I didnt compare last seasons attendances to this. I simply said that it was easily provable whether or not P+R puts bums on seats. You argument is just a circular argument based on your preexisting prejudice. Whatever cause you want to attribute the recent rise in attendance to, we know it isnt P+R. We know this because there is no positve correlation between attendances and P+R being in effect. There is in fact a negative correlation between attendances and P+R. Now i can accept that this doesnt prove a correlation between P+R and lower attendances, it does, without doubt, show no correlation between P+R and higher attendances.

That game. 5 years ago added 3k to Wakefields attendance. There were 13 home games before that only 3 were attended by more than 5k. Their 3 home games prior to that were 5.5k against Leeds, 3.3k against Les Catalands, and 4k against Bradford. The same Bradford side that Wakefield got 9k against in the first game of that same season.
If relegation was so exciting, got so many bums on seats, led to such visibility, then where did 5k fans go who went to see Wakefield V Bradford at the beginning of the season where there was no link to relegation who wouldnt go see Wakefield v Bradford in round 22, their 3rd from last home game of the season with relegation looming.
Its good for RL. Bradford are getting about 11k currently. There isnt a team in the lower leagues who even being optimistic are likely to get even half of that. Bradford go but and drop out of SL that 11k goes to 2k/3k and a team with much less scope is promoted. They average 4k (which isnt enough to run an SL club on sustainably) and the game itself has lost 4k fans who are no longer watching the game, all because Peter Hood isnt competent. Its a good thing that Bradford have the space to reorganise. We would achieve nothing by destroying their visibility, 1st team, youth development and infrastructure

It will likely be a poor spectacle compared to the matches at the top of the table. I'd naturally much rather watch the teams at the top of the table than the bottom, surely everyone would. You can't be serious about journeymen. Surely you can remember the garbage that Widnes and other clubs used to sign in order to avoid relegation, and how clubs like Wakefield would put out teams with 14 or 15 overseas players in the 17 because they couldn't invest in youth for fear of relegation. Think about what you are posting.
It definitely does not compound the problem with journeymen players, and to suggest otherwise is completely ludicrous as I have already stated. The only issue is that, as you say, clubs may look to build for the following season rather than panicking and spending money they don't have on poor players so that they can avoid relegation and continue their meagre existence for another year. But surely that isn't a bad thing. That doesn't mean the quality of matches will suffer, they will only suffer in your own mind because you have built up the idea of relegation as a spectacle. As an RL match, I'd probably prefer to watch matches involving teams with nothing to play for than relegation-threatened teams TBH, they are far more likely to contain exciting play and also probably to be a higher standard. Your argument seems to be based on incorrect or poorly thought-out assumptions. Relegation does not make the sport more enjoyable unless you like watching clubs being destroyed, years of work being thrown down the drain and people needlessly losing their jobs.

What would you disagree with in that assesment?

Thats self evident. But lets not pretend that there is ever going to be a system with no risk of clubs going bust. There always will be. You cant make a cake without breaking some eggs.

Yet more people are watching and more people are playing than ever before. Whilst i dont doubt your sincerity, it certainly isnt something which is being replicated in great numbers.

There are many many other options. They just may not be palatable to you because it doesnt involve prioritising a relatively small number of clubs in the championship over all other parts of the game.

Seems Sam Tomkins prefers P&R as well (with apologies to mods if link needs tidying up). menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... mfort-zone

Seems Sam Tomkins prefers P&R as well (with apologies to mods if link needs tidying up). menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... mfort-zone

Super League clubs are going bust whilst holding licenses Smokey. Not just small clubs either - big ones like Bradford.

What words of wisdom do you have in this regards?

Bradford have been a poorly run club for a while. Whichever system we operate under if Bradford make the same decisions, they will be where they are.

No Smokey, franchising has caused the ills of the Bulls, rising crowds are irrelevant because they don't suit the argument for P&R, and Widnes games are boring because there's no threat of relegation.

Meanwhile, in the real world lets consider some realities.

1) RL is - and always will be - a minority sport played mainly in the north. RL simply doesn't attract the kind of money available to RU/football. This relative disparity is increased during a financial crisis impacting the whole economy. SL struggled to get a major sponsor this year - I doubt whether the Premier League or RU competition would have had the same problems, no matter how dire the economy.

2) During such a major financial crisis, it would be stunning if clubs weren't under enormous financial pressure. This has nothing at all to do with P&R or franchising. Its a combination of economic conditions and in some cases poor management.

3) All teams are NOT created equal - either under P&R or franchising. Wigan and Sts would be big under any system; Batley, Keighley etc never will be big under any system. Exactly the same is true in other sports as well, right across the world.

4) Sky money is absolutely vital to the survival of the sport in any professional sense.

5) End of season relegation battles added "excitement" at the back end of the year (ignoring the harder games which relegation-threatened clubs would sometimes seemingly throw), with the losing team doomed to be broken apart.

6) Teams are no longer able to sign 6 half-decent Aussies in an attempt to survive in SL. That change alone would mean that P&R would lead to sides as bad as the current Widnes one coming up and going straight back down again. At least Widnes have some chance of trying to build a team over the next two years.

7) Across SL we are finally starting to see investment in youth. Under P&R there was no evidence that any except the most secure clubs put faith - and more importantly money - in junior development as a major source of new players. This is one of the most positive features of the SL landscape, and needs to be given time to work.

Franchising was never going to solve all of the problems RL has. But it is helping with some. The only arguments in favour of P&R appear to be claims about excitement at the end of the season (not matched by overall crowd numbers, irrelevant to the sport as a whole and generally enormously damaging to the relegated club, but lets be generous and take as a plus for a few fans) and the opportunities franchising seemingly removes from Championship clubs.

I understand that P&R has some appeal on the grounds of 'fairness'. But if we want a professional sport then the claims of Championship teams and fans simply cannot be put ahead of the SL sides that actually make the game as big as it is. Unless we really do want to see the sport at a professional level in England die on its a*se.

but the quality of Super League games is going right down from what i've seen, boring boring yawn yawn matches because most teams have nothing to play for

Ok

Tomkins lives in a real world, the sporting part of which expects P&R and laughs at Franchising. Considering it the domain of Hockey, Basketball and American Football - ie the joke sports of the UK.

Relegation and Promotion should be back every 2nd year with the two winners from the championship in those years unless it is the same team that wins the championship should play each other for promotion with the two sides that finish bottom of SL playing each other with the loser being relegated and the winner surviving unless it is again the same team that has finished bottom both years

This would give lower teams some incentive to get their act toghether