Jeez, you're like a cockstruck teenager when it comes to MR. Let it go man, let it go.


You're using the words 'club' and 'team' interchangeably, and they're not the same thing. You say you want the [iteam[/i that finishes top of the lower division to be given the chance at the higher division. So, do you want the [iclub[/i to be forced to take their place in the higher division with the [iteam[/i that got them there? If not, why not? If so, what do you think their chances would be in that higher division?


Another way of looking at it is to say that if you want the top division to be populated with the best clubs - and, surely, that's what the top division is meant to be about - then having a system where a better club can be replaced by a weaker one on the strength of one good and one bad season on the field seems massively flawed to me.


A closed shop that allowed Widnes in. Not a closed shop, in other words.


Is there another sport that promotes directly from a part-time division into its fully funded full-time top division?

I don't disagree with what you both want in an ideal world. I've said it on a number of occasions in that I can see lots of reasons why something wont work. I just can't provide any alternatives that I can't pick holes in either. I think it boils down to the fact that there is not an easy solution for everybody. I would like to see a really strong RL brand where Licensing is a thing of the past and P&R work. I just think that the gulf between Championship sides and even the worst SL sides are still too big for it to work. P&R will function as intended when there's parity to a certain degree between Championship sides and SL Sides. Don't mistake this as snobbery as I'm more inclining the notion towards parity between Clubs off the field than on it.

Other sports with P&R don't suffer the same off-field problems as RL does. This is because RL really is two-tier. It has a completely Pro top league and a Semi-Pro second league. It's a massive ask to turn a Club from semi to Pro status, especially when we are a sport not gifted with big finance. It works with football because there is four tiers. It's like asking a Blue Square Premiership side to compete in the Premiership. You don't even need to use such an extreme example. How about a Division two side (Fully Pro) playing in the Premiership? Championship sides struggle and they have a workable structure in place. The gulf between the top and the rest is too vast, at the moment, to make it workable. It will be returning to the way it used to be before licensing.

Like I said, I don't have any answers worthy of consideration, just a lot of potential problems. Like I said, I don't disagree with you in principal I just see the potential problems.

Indeed. The problem is not P&R [iper se[/i, but P&R between a part-time and a full-time competition when there is such a huge gulf between the two. Marshy1 - like all other advocates of P&R - tend to focus on the promoted team and ignore the relegated team, where the effects can be horrendous (Oldham, Workington, etc.). Do we really need to go back to that?

The fundamental problem we have is that there is not, at the moment, enough money in the game to fund more than a handful of full-time clubs, yet we need those clubs to be full-time or we run the risk of losing top players to the NRL and RU. It seems that rather than address the problem of lack of funds (SL still hasn't got a sponsor, remember), the RFL has chosen to tinker with the structure so it can be seen to be doing something. There just seems to be a complete lack of vision at the top levels of the game since Richard Lewis left.

Red John, its alright talking about vision, but the simple truth is that the bulk of the British public simply do not want rugby league. Is there a formula that will spread the appeal wider than the M62 corridor? All those years ago Eddie Waring and the BBC did their best but where are we now?

Is there a business plan anywhere that states what RL is actually working towards? If you don't know where you are going, how do you know if you've got there?

Red John...how much do I owe you.?
That is the best Psyco analysis I have seen on any forum, thank you.

But you got my drift.

I always wonder what the BBC would need to pay for the live rights to one game a week? The exposure that it could offer could help the SL bods attract proper title sponsors rather than a name of the side of a Transit.

That's the point I was making, and is the point Ian Lenegan has been making recently. The restructure of the league is of no interest to anyone outside of the M62 corridor, and the sport's top competition in the UK can't attract a sponsor. These should be the focus of the RFL, but instead it's indulging in a bit of navel gazing over P&R, which will, I think, be hugely detrimental to the sport (I strongly suspect we'll lose London next year, which puts us very firmly back in the 'Nuthen sport for Nuthen people' category).

