Annual promotion/relegation is a nonsense in the modern game. There simply isn't enough time or resources, in any aspiring club, to get themselves upto standard for SL.

Any new SL club, whether an expansionist club, like Toronto, or a traditional club, like Leigh or Featherstone, needs a minimum 3 years to get themselves competitive - Its why licensing, where an applying club can be fully assessed for what they will bring to the league, is essential.

Look at Toronto as an example. Last year, they were far above anyone else in the championship and, whether a false front or not, had resources to improve their squad. Yet, admittedly after a short period, they looked nailed on for relegation when lockdown came.

Clubs need time to establish themselves, otherwise we just have a small number of sides yo-yoing between divisions, which does nothing to stabilise those clubs for the long term.

Amazing how most other pro sports manage it...?

Do you mean like county cricket, NFL, the NRL, etc?

How many fully professional clubs do we have by the way, all playing off the same resource base?

How many fully professional clubs do we have by the way, all playing off the same resource base?'"

County cricket's most watched and most money-spinning competition is played on a licensed system. No relegation or promotion.

And I'm not picking a fight. Just pointing out the obvious.

Oh, and you never answered my question.

Whoever takes the 12th spot,should be given a season's grace to establish,and then that should be the system thereafter.. The team who finishes in 11th will be relegated if the promoted team finishes bottom in their first season.

P.S. Maybe i should have posted this on the future of the game thread.

That would be p!ss funny after the amount of slaver we get off some Wigan fans on here

That's the idea, if you finish bottom you have one more season to get your act together. As for the club who finishes 11th and being competitive, well that's what the fans want to see (competitive games). It would certainly give an incentive to play well and try not to finish in 11th place and that would also avoid meaningless games.

The point with al the promotion/relegation v licensing/franchising is that whichever system is put in place, there will be plenty of clubs that are unhappy.
After all, this is precisely why P & R was reintroduced.
Of course the system isn't perfect and of course it destabilases the clubs who are battling for promotion or, battling to avoid the drop.
However, a closed shop in our sport wasn't right either.
It didn't work last time, apart from protecting those clubs who may usually be under the threat of relegation and it wont work in future, for exactly the same reasons.
Taking Donny's side of the argument (for a change), why on earth should aspiring clubs, Newcastle, York, Widnes, Leigh be prevented from ever getting their chance in the top flight and if we are ever to expand the game further, either in the UK or overseas, what happens then.
IF there are so many "worthy" clubs vying for a spot in SL then, why on earth not increase the number of clubs in SL - certainly going from 12 to 14 seems eminently sensible and would allow us to get rid of the ridiculous loop fixtures.

By doing this and keeping 1 up, 1 down, there is a greater chance of any promoted club surviving the dreaded first season. Yes, there will still be issues for any relegated club but, isnt this what sport in the UK is all about.
A battle for supremacy at the top and some jeopardy at the bottom.

So, not County Cricket then?

The RFL and clubs need to increase the player pool, not fudge a sporting competition.

Seriously, how do you increase the player pool, as we are already struggling to find enough quality to warrant having 12 teams?

I've already read someone suggesting increasing the league from 12 to 14 - that will just dilute further what is already a poor quality of RL... More realistically, the league needs cutting to 10 and the division below needs to be a feeder for that higher league.

I saw a quote the other day that said that the most dangerous person is the one who cannot imagine that they might be wrong. That would seem a fair summary of some posters on here. Different sports have other criteria for organising the playing structure. Most of us were brought up with promotion and relegation which is at least simple and obvious but as sports science has moved on the promoted team has almost no chance of staying up without a big cheque book.
Franchises provided a certain amount of stability but without the possibility of earning promotion and are frequently called unfair on here.
We also do not have enough big backers to be really radical and think outside the box now our one flashy display, Toronto, seems to have gone down the pan.
We seem to have come back to the idea that we would be best served by promoting a team that lies so close to at least one other SuperLeague team that away fans could make the on foot.
Personally I like the idea of Toulouse. If not Toulouse then a large urban area like Newcastle could provide new supporters. We seemed to be doing so well in London but managed to make a mess of that by never fully settling.
Ultimately I worry that The Championship is too cash poor to support development of players and to afford promotion. It is a shame than the game as a whole cannot afford a much expanded SuperLeague with a funded Sl1 and SL2 to allow both ring fencing as well as promotion and relegation. Sadly, at the end of the day, what do I know?

Give it to Fev where hopefully I'll be able to see them take a few hidings.

A darn sight more than the trolls on here that's for sure.

When backed by significant funds Newcastle playing as Gateshead came fifth in Superleague in 1999 winning 19 of their 30 matches, 6,600 for Bradford.

Kurdi is a multi-£Millionaire and has developed a sizeable player development system that could go on top of that sort of performance. If people want expansion that is it.

If Kurdi is ignored when Argyle got flagged all the way into Superleague with his phoney club and couldn't care less attitude, then you can safely say expansion is dead. What more do so called "expansionists" want?

Do post more........