That's the whole point. Until they, as a club are good enough to get promoted they shouldn't have the chance.

Then give the promoted club a seasons grace.

Until we see criteria its anyones guess but they should be trying to increase full time teams and this system will do anything but that. I dont think the likes of Cas or Wakefield have had outdated stadiums by choice, there is no money in the game.

This is destined to see teams spend what they dont have.

A brand new stand? What happened to the new stadium they promised last time franchises were on the table

Why have the RFL paid a small fortune (I imagine) for IMG to make a few suggestions. If the RFL don't know what the answer is, then there is no hope for the sport in this country. Maybe IMG should be asked to help County Championship cricket as well, good luck with that. Like RL over here, it is what it is, and nothing will ever change.

Promotion and Relegation based on on the field performance is better than your league being decided by an independent body. However if you happen to have the same or better franchising category* than the team that finished bottom, and win the Championship, then you should be promoted to the Super League. This IMG plan suggests you could have a great season on the pitch and still be relegated which is taking things too far.

Lets face it franchising was unfair last time because the only difference between the smaller super league clubs and the larger championship clubs is the Sky money.


*Assuming they don't hand the good scores to clubs that are about to go bust, but they get bonus points because they are in a new county/principality/country.

the worst thing that could have happen end was for IMGs first engagement with the RL Family was an opportunity to say "seen that" "didn't work" "Been there got the t-shirt an still feeling the pain"


But that's exactly what they have done... and they haven't even thought through the full application and deployment of the idea..

this is an awful piece of work and, if indicative of the quality of IMGs work, is a clear warning.

So we know that clubs in SL in danger of relegation have difficulty planning long-term and getting players to sign up when they aren't certain their team will be in the league the following year.

And this proposal creates an entire cohort of "Category B" clubs in SL who will be reassessed *every year* to see if they remain in the top flight.

That simply reinforces the uncertainty and instability around those clubs and makes it almost impossible for them to plan long-term on the field (which in turn make off-field investments much more difficult to finance).

It also absolutely bakes in the dominance of Category A clubs who can sign the best players to long term contracts without any of the worries of the B clubs.

In short, this is worse than licensing, which at least gave a bit of medium-term stability to all clubs, but caused decay and decline in the Championship.
But it's also worse than P&R, which only caused uncertainty at a relatively small number of clubs.

Madness.

A Clubs - St Helens, Wigan, Leeds, Catalans, Warrington, Hull
B Clubs - Hull KR, Huddersfield
Lower B Clubs - Wakefield, Castleford, Salford, Leigh, Toulouse, London, York

With everyone else being C. That's my prediction

St Helens should be graded an A+ for their contribution to rugby league at every level, just look at the Saints Academy and Ladies Team and they recently won an award to the rugby league community, also the amount of players they provide to all the England squads.

The issue here is that, once you move away from on field performance being the driving factor, the whole situation can be engineered to suit whatever agenda is being pursued at a particular point in time.
There is some mention of expansion but also having a cap on 2 overseas clubs (for now). Are we going to see big cities trying to bid for clubs in the top flight and just who and how will the "weighting" of the various criteria be decided ?
Surely, having a set of minimum standards for SL and (tier 2) would be the right way forward and for God's sake, while we are still classed as a sport, let's have success decided out on the pitch and not in a smoke-filled room.
If not, people will be walking away from the game in numbers. Fans will be better off turning up to board meetings, rather than supporting their side on a Friday night

The responses to the presentation so far just show how divided the sport is currently. Those who are traditionalist and want the sport to stagnate and go back to semi pro to protect the 'as is' and their own club's current status. And those that want the sport to move on and improve through attracting new investment, even if it means some clubs being left being.

Sitting and doing nothing is not an option here. Promotion and relegation has added nothing to the sport and it needs to be gone as soon as possible. The IMG proposals are a halfway house, they encourage clubs to improve to achieve the higher gradings whilst leaving the door open for clubs that do significantly improve. The bit about expanding the league if they can fill it with A clubs is a good one, plenty for aspirational Championship clubs to go for.

