On paper it looks fine, in reality it wont change anything in the game. It dangles the carrot of promotion and relegation but severely restricts the chances of it happening. It will produce a top tier competition that will become almost shut-off from everyone else. Like now but more so. It will keep lower teams games interesting in so much as they have a risk factor even though it's small.

Let's say for example that Salford have a stinking season next year and finish bottom at the halfway stage. They then get put in a group with a few teams that operate on nearly half the cap of their SL rivals. You could have the likes of Locke, Chase and Hanson wiping the floor with part-timers. Hardly a crowd draw for either team. If by some miracle a Championship team gets promoted, they've basically worked their backsides off to form the whipping-boys group for the next season. Lower teams and promoted teams can't get the intensity of games brought by the top tier and can never break in the longer it goes on for.

I'm not saying that what we have now is right but I just can't see how compartmentalizing the leagues address the real problem in RL and that's the gap between rich and poor. Between the top of SL and the bottom of the Championship.

I really can't believe that so many people, mostly on Facebook & Twitter, are struggling to understand something so simple. If nothing else, the announcement of this new structure has shown that the education system in this country is a joke and that Britain really is getting dumber, year on year.

Roll on 2015, I can't wait personally.

I like it, it now restores hope to the middle-order, whilst giving SL sides worthy of their place a chance to prove it (no slackers).

League 1's, 11 h & a = 22 games? Thats a bit of a mystery and I don't get that, surely it should be 26 games, 13 home and away?

Really not keen on the system as a whole, and one of the main reasons is the scrapping of the play-off system that has on the whole, been successful since 1998.

And by that I mean the team that finishes top of the pile being given the greatest advantage. 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 is shocking system. You really could have a scenario now when a team finishes a mile in front of the rest, loses one game to team 4 and that's it, season over. The teams that finish 1 and 2 deserve their 'second chance' game IMO.

The old top 5 system was perfect, in that it awarded each of the 5 teams slightly less of an advantage as you went down from 1-5. With not that much tweaking they could have done something similar.

1 v 2 (winner to GF)
3 v 4 (loser out)
Loser of 1 v 2 v Winner of 3 v 4

Surely that's better???

I pretty much get it now after a few times of rolling through the print but on first hearing it, it is quite a lot to take in and understand and the fact that many posters on here, whom i assume are ardent RL fans for the very fact they do post, are still scratching their heads at it all says a lot.

I do not relish trying to explain the system time and time again to friends and colleagues who are casual fans and have a passing interest in the game.

completely agree.

12 teams 1 up 1 down would have been the best way to go IMO.

Time will tell on this new system, we will have to see, but i feel there are plenty of holes to pick at already and more will present themselves as the season unfolds.

At the risk of sounding rather dumb. Can someone please explain the 7 game mini league.
In particular the home/away fixture structure.
Is it explained somewhere and I have just failed to read it?
Thanks.

Just heard on the radio it's increasing to five for the championship clubs. Is it still seven for the SL clubs?

It's in there somewhere just not that clear. I read it as the strongest teams, placed 1 and 2 in championship get four home games as do the 9 and 10 placed SL teams the 3 and 4 in championship and 11 and 12 in SL get 3 home and 4 away games. Thus there is at least an incentive at back end of SL season and some incentive not to just scrape into the top four of championship.

Not sure whether same applies to bottom 8 games.

How a club sells a season ticket on that basis is another matter?

I don't like the 4v5 play-off in the middle 8 division.

It seems as if a Championship does finish above a Super League club in the seven fixtures. They could still lose out via the play-off game. If it wasn't hard enough already.

I really like the sound of it! Top teams really want to make sure they have as much points as possible ready for the top 8 split when they have to face each other again. Some teams will be fighting just to get into the 8 to avoid chance of relegation! One problem though. Let's say a team is guaranteed a top 4 place after the split will they rest players for preparation for semis? Will other teams be affected by the resting of players? For example league position. I would be screwing if to reach the top 4 I needed the team who rest players to win to get in there. Wouldn't be right fair. Apart from that Roll on 2015

Any news on salary caps and overseas allowances yet?

There needs to be more of a reward for finishing top of the SL

I can see sides sitting back once they are guaranteed a top four spot.

The only incentive for coming top is a home draw.

We may see teams tactically deciding which position to finish in. This is something that has bedevilled the current top 8 system where sides basically coast into the playoffs.

I think it's alright, better than straight P&R anyway.

I don't like the name "Million Pound Game". It makes the sport sound incredibly small time. A million pounds isn't that much in professional sport. Just call it the Super League Decider or something more professional.

The increase in funding will be key for the top Championship clubs.

I like the new League 1 Cup, it gives those clubs something else to aim for and brings another dimension into that league.

I'm 50/50 on the changes to the Challenge Cup, I'd prefer the top clubs to play more Cup games not fewer. But I'll give it time to see how it works.

I'd prefer a top 5/6 playoff system to the 1v4, 2v3.


Re the discussion on licensing, I don't think licensing failed as such. I think it wasn't implemented as it should have been and it was unlucky to come in just at the same time the global economy crashed. Under any system RL would have struggled to increase/maintain crowds & revenue in this period.
I think it needed to be at least 5 year (rather than 3) licences, with in-depth gradings/reviews of every aspect of a club alongside targets for each aspect of each club to be met by the next licence round.
I also think it was a big mistake to add 2 teams to the league. If it had been 12 teams, with a top 6 playoff, I think it would have worked a lot better.

The Championship salary cap will be £1m, I didn't see SL's mentioned but I'd guess it'll stay roughly the same at £1.6m/£1.8m.