It may well be the case that the top 4 are sorted early, but there is a very good chance that at least the 4th spot will be up for grabs towards the latter part of the weekly rounds. For it to be sorted early, it would mean that the top 4 teams will have had to play at or near their best for the majority of the season. Holding back for the playoffs, finishing 5th and getting an easier 1st PO game is no longer an option. Surely this is a bonus?

With regards to the 2nd point, it has already been pointed out that the maximum number of games for the top teams would increase by 1 compared to now, however it has been stated that the top 12 teams will enter the CC a round later than currently, so the players won't have to play anymore games than they do now. They'll just have to play more against the better teams. This has been the criticism of SL for some time now, not enough games played at a high enough intensity and too many blow-out scores. The NRL play 24 games plus POs not 22, and a lot of the top players also play 3 SoO games.

It may well be the case that the 4 teams that drop down in to the middle tier end up being the 4 that go back up the following season. But it gives the Championship clubs an opportunity to prove, on the field at least, that they can compete. They will have a higher salary cap than now so if the clubs cans afford to spend it the gap will not be as wide as it currently is, some may even be able to operate on a mostly FT basis. The interest will be from the fans of Leigh, Sheffield, Featherstone etc. who want to see their team compete at the highest level. It's much better than simple one-up one-down P+R between a FT professional league and a PT semi-pro league anyway.

There are definite issues with this system and it's by no means perfect. We still don't know the full details of a lot of it. However, on the face of it anyway, it's a much better system than we have currently.

Isn't it more like ditching 1 fixture against SL opposition and gaining 4 against Championship clubs? As it stands they play 27 v SL, under the new system it would be 23 v SL -Split- another 3 v SL and 4 v Championship

Some of these teams have an average of less than 5,000, there's not much of hit to be had. Maybe they think that promotion clashes will attract more fans than the dead rubbers they've had at that stage of the season for the last 5 years?

In 2011 and 2012 Wigan's home PO fixtures against Saints, Catalans (x2) and Leeds attracted around 50% of the attendance of the corresponding weekly round fixture. There are similar stories with the other top team's PO games. Surely addressing this is more important than worrying about whether Widnes v Featherstone would attract more or less than the 5,405 who watched Widnes v Wakefield in 2013, for example?

Fair comment. You make some good points about the NRL, I hadn't included SoO.

What do you think the players representatives will think about it?

Does anyone think this will be good preparation for the end of season internationals?

Does anyone have a link confirming that SL teams will only enter the cup in round 5? I hope it's not the case as playing against teams you wouldn't normally come up against is a big part of the fun of the cup for me. Having said that I do understand that many of these games are uncompetitive and poorly attended

edit: never mind, found it in the Watkins report

Holding back for the playoffs With regards to the 2nd point, it has already been pointed out that the maximum number of games for the top teams would increase by 1 compared to now, however it has been stated that the top 12 teams will enter the CC a round later than currently, so the players won't have to play anymore games than they do now. They'll just have to play more against the better teams. This has been the criticism of SL for some time now, not enough games played at a high enough intensity and too many blow-out scores. The NRL play 24 games plus POs not 22, and a lot of the top players also play 3 SoO games.
'"

If anyone is bothered about what the players think I thought I'd just add this - www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21 In particular - "We opposed the preferred restructure option in our formal written submission to the RFL dated the 5 September 2013. We repeat our comment that the option favoured by the RFL, which includes the three x 8 league split, is an option which has clear, identifiable barriers to success and is an option whose basis was rejected by the Scottish FA and experimented with by the Swiss FA and ultimately rejected. The proposed changes give us severe concerns with regard to player safety and welfare given that the preferred option contains a requirement for players to play more games; this coming not long after a mantra from on high about players should play fewer games to give the national team a better chance to beat the Aussies. We have asked the RFL to undertake a thorough piece of research on the impact of increased workload on players" Unless minds have been changed recently of Damascene proportions, I think that puts the case against the new system pretty clearly.

If anyone is bothered about what the players think I thought I'd just add this - www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21 In particular - "We opposed the preferred restructure option in our formal written submission to the RFL dated the 5 September 2013. We repeat our comment that the option favoured by the RFL, which includes the three x 8 league split, is an option which has clear, identifiable barriers to success and is an option whose basis was rejected by the Scottish FA and experimented with by the Swiss FA and ultimately rejected. The proposed changes give us severe concerns with regard to player safety and welfare given that the preferred option contains a requirement for players to play more games; this coming not long after a mantra from on high about players should play fewer games to give the national team a better chance to beat the Aussies. We have asked the RFL to undertake a thorough piece of research on the impact of increased workload on players" Unless minds have been changed recently of Damascene proportions, I think that puts the case against the new system pretty clearly.

Fair enough but you'd get exactly the same result by going to a top five system in a normal league structure. You don't need this idiotic split to reduce the number of teams involved in the playoffs and thus make the league more important.

The new system means it is almost certain to be a simple knock out between the top four and IMO that isn't a play off. It is much more of a cup competition and doesn't offer sufficient reward for winning the league or finishing higher. Look how the old top 5 system worked and see how it was biased toward the higher finishing teams. If you are going to decide the competition by a playoff after 30 league games you need to have something that offer more than a knock out game to win the thing.

I see McManus has said about the current system that itDifficult to comment on stuff that hasn't been announced yet. I agree that the SC stuff is one of the major points that needs sorting though. Isn't the 2nd tier SC going to be £900K? '"

On the BBC web page yesterday Mathew Cummins of Bradford said that the proposed promotion and relegation was rubbish, on the same web page today S Wane says he himself has reservations. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/25842657

On the BBC web page yesterday Mathew Cummins of Bradford said that the proposed promotion and relegation was rubbish, on the same web page today S Wane says he himself has reservations. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/25842657

The vote for a 12 team league didn't have an opposing vote.
Why clubs like Wakey, London and Widnes voted for relegation is staggering. Especially Widnes. They voted for 2 down in 2005 then finished 2nd bottom and were relegated. To vote again for getting your club to be vulnerable for relegation is just daft!
If they survive then are in the bottom four in 2015 they will take a massive cash hit when they have three home games against Championship opposition rather than two games v SL clubs.
You do have to wonder what is going on at some of these clubs.

I give up...They're making this up as they go along
rlhttp://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_14072-the-million-pound-match-to-decide-final-super-league-spot-from-2015.htmlrl
Is anyone in charge over there?

This is nothing new, it was in the proposal all along.

Must've missed it - lost the will to live after the first couple of paragraphs

Fair one!