Think about it. Under a 3-year licencing system, the Championship club would be facing a team at the bottom of Super League that has had 3 years to develop, and not just one like Widnes. So, it may not be as easy as you may think.

Under P&R, then the club you face wouldn't be in a position to grow slowly and experiment with young players and inexperienced coaches. They would have to be much better in order to avoid the bottom, even if they inevitably don't. So, you probably wouldn't be facing a Widnes side that is as poor as it is now.



But why is that better than the team that finishes bottom of Super League just having to accept their fate, while two evenly matched teams battle it out, in a culmination of the Championship season, in order to win the right to replace them?

It seems a fairer way of doing things to me, while guaranteeing that Super League will get fresh blood.

The only problem that I see is that, under the licence system, this could be a death sentence for some Championship clubs, because they will be locked in there for 3 years. You can see what that did to the Crusaders. That's why Widnes got the licence. Under a licence system, that makes sense, but the major flaw in that situation is there for all to see. So, a return to annual P&R would have to happen, in order to make any of this feasible for most, if not all, Championship clubs.

Like you say, it is unlikely that there will be an about face by the RFL anytime soon, and licencing will remain anyway.

I understand your points and it Ashame not more money in the game.I love promotion and relegation as fun end of the season.But due to a big gulf in salary cap of £300,000 and over 1.2 million to 1.8 million makes it difficult.I am hoping at my club next season we spend more on players and get rid of the garbage.Adjustment is big and if was relegation we be straight back down.We was poor in the Championship, but not all players want to be fulltime,as some fulltime are not so better off if had another job.

NOt for the bottom teams they aren't. As Tomkins said last week, they play competitively for 20 minutes or so but if they go a couple of tried behind to one of the top teams they turn it in, because they know there's no danger of relegation so why pull your tripes out? The bottom of Super League is a joke comp. The lack of intensity week by week is why our top players are unable to beat Australia. We need some way to motivate the bottom teams and nothing motivates a team like fear. That is what all sport is about. Hopes and fears. It's also why crowds turn out. When Wigan's results became predictable in the late eighties, early nineties, despite their success their crowds actually diminished.
The classic example of what promotion and relegation can do in terms of international sport is English cricket. Under the old County Championship when by July most players were just going through the motions we were the world's easybeats. Now after the introduction of P&R we are challengers for the no 1 Test team spot.

P&R is not the reason for the England cricket team doing well. Central contracts and a change in coaching is the reason.

If not money then what other resources are you talking about ?

The revival in England cricket came after the introduction of P & R into the County Championship - it's pressure and intensity that builds international players, not comfort zones. The Aussies don't P&R that's true, but they do have the incentive of the State of Origin team. The money they can make playing SOO must drive them to excel.