If you took away relegation, 75% of the games would have no meaning or appeal, the top few teams would run up cricket scores. The outcome will be dire for one team but some of the better games to watch recently have been relegation battles.

Yet no-one can explain why this doesn’t happen in the NRL.

Or any other sport without P&R.

Because it's a mentality thing.

Take basketball. You are EXPECTED to score when you have the ball. When you fail to score in posession it's massive. This is obviously a completely different thing but it shows mentality in different sports is varied.

The other thing is that nearly all sports in this country have P and R, other countries didn't. The psychological thing of losing something you always had is quite influencing. That's why certain gameshows are tense to keep your money rather than gain a bigger prize. It plays on human mentality.

The lower divisions could be seen to be losing out on a chance they've always had - that's why it wrankles.

And even though I hate being down there it is definitely tense and entertaining just for the fear of LOSING something. There is less tension in failing to gain something.

And yes, it is still exciting to try and win something - its just there is no jeopardy if you don't.

What? Blow out scores and meaningless matches? This happens in the NRL every year.

I was just as interested in the top two clash last night as I have been with the relegation battle. You’re not a Leeds fan by chance are you?

Of course there are blow out scores and meaningless matches. There are under any system. P&R doesn’t guarantee no meaningless matches.

But the NRL is seen as both higher quality and more entertaining.
Just because the relegation battle is interesting doesn’t mean it’s good for the sport. It’s manifestly not.

As I said, RL fans consistently call for the sport to plan for the medium and long term. Yet insist on a system that ONLY allows for short term decision making and actively destabilises at least 20% of its professional clubs every season.

I am a Leeds fan. That’s pretty easy to check. A Leeds fan who has called for no P&R for at least 15 years. When Leeds were winning 3 in a row, winning the treble etc I was calling for no P&R. Leeds are probably the most well placed club to survive relegation.

I can only speak for myself but I'd have been utterly bored by the fare Leeds have served up this year, were it not for the threat of relegation. As it stands, the games matter. I can accept P&R may not be in the best interests of the game though I reckon it's one that was born to struggle whatever its systems, hence franchising might not achieve a right lot more.

Actually just about everything in this sentence is incorrect. P and R is good for sport as it forces teams to improve rather than coast along not winning anything every year but still getting paid.

What it is NOT good for, is business. Sport is NOT business, it is entertainment in all its forms. If you firmly believe that sport = business try going and standing outside M&S or Tesco and cheer them on. Sport needs financial support yes, but sport is sport and both ends of the table provide entertainment that Sky are prepared to pay money for.

Why doesn't the NRL have it? Because they never had it and therefore their sport is built around not having it - plus the lower league is financially supported better than over here and they are not treat like second class citizens. Thats back to the whole mentality thing I posted earlier.

I also put to you that supporting Leeds for so long, you've forgotten all that. That isn't meant to be a dig at you, but its a possible view of why you have this opinion.

As I seem to be talking more about basketball than RL here today, i should mention that I think that perception is based on people watching highlights, which are more likely to show scores than misses. A team having 50% successful shooting from the field (I dunno why they call it a field) is considered very good.

I was once watching season highlights of Icelandic handball (long story), and pointed out to my friend how ineffective the goalkeepers seemed to be - same sort of thing.

In many ways I enjoy watching games as discrete 80 minutes of entertainment. I’d happily watch a series of challenge matches, without worrying about there being a champion, I imagine.

I see the value of a league structure in providing an ongoing sporting narrative, as well as regular fixtures and income. I prefer having it, but could still enjoy games without it, I think.

sometimes, I think the ongoing narrative distracts us and takes us out of the moment. For example, in football, when they say ‘what does this fixture mean for these teams hopes of qualifying for the Champions League?’, i feel like they’re moving on before we’ve enjoyed what’s in front of us.

So I don’t really get the concept of a meaningless game or dead rubber. Surely each game itself should have meaning - its result matters in of itself. As much as sport matters at all.

But that seems to be a minority view and the sport needs to appeal to the broadest possible audience.

This one million percent.

You live beyond your means and this is what happened. I see nothing different to suggest Widnes would not be in a better position should we still be licensing. We need all the headlines we can get and relegation gets that. We are seeing teams starting up and entering in the bottom structure and growing nicely.

Him is obviously $h!tting himself coz Leeds are in the poop.

And it's Sinfield who has degraded your club.