Top of the league straight into the final for me too, makes it worth a lot more and teams won't be so keen to 'rest' players if they are going for top spot.

What about doing away with the play offs and grand final altogether and replace it with a world club playoff consisting of top 3 from SL and top 3 from NRL. 3 SL teams go over to Aus and play all three NRL teams in consecutive weeks. The 3 NRL teams then come over to UK and play the 3 SL teams. Top 2 go to World Club final.

Wigan want a return to P&R because they know they'll be nowhere near it and it won't affect them.

I totally support the licensing system, and think it should be strengthened. I'd like to see 14 clubs in the next round, based on the 13 best UK applications + 1 best French application, or 12 UK + 2 French.

Where previous rounds have gone wrong is in not picking the best, but the easiest. The RFL didn't want to admit that it's pet Crusaders project was desperately underfunded, and didn't want to deal with the flak from throwing Cas or Wakey out.

As for the play offs, the original top 5 playoff was spot on and never should have been changed.

but does that matter, would be more emphasis on winning the league instead... the play offs would just be an extra bonus of doing the double and you get your reward of going to the final by winning the league

The only way winning the league would be seen as more important than winning the GF is if the financial reward was better. A lot More prize money for winning the GF. If the prize money pots were swapped you can bet your proverbial that everyone would be working towards becoming LL.

Wigans prize money for winning the Grand final was £30.000 Warringtons £15.000 for finishing runners up in fact Wigans total prize money for doing the double was less than a Football Conference team would get for winning their playoff final

no wonder theres a revolt against the RFL and the way its being run

put dr koukash in charge

Put Aunt Bessie in charge, and we can all rise together ................................I'll get me coat

Interesting how the most vocal of the rebel clubs are the ones that are been bankrolled by wealthy owners .

The I'm alright Jack attitude is typified by the likes of Lenaghan .

Really? The RFL don't appear to publish prize money any more- but the challenge cup winners got £100,000 in 1998 and £120,000 in 2000.
And Leeds got £300,000 for winning the grand final last year so I think Wigan should have words!

didnt get their wealth for nothing, must be doing something right

Don't agree with going straight through to the final. Winning the LLS is a reward for a consistent season and it earn's you the right to an easier route to old trafford, but the play-offs are a seperate comp and a final birth shouldn't be guaranteed. Two home bites of the cherry would be my preference for the team that finishes top, as it used to be.

Looks as if RFL have moved the rugby posts reading the piece below from the hull mail.
Only hetherington from the top clubs stayed (McManus wasn't able to attend)
Hetherington up the aris of the RFL as usual the others desperate to stay in SL so don't want to upset the RFL


SUPER League clubs look set to remain at war over the competition's long-term future with a battle between rival club owners deepening after six clubs refused to back proposed changes.

Officials at Hull FC, Hull KR, Catalan, Huddersfield, Warrington and Wigan have been accused by Leeds Rhinos chief executive Gary Hetherington of making 'selfish, self-interested' demands over the running of the sport, after walking out of a meeting on the matter with Super League Europe on Wednesday.

The proposals to cut the number of top-flight clubs from 14 to 12 was suspended without resolution after the six clubs abstained from voting on the matter, leading to a furious outburst from Hetherington, who backed the plans.

However, sources have told the Mail Hetherington's perceived influence in the game, and on the RFL, is one of many concerns the clubs have over the sport's future.

The Mail has been told what the six clubs want is a proper consultation process and they feel the RFL are trying to rail road through the new restructure of the game. While six of the top eight clubs abstained from voting, St Helens were not represented by the owner as he was unable to make it.

The Mail understands the six clubs want proper governance and some proactive commercial growth delivered by the governing body and have told the remaining clubs if there is cause for concern in six of the top eight, why rush through a decision.

Only 10 days ago the executive of Super League gave agreement in writing to a majority of clubs desire to slow the process down for proper consultation to then be finished. That agreement was withdrawn at this meeting. That stance was not acceptable to six of this year's play-off clubs. Those clubs want an increased Super League representation and are not convinced on the new structure format, regarding it as a massive move for the game, which may be better served with a 12 team competition and one up, one down relegation and promotion.

The clubs are not writing off a restructure, with the Mail told they just want to look at it for longer. The rebel six could even grow to eight with St Helens and Bradford, who remain in flux while their new ownership is ratified by the RFL, are also understood to favour a hiatus before any decision is taken.

The source of frustration has grown with the clubs who abstained stressing they wanted a three-month consultation process before a vote was taken, while the likes of Leeds, Widnes and Wakefield wanted a swift decision.

Super League chairman Brian Barwick said: "It is very disappointing that we were unable to take a vote on such important issues because some clubs chose to leave the room and refuse to participate further.

"Clearly some of the clubs have deep-rooted issues and between us we have to find a way of resolving our differences for the benefit of both Super League and the wider game."

Whilst unconfirmed, suggestions began to surface yesterday that the walk-out clubs had also been unhappy that the RFL may have come to Wakefield's aid by supporting the club financially as it is restructured

Former Hull chairperson Kath Hetherington – Gary's wife, is to take over in a similar role, giving the family two votes on major decisions at Super League level.

That growing influence of the Hetheringtons is believed to be a source of real concern for the likes of Wigan chairman Ian Lenagan, as well as Hull FC owner Adam Pearson and Hull KR chairman Neil Hudgell.

The six clubs believe as little as four weeks are needed to sort out all the issues in relation to structure and governance and are tired of working to the Hetheringtons' time scales.

All six club owners were unavailable for comment.

According to Adam Pearson at Hull FC's fans forum the other night. Wigan got 40000 and Warrington got 30000 for the grand final. As an owner of a club I would think his figures would be fairly accurate

Brian Barwick wants to keep his trap shut over the matter. Since he has been at the RFL he appears to have said nothing and done nothing of any importance to further the game.
I was willing to give him time, as he was said to have significant contacts in sport to bring in substantial sponsorship allegedly.
But I have seen no benefits so far.
Then he spouts up about proposals regarding RL of which he knows nowt.
How much are we paying this chap for doing nothing apart from having a go at chairmen who do know something about the game, and are constantly pumping money into the game.