It would be interesting to know where the RFL see the sport in 5, 10 and 20 years time, and what plans they have to get there.

That's a fair answer Butcher and one I do agree with.
It's very sad that RL has allowed itself to end up with a two tier system as you rightly describe.
The reason for this lands firmly at the point when Sky came on board which for most people meant the saving of RL. Personally I think apart from TV exposure it started the downfall.

Lenegan made some good points but ultimately I disagree with his main assertion. The number one priority for the RFL is to secure as much money as possible for TV broadcasting rights; this bankrolls the full-time professional era. The current deal with Sky expires in 2016. Whether or not because they were overstretched by the new Premier League rights contract, it is noticeable that Sky are cutting coverage elsewhere. There’s talk of Sky reducing its commitments with darts, for example, which has been a bit of a boon for them in recent years. It also lost out to Premier Sport for rights to the RL World Cup (if it even bid for them) and opted out of showing matches in the earlier rounds of the Challenge Cup. I doubt it was a coincidence that around this time talk of league restructure became serious — the RFL were spooked.

The new league restructure and resulting hype will kick-in around the time TV rights will come up for renegotiation. In effect, this is the RFL saying to Sky (or other suitors) ‘we’re still cool’ and ‘we can change’. So as for a long-term plan, it wouldn’t surprise me if there isn’t one. This is all about 2015.



We can argue about the relative merits of the full-time professional era but with hindsight it saved many clubs. Big clubs at that.

I have posted on earlier posts when the original restructuring plans were ' leaked' .
It's re arranging chairs on the Titanic
I fully agree with Chico's main point , Finance is the number one priority for the governing body .
for two seasons now we've had no money in from a Main Title sponsor ,
we've all but binned academy structure with DR
Now were basically losing 50-60 full time Playing roles by stripping two professional teams from SL
They won't increase the salary cap
they won't allow a marquee player nomination outside of the salary cap .

So the supposed aim of the restructuring is to improve the quality & competition
but this will not stop the issues the SL - RL currently experience

No more money coming into the comp
No increased revenue to attract more prestigeous players
no mechanism to halt the drain of our best SL players ( UK & Foreign ) back into the NRL - RU
A shortened league & PR will further curtail risk taking by putting academy lads into 1st team action
No emphasis on future academy spending for the next generation of SL players
just the same Sky money shared between the Haves... and a bone thrown to the have not's to join the table and /or starve trying

The more I hear and read about the proposed 2 leagues of 12 to be split into 3 leagues of 8, the more I like it. Suppose it was happening now at this stage of the season. The top league would comprise : Wigan, Huddersfield, Warrington, Leeds, Catalan, Hull KR, St Helen's and Hull. Presumably then, a top 5 play off.

The 2nd League would comprise : Wakefield, Bradford, Widnes, Castleford, Salford, London, Featherstone and Sheffield. The aim here, presumably is to get into the top two to be included in next years Super League of 12 teams. The remaining teams would be battling to get into the top 8 of their league to get into the 2nd division the following season.

This gives a chance for all teams to be promoted. Sounds like an exciting scheme and gives something for all clubs to aim for at the back end of the season.

It also gives a pathway for teams like Hemel and Oxford to ultimately achieve SuperLeague status and keeps existing top flight clubs fighting to retain their status.

Rugby League has always been an innovative sport. Long may it continue.

Sorry for being so positive about all of this.

I have to disagree.

The point is it's peace of mind for a player to sign a 2 year deal if the player knows the club have a franchise for the duration of his contract. If a player signs a 2 or 3 year deal with the threat of relegation he could find his contact is cancelled after 12 months.

I think under the current franchise system, it was more unlikely for a club to lose their license (at the end of the 3 year license period) compared to the threat under the new structure of a team actually being relegated every single year.

You don't have to be a risk assessor to realise that the franchise system gave players (especially those at lower standing clubs) more peace of mind.