker"This makes interesting reading on why the Swiss ditched the system the RFL thinks will save the game www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/foot ... ds-1524036 The most concerning part is this Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change'" The system as so bad they used it for 15 years.

Quote ="The Chair Maker"This makes interesting reading on why the Swiss ditched the system the RFL thinks will save the game www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/foot ... ds-1524036 The most concerning part is this Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change'" The system as so bad they used it for 15 years.

Thats what I was thinking fevfan

We had licensing for 7 and automatic one up one down for 12. Key FACTS from that is sponsors won't interested and fans stopped been interested which is what I fear will happen here.