RFL consider P+R changes

(btw, I can only assume the person who wrote that story for the BBC didn't actually read the Watkins Report)

RFL report rlhererl (no mention of (re)introducing promotion and relegation between the the three tiers of the game)

Watkins Report itself rlhererl [and a search of the pdf returns no results for "promotion and relegation"]

However, it's recommendations do include

Quote: promotion and relegation "

Recommendation 9

The current distribution of RFL profits to members is also an issue that is in need of review. At present, 60
per cent of profit is directed to members in the Super League, 30 per cent to members in the Championships
and 10 per cent to the Community Game. This split was in part determined by recognition of the
contribution Super League clubs made in releasing players for international duties, which is now addressed
through a separate financial mechanism. It is therefore now appropriate to amend this split to ensure a more
even distribution of profits, recognising the valuable contribution all parts of the game play in its overall
success, and ensuring that each tier of the sport has a vested interest in the financial performance of the
RFL. The payment of an equal share of profit to each RFL professional club member would be appropriate.'"

There was also this, in terms of the responses from 'stakeholders' in the game

Quote: promotion and relegation "A number of clubs also queried whether the
competition could support 14 clubs, and believed that further discussion was required on the optimum
number of teams in the Super League.
A number of clubs raised the issue of the commercial performance of the sport.¨There was a consistent
belief that the sport (both centrally and at club level) had not extracted maximum value for its commercial
properties.¨Many respondents acknowledged that this under-performance was a combination of a
number of factors; however it should be a priority of the RFL Board and member clubs to improve
significantly the amount of revenue flowing into the sport.¨Further, almost all clubs were in support of
benchmarking their own financial performance.¨However a number of clubs also stated that they lacked
su¤cient trust in their fellow clubs in order to perform this benchmarking exercise.¨There was also a
view that there needed to be a more collective approach (particularly to issues of common need, such as
collective purchasing).
¨
This issue of trust between clubs and between sections of the game was highlighted by a number
of respondents.¨These respondents believed that at various tiers in the game there was an “us and
them” relationship (particularly between the Super League and Championships clubs). There was
a clear recognition that the Super League is the “shop window” of the sport and that it needed the
appropriate level of resource to flourish and succeed visibly. There was, however, a concern that the
Championships¨also needed nurturing, yet was in a position of being beholden to SLE and therefore
utterly dependent upon the discretion of the Super League clubs. It was felt both within Super League
and Championships respondents that the game overall would benefit from a more positive relationship
between the two sections of the professional game and consideration should be given to how this could
best be created. While there was recognition of the need for a significant amount of self determination for
SLE, this could not be totally unfettered from the overarching authority of the RFL which is responsible for
ensuring that the whole game is as strong as it can be.'"