I can't see any of the journos making comments on how all of this is going to affect current/future broadcasting deals and also how they plan to distribute central funding. Anybody seen any comments on this?

Removing loop fixtures and the magic weekend is absolutely the right thing to do, as is increasing the focus on internationals. But how do Sky feel about this?

The problem with the word "invest" is that nobody invests in a Rugby League club, or almost any sports club outside the elite globally huge leagues, in a normal economic sense.

Coleman, Moran etc didn't "invest" in St Helens and Wire seeking an economic return. They were simply millionaire fans who were happy to write off a lot of money to support the club they loved.

Clubs who haven't stumbled upon a rich fan with loads of cash aren't going to find commercial investors and we shouldn't be pretending they will.

Only a wealthy backer in the championship would have any chance on promotion, and then where does the backer eventually say, I ain't spending any more ? This is a lost cause. Thankfully for Leigh, Degsey has pumped a lot of money in, and without the grand final this weekend, Leigh might not qualify for a top Cat B licence, and that's on the back of many saying that Leigh look like a mid Superleague team. TBF - We do need to look at the criteria before we speculate any further.

If there is no plan to attract more players to the game, the quality on the field will continue to decline, so some of these proposals will have a lesser impact. This should mainly be about investing in development officers, getting more players in schools and community clubs, but if as is suggested French clubs have to have a minimum number of French players, then English clubs should also have to have the same minimum number of English players.

Franchising was handled so badly last time, then any fan who feels wary of it coming back is fully justified. Struggling to see how scrapping the Magic weekend and making a round of the Challenge cup 2 legs is going to improve things. Can't see the clubs accepting/surviving on 11 home fixtures a year either. If they replace league games with a 9s tournament it has to be hugely successful just to keep income levels steady, there is this implication the hundred is a "success" but it has come at the cost of other parts of cricket, which is the main worry for me.

I will be amazed if the new criteria doesn't involve a lot of discussion around grass roots rugby league, community interaction, academies and overall youth player development.
IMG know what they are doing and they will be well aware that the sport's participation numbers are nowhere near where they need to be if the sport wants to grow and for the overall quality to improve.

P+R adds another element of interest to the league with something to fight for every week throughtout the year. If you was to look at this season come july the season would be over for at least 4 teams. This would also add to a loss of revenue imo as less will attend for dead rubber games.

They isnt even a wealthy backer waiting to come into Super League let alone the championship. Its a pipe dream to think a club like Batley would get a wealthy backer and come a Cat B club. How can you plan as a Cat B club long term ?

This is a very poor option, the sport has never recovered after the last franchise. They should be putting more effort into bridging the gap between the champ and SL not widening it.

Hull's season was over by July under the current system too. You also played Rovers at least 5 times this season. Something needs to change.

How often has the promoted team actually stayed up after being promoted, and how many different clubs have have actually been promoted from the championship? The idea that relegation means it gives the teams at the bottom something to play for for longer doesn't seem to be accurate.

Widnes got promoted around 2012 ish? And stayed in SL for about 5 seasons? Apart from that, they seem to just yoyo

Of the 12 sides in Super League in 2022, I think only 4 have been ever present in Super League. Many have come up, or been down and come back up.

Hulls season was over in February.

Hull KR have done it twice, Huddersfield have, Wakefield have, Cas have also managed to stay up and also being relegated twice. Widnes have had sustained periods in the top flight and before the Gateshead merger Hull never actually finished bottom. I believe Salford have also gone down and back up.

So its not pretty accurate to suggest teams just go straight back down.

2 legged game for round 6 of the Challenge cup.

Cant wait until St Helens put 70 points on Keighley in the away leg first before welcoming Keighley to TWS for the second leg.......