In the last round of the much praised NRL there were 4 'blowout' scores. I think they should be looking to make it more competitive too.

I think he said 4 games and 3 blowouts.

A few years ago there were only really 2 or 3 top sides in SL, meaning the majority of games were fairly competitive even if played to a lower standard. Now there are about 6 or 7 top sides IMO so blowout scores are becoming increasingly common it seems as there are more 'top team vs average team' games. The competitiveness at the top of the SL is great, but the gulf in class between them and the rest of super league is becoming bigger and bigger. Would splitting the league up into 2 tiers help?

If blowout scores are a problem the scoring team could restart the game.

The first few sentences you posted there hint at progress being made . In a few years we have gone from two or three teams dominating the game to seven or eight .
Could it be that the cap is working and things are finally evening out ? Possibly .
Could it possibly happen that in a few more years we see twelve or thirteen teams that are evenly matched ? I doubt it . There will always teams that have a bad season or three no matter how you bend the rules to accommodate them .

who cares, the weekly rounds don't really matter that much. It's all about the playoffs, so don't pay to much attention atm. It only really matters a few months from now.

Fed up fo threads like this. The NRL had blow out scores and no one goes on about them. Cronulla for the passed few seasons were woeful, as are Parramatt now. Lets look at the positives. We have 6 teams who can GENUINELY be champions this year. How many other leagues and sports can boast that. I also think those 6 teams could down in the NRL and do extremely well and at leats 4 finish in the playe-offs. The top level of SL is increasing which is great for international. The bottom will also get better, but even the super dooper NRL will always have a dire couple of teams eveyr year.

I certainly think it is progress made. Take Huddersfield for example, top of the league currently with a predominantly young, British side. Didn't think I'd see that 5 years ago. Also, Catalan are a dangerous side this year and they have something like 15 Frenchmen in their squad - some of their youngsters coming through look great talents.
We're never going to have a league with 14 equal teams. That doesn't happen in any sport, let alone one that can be really unforgiving to the lesser teams. A league that has less runaway score lines would be far more entertaining though.

Agreed
I dont think it could be any more obvious that a 10 team superleague, with a much imporved national league is the way forward

What would that achieve though? You would just have another 4 clubs become meaningless, poorly supported teams in the championship. If Super League was to be split up surely the best way would be to have 2 leagues of 8, with 2 teams from the championship being promoted to SL tier 2. Tier 1 would be highly competitive, whilst Tier 2 would be equally as entertaining as 8 fairly equal teams battle to gain promotion which would keep attendances high.

London will drop out in time....if they make it to 2014 as they are at the moment I'll be stunned. Who else would you say has to go?
Widnes will be stronger next year and deserve a fair crack at the whip.....but time is aginst them
Does the comp need 2 teams from Hull?
Wakey or Castleford?
Salford have a nice new shiny stadium
Bradford are on shaky ground...financially and with their shed

Leeds, St Helens, Wigan, Warrington, Huddersfield, Hull FC & Catalans would seem to be the best 7......I would say HKR, Bradford and one of Castleford/Wakey would be the 10.

Salford and Widnes, together with one of Castleford/Wakey would be competative in the 2nd tier, but I believe London would struggle initially and might even drop down further.

Of the new comp, I would immediately impose a 80% European BORN AND TRAINED quota, deliver 5 year franchises, with the worst performing team, graded on 4 OPEN AND CLEAR CRITERIA being up against the Best Performing from the lower division for the next 5 years.

The loss of London might reduce the amount of money on offer from TV, but then again, you flatearth lot would get your game back...

Rugby league is a sport of blowout scores. The nature of the game makes it this way. You can't stick your whole team in the penalty box or have 15 men rucking up the pitch.

As someone else mentioned the top Premier league teams tend to smash the lower ones 4 or 5-0 unless the wee teams really get up. So we may as well get used to it. Or do one of the only things that might slightly help and have the team who concedes get the ball from the kick off but I don't see why we should do that.

It's the difference between the top and the bottom

If the league was reduced to 10 teams it still wouldnt prevent blow out scores

But I stil, think 12 teams in SL makes more sense

It's all the fault of franchising!

I blame Garry Schofield, Rugby Union and the credit crisis