I think every system will have flaws, no doubt, but then the reality is, if a club is looking for promotion they're going to need to be able to play teams far better than 9th, so they might as well test themselves. This isn't of benefit to the team finished 9th - but then reward those who finish in the top half of the table!

This makes interesting reading on why the Swiss ditched the system the RFL thinks will save the game www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/foot ... ds-1524036 The most concerning part is this Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change

This makes interesting reading on why the Swiss ditched the system the RFL thinks will save the game www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/foot ... ds-1524036 The most concerning part is this Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change

A bbc article in far more depth giving the pros and cons www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313899 This quote is very telling From the 10th game the pressure began [to be involved in the top eight and this pressure made the clubs really careless - signing players, changing the coach and taking financial risks. Apart from the two or three big clubs, it was not sustainable And another at the end, the difference between the teams in the 'championship' league and the teams from the second division was too big, so it wasn't interesting at all. There are also comments about how the smaller 2nd division clubs liked being in the promotion dogfight, because then they knew they would not be relegated. However at the same time they weren't interested in getting promoted due to their financial structure and lack of on pitch playing quality. Wonder how that will go down with RL fans from the likes of fax, fev and Leigh if they achieve promotion, but then find their club owners turn it down.

A bbc article in far more depth giving the pros and cons www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21313899 This quote is very telling From the 10th game the pressure began [to be involved in the top eight and this pressure made the clubs really careless - signing players, changing the coach and taking financial risks. Apart from the two or three big clubs, it was not sustainable And another at the end, the difference between the teams in the 'championship' league and the teams from the second division was too big, so it wasn't interesting at all. There are also comments about how the smaller 2nd division clubs liked being in the promotion dogfight, because then they knew they would not be relegated. However at the same time they weren't interested in getting promoted due to their financial structure and lack of on pitch playing quality. Wonder how that will go down with RL fans from the likes of fax, fev and Leigh if they achieve promotion, but then find their club owners turn it down.

Quote The Chair Maker="The Chair Maker"This makes interesting reading on why the Swiss ditched the system the RFL thinks will save the game www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/foot ... ds-1524036 The most concerning part is this Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change'" The system as so bad they used it for 15 years.

Quote The Chair Maker="The Chair Maker"This makes interesting reading on why the Swiss ditched the system the RFL thinks will save the game www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/foot ... ds-1524036 The most concerning part is this Switzerland used the model for 15 years, from 1988 to 2003, but after attendances fell through the floor and sponsorship and television revenue dipped they voted for change'" The system as so bad they used it for 15 years.

Thats what I was thinking fevfan

We had licensing for 7 and automatic one up one down for 12. Key FACTS from that is sponsors won't interested and fans stopped been interested which is what I fear will happen here.

You're comparing different sports though, football has no real comparison, it's a sport commercially and numerically beyond any other.

Q

Even if the RFL read these articles it wouldn't make any difference. The majority of fans don't want it and the players voted no to it, but they don't matter. The most worrying part of the articles for me is that the TV lost interest in the system.

SKY won't be interested in the second tier. Another problem is we have a seven week round robin of the top 8, we'll be seeing the same teams every week more or less. Then we have the play-offs and see Wigan/Warrington for the the fourth or 5th time that year.

I hated it when we used to play Leeds 5 or 6 times evey year as that big derby magic went away. Thankfully we're now back to twice a year.

It seems like the RFL have thought "well the best games are Between the top clubs (which there are) so they seem to think more games of them will improve the quality. But I think they are going to end up saturating it as they did with The play-offs. I've seen some blinding games between the bottom and top clubs when the bottom club was fighting off actual relegation. Not this down for 7 weeks to win promotion play in the same league again.

If what I've read on twitter is correct then it seems the majority of the chairman that voted this in are, for want of a better word, the lesser teams, maybe the Wakefield, Bradford, London and Castleford fans could direct their moaning at their own chairmen.

Makes sense really. They probably fancy their chances against the teams in the league below and rather than risk one or two teams facing definite relegation, they prefer the scenario presented by the split league which could, and probably will, end up generally with no one moving up or down. I'd wager the so called 'lesser' teams who voted it did it for the sake of self-preservation as they surely couldn't have voted for it on the basis of it being a good idea...