In what way are London a bigger club than Halifax, Featherstone, Leigh? Why are people teary eyed about them? We all want RL in London to succeed, but them getting hammered every week and moving ground every couple of years means they havn't.

Leigh had a nightmare season in our only SL season in 2005, for lots of reasons. We averaged 4600 that year. Fax have averaged over 7k in SL seasons and Fev are a club that has consistantly improved every year, they improve on the pitch and off.

What do London bring exactly? Apart from being in London? Is that it? Londons very existence in our premier RL competition is that they will play at a ground within the M25?

Maybe these 'millionaires' should make sure their money is invested well on a good youth development system, value for money players and good coaching.

When people invest in business, there's always a risk it can fail, why do SL owners and chairmen deserve a saftey net at the expense of quality competition?

Basically you saying they're happy to bankroll a losing club just as long as they aren't relegated. That's pretty-much what's wrong with the current SL anyway!

Well I'm all for it - I want to read another million pages of stats from William Eve in 2015

What is the goal? If it is to have a competitive top flight then forget relegation. Just have clubs in it that can guarantee max salary cap spending. Relegation was a disaster for most clubs pre licensing, my club has only just started to bare the fruits of jnr development programmes after 7 years, get relegated and we can kiss all that goodbye again. It is shortsighted and will see the game contract once again. Flat cappers must be wetting themselves.

Could someone direct me to where it says the two teams who finish bottom in 2014 will be relegated?

Just wait until either Wigan, Leeds, Saints or Hull FC look like they're going to go down, they'll soon change it back, i mean they did last time didn't they?

Brian Carneys shares his disappointment here :- www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... 6/8818567/ "But don't let the excitement of next year when two are going to be relegated fool you into thinking we've got a long-term sustainable plan." I think he has got that just about right.

Brian Carneys shares his disappointment here :- www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... 6/8818567/ "But don't let the excitement of next year when two are going to be relegated fool you into thinking we've got a long-term sustainable plan." I think he has got that just about right.

I'm pretty sure that everyone is going in with the intention of doing what is best for themselves and then what is best for RL.

However in the end it's about who holds the power and who holds the money and what do they want out of it?

Neither P&R or licencing are the golden shot that will solve RL's problems.
RL's problems are based on money and the lack of it in comparison to other markets that we compete with. Getting more money will not come from either P&R or Licencing. We need to grow our market. How this is done with less teams in the elite competition is a bit of an economic puzzler.

I don't think there are any easy answers to gaining more income, just hard work, by mainly the clubs to grow their income and supporter base.

Really? Have you watched any CC1 (not Champ 2) this year? It has been a thriving and exciting competition, where all teams have been reasonably competitive. Clubs have been able to join the competition without facing beltings week after week.

Last year four teams were promoted, because Championship teams whinged that they did not have a proper fixture list. Now they are going to potentially dump five clubs back down without any thought for the consequences to CC1 because it suits the agenda of the same clubs who whinged 12 months ago.

Still that's ok because you only want to see 24 clubs thrive (one of which is presumably your's)

That depends on how the new set up is financed. If it's true about the parachute payments, that may well not be the case.

Also as far as Hull KR are concerned, they'd still be seeing the fruits of their investment and junior development had P&R been in place, because they've never finished bottom of SL. That suggests to me that with the right sort of financial management, clubs can prosper regardless without taking away vital healthy competition.

Only 1 other team has to worry anyway, seen as the other teams have refused to change their stance on the Bulls only getting half their Sky money next season, you can pretty much guarantee we'll be relegated due to being massively hamstrung. Hardly a level playing field is it?!

Sort of curled up at the edges?

Iconic curled-up-at-edges level playing field ?

They'd only be able to do that if they could carry on losing £500k a year. How is that "prospering"?