Although im in favour of Toronto i tend to agree with the bit ive underlined,im not really sure 7 other clubs should be disadvantaged for the sake of one club,just doesnt sit well with me.

Surely we are entitled to take account of the weather in Toronto. You just can't play rugby league there outdoors in February or March. Even April is iffy. Please cut the Canadian boys a bit of slack.

Think they're on about the M8s here young man - surely it can't be problem that time of year as well, or would it be too hot for them then

The Qualifiers......clue is the other 7 teams bit and the fact that it was UNDERLINED.............are played in August and September.

Secondly, the "Canadian boys" don't actually have any Canadians......they are Leigh rejects with a Liberal smattering of ANZACS.

There is no reason other than fiscal that Toronto aren't able to play Home and away alternate weeks in the Qualifiers. As for the start of the season, maybe they should apply to join the NRL then instead of getting preferential treatment.....every team should be made play Home and Away alternate weeks.....if they can't play at home, then they should give up the their home advantage for those rounds, but the scenario this season is farcical with 10 teams all getting off the plane to face a fresh and acclimatised Toronto......Argyle needs to be told to show us the money or just forget it, because as it stands next year they'll bring nothing more to SL than Crusaders, PSG or London ever did......

The theory of what you are saying is correct.
However, there is a world of difference in competing with the bottom 4 in SL in a short sharp burst and competing with the whle of SL week in, week out and if/when those 50+ point reverses start to come in, even the "good" players become less than average.
To make it into the top 8, not ony would any promoted side need 6-8 good new players, they also have to gel and in regards to the overseas players, which Toronto and Toulouse will have plenty, those new "overseas" players have to avoid the dreaded home sickness, which seems to worsen just as soon as their new club get a few thrashings.
As I said, just about impossible to make the top 8.
Therefore, the best that a promoted side can hope for is to scrape through year 1, with a thinnish squad, pray for good luck with injuries and then try to improve their squad during the following season.
This is a major, major flaw with the current system.
However, should Toronto (and Toulouse) manage to get well into the mix and one or both actually gain promotion, there would be a new structure on the cards very quickly indeed.

None of that is a flaw with the system unless by system you mean having P&R (which if we didn't have then we wouldn't have promoted sides to struggle to stay up). As I posted before it was always the case that a promoted side would be recruiting after all the top tier clubs had sewn up theirs as they knew they were in the top tier while until sealing it at season's end the promoted club(s) didn't. When we had 1 relegation spot the aim was second bottom, when we had two relegated it was 3rd from bottom, with three it was 4th bottom. The aim was always to do just enough to ensure staying up (the odd exception saw a team compete much better and finish a bit higher). The only difference now is that the equivalent to finishing 11th out of 12 in the top tier is to finish 3rd in the qualifiers (or failing that to win the MPG).

Getting thrashed and regularly beaten will hit confidence but using a club in the bottom four as an example it won't be a mauling at the hands of St Helens that will decide if Huddersfield stay up. It will be the games in the qualifiers against Championship teams and 3 other teams that have getting beaten all year too. At least with the qualifiers it will be games against teams of similar ability that ultimately decide the fate of the contenders rather than getting a shellacking by St Helens et al. I'm guessing that you don't like the split season format and want it changed, however the struggle for any promoted club to avoid going back down has nothing to do with the current system for deciding relegation, changing it wouldn't change that.

Realistically something is going to have to give, the level of player in the top 4 or 5 clubs in the Championship is on par with the bottom 4 of SL.

Most of those players are earning more playing in the Championship than in SL which is part of the problem.

SL either needs to go to 2 leagues of 10 or extend to 16 teams.

SL has never been as boring as it is now and in some respects the Championship produces much more excitement.

Something needs to be done now.

Depends why you think SL is boring as to what to do about it.

In my opinion it's boring as there is far to much one man stuff. Sides are doing anything to get penalties which spoils the flow, speed of the game. It's all about size and power rather than skill. And refs and the rules are poor with no consistency in a game let alone over the season.

