The five teams you mentioned are still a minority of the 12 teams in SL, and wouldn’t win a majority vote, therefore, some of the so called bigger clubs must be voting against any change at this time. I would imagine most RL fans believe whatever decisions are made, it’s the CEOs /Chairmen of the top six clubs who make the real decisions.

The up to 14/down to 10 proposal was inherently a bad idea so it's no surprise if some of the larger SL clubs voted against it. Anyone with a brain would understand very few fans wanted a 10 team league.

The league structure is not the problem with the game. It's amazing that people still think tinkering with this will fix up the real problems the sport faces. If anything yet another change just further reinforces the impression of drift and malaise some people think the game has.


This however....

What complete BS. Accusing other people of self interest because a very bad proposal which would have benefited your club more than almost any other didn't go through. Unbelievable.
And please stop using the "game is dead" crap too. It's lazy and tedious in the extreme.

These sort of suggestions are just wish lists with no regards to the commercial realities.

Inventing a league that would see the season ending pretty quickly won't suit SKY

Inventing some other comp to fill the gap won't suit SKY

avoiding loop fixtures that often have produced massive gates and great TV like Leeds and Bradford clashes won't suit SKY

Don't some people realise if you don't provide what SKY want then that will be that for the game.

Same blind nonsense we had when people were inventing a cross atlantic league that wouldn't get tv coverage from here of from North America.

McManus noted if at least 9 top English clubs were not in it SKY would pull the plug.

Had no effect, the dreams still flowed thick and fast.............. And now they are back,,,,,,

Is having 3 league games against each of the other clubs any better than "loop" fixtures"
It would be a "balanced" fixture program of sorts but, playing every other club a MINIMUM of 3 times a season (plus cup games and play offs) doesn't really improve things.

Having a 14 club top flight would do though



As Sky keeps reducing their investment, how long before the 10 club top flight becomes 8.

The "soft sell" and pretense that the 2nd tire will still be Super League shouldn't fool anyone but, already, plenty seem happy with the Championship "re branding".
How can SL 2 have any level of serious funding ?
The main reason for change is to allow SL 1 to maintain a similar level of funding for a reduced number of clubs in the league.

This purist idea that clubs must only play each other twice is ridiculous. It totally ignores the commercial realities.

So Lenegan & co, say to SKY [i"we are only playing each other twice, take it or leave it"[/i so SKY says "We will leave it" and the game collapses.



So Lenegan says "we will invent some other competition to fill July and August, (and in that competition like a 9's clubs still end up playing each other a third time or more

)

Season 2003

Leeds.v.Bradford 71,000
Bradford.v.Leeds 22,000
Leeds.v.Bradford 23,000
Bradford,v,Leeds 21,000
Bradford.v.Leeds 20,000 It's the entertainment business, if we want "sport" try the Pennine league.

Oh brilliant



Split the already reduced TV money 14 ways and you will end up with clubs who can't compete, with a return of clubs who will only manage to get a few wins against each other, Leigh can't win a game, will London compete, can TO compete will Fev compete? No chance.

SKY won't want these clubs on Television they get far bigger returns and we get far bigger crowds with Loop fixtures as you can see from the Leeds,v,Bradford stats.

Late in a season an RL punter thinks "shall I watch Saints and Wigan, they have been on TV twice before playing each other"...."nah I won't bother!"

It's not that people even think like that, they may not have seen the two other games. Don't people get that this is about audiences and money.....

Remember the godawful Wakefield Trinity side of 2015? Did people think "[iOoooh Wakey are playing wire for the first time this year. I must watch that [/i

Result Warrington 80 Wakefield 0........... That's your 14 club disaster........

I remember one season where London stuck 70+ twice on widnes and again once on wakey....there was the legendary shirt burning incident when we stuck that number on Warrington when we were pastel......the sky didn't fall in. It happens....
If you can't survive on 8% less tv money you've no place in soooooooper keeeeeeeeeeague.

If it is about attendances and money then just build a SL based on this best attendances and richest clubs. So Salford would be out. No place for London no fans or Bradford no money. These factors tend to determine leaguer position anyway. Sport should give everyone opportunity that is what it should be about the biggest stories are about surprise successes. Will we have a story like Brentford beating Arsenal?

This

I think 3 'commercially attractive' games a year is ok, but 4 is overkill and there is a risk of further Cup and Playoff games against the same team. But that is of course luck of the draw, the Hull Derby hasn't been played in the Cup in the SL era and we've only had it as a playoff tie once and that was 11 years ago.

I do think they have overkilled the derbys at the Magic Weekend, this years strategy of teams expected to be in a similar position in the table seems to be a good one. Only Rovers-Leigh appears a mismatch so far and that's because Rovers have exceeded expectations, its in the dead last thing on Sunday slot anyway.

The game needs Bradford back in SL, they are now improving a bit on the field and Odsal is at least having a bit of a tidy up. No other club will instantly bring in that many fans and there is loads of history for the media to bring up in their TV coverage.

I'm confused by your post.
You firstly say that playing each side 3 times a season isn't too bad and then follow by saying they "overkilled the derby games" by having them at Magic.

Remembering that there is the cup and play offs, clubs will meet a MINIMUM of 3 times in the 10 club league and this could easily ramp up to 5 or 6 by the end of the season.

The old saying about too much of a good thing springs to mind.

There seems to be the same thought processes going on as there was for the contrived MPG every season.

It was the rarity of the first MPG that made it special.

If FC played Rovers every few weeks, the derby would lose some of it's appeal.

For me, the problem isn't with the number of clubs in the top flight, in fact, it would benefit from having 14 clubs. It is the lack of cash in the game and reducing to 10 clubs isnt going to add a penny to the money coming into the game.

Also, with 2 French clubs in the top flight, there will be another game without any away fans, further reducing clubs' income, especially if a club cops 2 home fixtures against either or both of the French sides.

Those that don't like repeat fixtures are happy to speak loudly about it, but as the crowds in the grounds show, a second home game against a big team draws more than the first home game against a small team.

So even though the repeat fixtures may see lower crowds, they are more attractive to club owners.