Darryl Powell at Tigers firmly in the same camp as Tony Smith here :- www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... coach.html

Darryl Powell at Tigers firmly in the same camp as Tony Smith here :- www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... coach.html

I thought it was a joke when I first read it, then nearly fell off my chair when I realised they were serious!

We think the sl is screwed at the moment, this will knock in the final nails!

I would encourage RL to come anywhere he wanted as long as it was a long way from our sport

While I still think the proposed split season system is too complicated, the difficulty is that there are also major flaws with the alternatives.
Licensing as a concept that gives us stability, while also allowing poorly run SL clubs to fail and well-run Championship clubs to progress is a busted flush. The opportunity to 'stick with it' has gone. What it would now mean now is a clear and unambiguous split between the pro and semi-pro games, with no formal mechanism for moving between them. There is a case for that - but it would be new. Or being honest and self-aware about it would be, at least.
P&R only work if you narrow the gap between the divisions - allowing the Championship to go 3 quarters pro or something. Cutting SL by just 2 doesn't free up enough cash to make much difference, even assuming the top flight clubs would pass it to the second tier, rather than divvy it amongst themselves.
I'm not a huge fan of 2x12 and 3x8, but I think the RFL are being more honest and/or intelligent than some of its critics.

Somebody please tell me how the 2 x 12 leagues will be funded ?

They won't we will just see inequity in funding and thumpings on the field. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

I'd rather see a fair licensing system.

12 team SL, to be in it you have to guarantee you can spend full cap and x amount on off field and jnr operations. If you go into administration you lose your license. If you fail to meet the criteria you lose your license.

If a team loses its license any existing or new club can bid for the license as long as they met the criteria financially and infrastructure. Rfl will then choose the best bid to replace the failed club.

You won't get 12 teams then.

Tried and failed, a few details aside - they didn't have the stomach for the hard decisions it requires. And in fairness, hard decisions are, y'know... hard.
And a club's fate getting decided in the offices of KPMG or whoever - better than the improvised election nonsense we got, but it hardly stirs the blood.
I'd happily accept an NRL type model, or (together with greater re-distribution of Sky money) a return of P&R. If we can't quite bring ourselves to bite those bullets, I could live with this split season thing. Licensing and assessments - boring, pointless and discredited, the worst possible option IMO.

I'd guess that only 5/6 clubs (if that) spend up to the cap though.

I agree with your sentiments though, FAIR licensing seems to be the best option.

i'd have kept a 14 team sl, but with 1 team up n 1 team down every season. why does the rl have to complicate everything.
sl needs a higher salary cap or ALL our best players will go and earn big bucks in oz leaving us with a sub standard comp. yes it will give up and coming players a chance but when they get to the right standard they will go to nrl like those before them.
if the standard of sl drops the game will be less attractive to potential investors and we may have to go back to part time players. and will sky pay good money for a lesser product. i think not
the rl already sells our game well short of its value and our national advertising of big games is non existent.
i dont buy that 27 games + the cup is too many games. top nrl players will play 24 league games, 3 soo + presidents cup etc. so they arent playing that many games fewer then ours, and only clubs that progress in the cup will play a few more anyway
the game needs greater sponsorship money coming in and better promotion of the product

I hope that whatever structure changes is decided that the franchise test will still be retained inc. finance and ground condition etc.

I do believe that promotion and relegation should be found a place in the future structure but I would hate to see an annual up and down situation of basically the same clubs. One team up and one team down should I feel be a maximum but there must be some protection for the teams that one year simply would not give (and quite possibly with Administration being the result). Having said that I dare say that if I supported a team in the Championships I would probably accept any opportunity to get into Superleague!!!

Current attendances in the lower divisions are sadly very low (mind you so too have London attendences been, particularly this year). Whilst I recognise that superleague will create excitement and increased crowds I am yet to be convinced that the increase will be at a level to ensure a promoted club's success. However, I would still want that chance as a championship supporter!!!

People on the forums seem to be quoting that the 8 split system is the favoured one but I am certainly not convinced. This and other boards surely are not the arbiters of deciding the future league system and a thousand board responses would not make it so. I cannot/dont believe that the number favouring one system or the other by posting on this board carries the strength of argument to make such an important decision. But as I said before a mechanism for P & R should be found but it should be made to work within the existing system.

Having 4 teams from Superleague and the Championship competing against each other to me seems unworkable because of the gap in finances/player quality throughout the season. I know it can occasionally work that the lower division club can succeed in an important game and as I have said above the Championship side will want to take that opportunity. I do not believe that this will happen in the proposed system

I support the statement of Tony Smith. I believe the RFL should not keep changing the existing systems which frankly have hardly been given much chance to work.

I prefer a 14 team Superleague.

I accept that my submission is not a vote in favour or against all the proposals - It is just an opinion ilke everybody elses.

More money for the Championship clubs first and P & R to go with it.

Although the cap should be increased, at least in line with inflation, the fact that less than half of the club in SL can afford to pay the full cap, means that it actually doesn't matter too much.
The cap at its current level may be preventing the top 5/6 being even more dominant than they currently are.
As for the biggest names going to Aus, or RU, even with a substantial increase in the cap, we cannot compete with these two.
The only way to help, would be to give dispensation for one or two "superstars" per club but, this would only apply to the top 5/6 and there is a danger that this could see all the UK talent going to just 6 clubs.

almost as shocking as

If they sort out the funding of 24 clubs then option 3 would work and bring meaningful games week in week out. I doubt they can find a solution though in time foe the vote in July