I'm not sure about this whole issue. I'm sort of caught between two opinions. There clearly isn't enough talent to justify 14 teams, but Sky wouldn't wear a curtailed format I feel. It's a tricky one.

This !!! (including the P & R)but with London getting the chop and only the top 3 in SL1 making the playoffs, the team finishes top goes straight to Old Trafford with 2nd and 3rd playing (2nd place team gets home advantage)

You're kidding yourselves if you think a 10 team league is viable. How will clubs manage with only 9 home games and fewer playoff games? Most clubs are losing money as it is. And let's not pretend it would be a 2 tier SL, it wouldn't. It would be a 10 team SL and a 10 team 2nd Division/NL1/Championship just with 4 of the worst SL teams in it.

14 teams is the way forward for now, it provides a reasonable number of games without repeat fixtures and restricting the pathways for and money spent on young players by reducing the number of clubs is not the way to increase the quality of players in the league.

Yip, 27 games equals 9 at home................. granted it would be 13 and a Magic weekend.

I would expect you to be highly critical of the RFL in the farcial way they have messed about with Championship 1 then, currently only 8 teams , how will they manage?

I agree to a point, it should have been sorted earlier and I would prefer there to be a minimum of 12 teams in a league. Instead of a 14 team Championship and 10 team C1 I'd have gone with 12 in each. But you also can't directly compare a semi-pro league to a fully pro league.

As long as we're alright Jack, they're doing the right thing. Nothing to see here

True, its much easier for full time teams

Exactly, I don't understand how people can't see this - nobody would benefit in the long term.

Let's just go back to a 30 odd team single division, and balls to it.

I'd like to see a four team Superleague, with each team playing the others atleast eight times. That would be good.