Of course it's a flaw with the system.
Under any kind of "standard" promotion /relegation, any club would only need to avoid the wooden spoon to be in a position to start and build for the following system.
Also, the better players, unless being substantially over paid, want to play in SL and not want to run the risk of having their contract made void when their club is relegated and this, not only affects any promoted side but, it also hampers the recruitment for any sides that may be under threat of the qualifiers, which allows the top 4/5 sides to attract the better talent and on lower paid contracts.
The system is flawed BUT, it has created a vibrant high risk competition which, for many neutrals and armchair fans, is far more interesting than what is taking place at the top of the pile.

On your second point, it's all about taking confidence into the middle 8's.
IF the SL sides, albeit in the bottom 4 are playing ok and bring in a couple of "stars" in time for the middle 8's, they should be ok and there is always the all or nothing MPG to save them at the last hurdle, again, fundamentally wrong to have so much on 1 fabricated game every season but, it does make compulsive viewing.

Under a standard 1 up 1 down P&R system finishing 11th out of 12 would be enough, I have stated that. Under the system we have the position in the 12 pre-split is largely irrelevant if you are 9th or below as points are then reset, the season isn't finished. Teams 9, 10, 11 and 12 are then joined by the top 4 Championship clubs the de facto teams 13, 14, 15 and 16. At the end of the qualifiers teams 1, 2 and 3 (9,10 and 11) are safe/promoted so the top 11 take a place in SL just as with traditional P&R. then the team ranked 4th (12th overall) gets another bite of the cherry by having to beat 5th (13th overall) to stay up. So a promoted club can finish 12th of 12 after playing everyone twice plus Magic and not be relegated. Under standard P&R they would now be gone but they now can still save themselves with their post-split games and after that they can finish 12th or 13th and still get another chance in the MPG rather than just being down. If a SL team whether newly promoted or not cannot do enough to stay up then they don't deserve to. That is their failing not that of the system, just as it would be if a team that wasn't 12th pre-split ends up going down (as has happened) as they would not have played well enough when it mattered most.

I do agree with you that the MPG should be binned but as it more than any other is a made for tv concept I doubt it will go unless we ditched P&R altogether.

Apart from stating the bleeding obvious, this still means that any promoted club is back in the middle 8 shake up and while the top 8 carry on cherry picking the best OOC players, ALL of the clubs in the middle 8 have to either gamble like hell or wait a couple of months longer to finalise their squads for the following season, it's not the same as 1 up, 1 down at all.
Back in the day, with a quarter of the season left, everyone would know which club was likely to be relegated (or maybe it was down to a couple), which, in terms of available time to sort out their squad, put most clubs on a level playing field.

If you were looking for a club to play for (assuming that you couldnt play for you beloved Wigan), would you pick a club that you were certain would be in SL or aim low and go for a club that could be relegated,which would possibly void your contract. It's a no brainer.

Of course all of the cards are stacked in favour of the incumbent SL clubs but, until they are CERTAIN of their SL status, they cant prepare fully for the following season, which puts the clubs in the MPG even further behind the rest.

So why have a Canadian team if, in your humble opinion is too cold to play in their country when the rugby season is running in the host country?

How many more goalposts do you want moving to accomodate Toronto.

Join the league by all means, but at least operate within the guidelines like all the other clubs do.

#I think that they were INVITED to join the league, without which there would be no "North American Experiment" and anyone with half an ounce of local knowledge regarding the climate would realise that they (Toronto) couldnt play their games in Toronto during the first part of the season.
You need to take issue with "the fat controller". regarding them being invited to join the party.

On the plus side, it means that WE can visit in the warm weather rather than freezing our whatsits off.
It's a cracking ciity and well worth a visit.

You may be a bit like Crocodile Dundee, lost in a large city

Been there, done that