This is exactly what I would have in terms of relegation. It is similar to the Scottish football system I believe.

Yes we should follow Scottish football, the pinnacle of sport.

I don't like it because of the Scottish football link, they just happen to use the system I like.

We were in Super League for ten years. We spent a total of one week at the bottom of Super League in ten years. This year, we finished above Huddersfield in the regular season and above Salford in the eight's.

Within this system, we have been relegated, we knew the rules, but I defy anyone to justify that we've got the correct system in place as a sport.

I've seen teams in football only just sneak into a playoff spot at the last minute. Teams only fall into the bottom 3 on the final day and teams win Champions League titles without actually finishing their league as Champions (Liverpool finished 4th and 30 points behind the Champions to qualify for the CHAMPIONS League in 2005 they won)

It's not perfect but it's a hell of a lot better than relegating a team who have come bottom of the elite comp and promoting a team who have been playing against part timers and teams with a much smaller salary budget. At least with the current system you have to justify your place over 7 games.

In 2006, Cas didn't finish last and were relegated (to make way for Catalan) - everyone knows the rules at the start of the year.

I was against the new structure right from the start and I'd prefer we had something else. But the whining about massive unfairness and won't somebody think of the poor players is, frankly, pathetic. It's sport. Sport isn't fair. The system we have is unnecessarily gimmicky but no more inherently unfair than any other. And the RL players whining about livelihoods and mental health maybe ought to take a look at what happens to ordinary hard-working families every day of the week.

I have sympathy with the players, I have a lot more sympathy with the admin/backroom staff who may well be losing their jobs without the option of another club to go to.

But we can't have it all ways. Many players, coaches, club officials complained at licensing for being a closed shop. Well this is the alternative.

The fact that it's a one-off game is a red herring. That's irrelevant. The issue is relegation itself, not the manner of relegation. Would it really make any difference to Hull KR had they lost all their games and been condemned to relegation 3 weeks ago? Not at all.

Hull KR had 30 rounds of SL in which to avoid this situation, they didn't. The only people to blame for that are the players, coaches and officials at Hull KR.

Slight case of pot calling kettle there.
Nobody from Cas was happy about the nature of Castlefords relegation that year, many other RL supporters thought it was harsh.
I didn't hear any Cas supporters saying "it's ok, we knew the rules".

Having said that, this system was approved by the clubs and so we have to get on with it but, I dont think there were too many other options put forward.

The "mental" aspect is massively increased by having an all or nothing game every season, is it really necessary ??

Most clubs (and their supporters) are able to accept finishing last and being relegated but, the new structure doesn't do that.
It heaps all the pressure on 80 minutes of "sport" and great as this may be for the neutral or armchair viewer, it's very, very harsh on the players and staff.

Although clubs can and must make plans for winning or losing the MPG, can you imagine going into work on a particular day, not knowing if you have a job at the end of the day.
The only thing close in the real world is when companies announce that there are going to be a number of redundancies but dont tell staff until Friday afternoon.

The main point here is that t (the MPG) is just not needed to decide the weakest club in SL although we would then have to go with 1 up 1 down and most SL Chairman, are probably "happy" to have one last chance but, it's still very harsh for everyone else.

You've completely ignored the point I made.

You do it by having more competitive teams. Hopefully Leeds and Huddersfield in the mix next year. The tighter the table, the more every match matters.

If the points are carried forward to the super 8's is it fair teams that teams who finish with more points in the regular season can't have a points advantage in the middle 8's. Why not handicap teams that finish 11th and 12th and 3rd and 4th in the championship with a -2 points deduction in the middle 8's. There just isn't any consistency between the formats with one slate being cleared and the other not. To take it a stage further why not give the top 4 a 2 point advantage over teams 5-8 to keep the super 8's more interesting for longer?