FORUMS > Wigan Warriors > Superleague going to 12 teams 2015 |
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 2797 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2017 | Oct 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
39978_1327618193.jpg :d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_39978.jpg |
|
| Quote: Aboveusonlypie "The more league games you have the more points at stake the more likelihood that by games 28/29/30 the top 4 are sorted. It's basic maths. The more points that are at stake the more the league becomes stretched. Why do we need a pre-qualifier for the playoffs - that's what the regular season should be for. And you haven't attempted to answer my query about whether Sky are interested in a reduced playoff series?
You are happy that there will be more intensity in the season all the way to the playoffs. But has anyone considered what the players union think about all this? By the time they get to the GF each team will be knackerred! - NRL players have played 22 league games plus playoffs. SL players will have played 30 league games plus Challenge Cup plus playoffs.
I just don't see how anyone will be interested in the second teir games. Effectively full time pros playing against part timers. I'd put money on it now that Super League will start with the same 12 the following season.'"
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.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 15453 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
[quote="Frank Zappa":1sacjrvf]Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.[/quote:1sacjrvf]
[quote="The_Enforcer":1sacjrvf]Most idiotic post ever goes to Grimmy..... The way to restart should be an arm wrestle between a designated player from each side.[/quote:1sacjrvf]: |
|
| Quote: Father Ted "What does bother me is that the bottom clubs in SL have voted to ditch two fixtures against SL opposition for three matches versus Championship clubs.
Have they done their crowd projections and likely revenue consequencies?
If they haven't then they could find themselves in all sorts of money troubles.'"
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
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 2797 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2017 | Oct 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
39978_1327618193.jpg :d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_39978.jpg |
|
| Quote: Father Ted "What does bother me is that the bottom clubs in SL have voted to ditch two fixtures against SL opposition for three matches versus Championship clubs.
Have they done their crowd projections and likely revenue consequencies?
If they haven't then they could find themselves in all sorts of money troubles.'"
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?
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1979 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2012 | 12 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2018 | Jan 2018 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
68548_1368547004.jpg "Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try
No hell below us, above us only pie"(John Ono Lennon born Wigan 1940):d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_68548.jpg |
|
| Quote: WARRIORCRAIG "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.'"
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?
|
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 15453 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
[quote="Frank Zappa":1sacjrvf]Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.[/quote:1sacjrvf]
[quote="The_Enforcer":1sacjrvf]Most idiotic post ever goes to Grimmy..... The way to restart should be an arm wrestle between a designated player from each side.[/quote:1sacjrvf]: |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 14395 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | May 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
26.jpg Last league derby at Central Park 5/9/1999: Wigan 28 St. Helens 20
Last league derby at Knowsley Road 2/4/2010: St. Helens 10 Wigan 18:26.jpg |
Moderator
|
| Quote: WARRIORCRAIG "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?'"
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.
'"
Most NRL players do not take part in SoO and so no you cam't argue there is little difference because of the SoO.
Quote: WARRIORCRAIG "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.'"
I don't see how it is. It has not solved the issue of what happens to a current SL side if they drop out of the top 12 in terms of salary cap and players wages. Are they always going to be considered a SL side from a salary point of view so can maintain a £1.8m salary cap? Or at some point are they going to have to adopt a reduced cap level a and so rip players contacts up? If it is the latter all this does is kick the issue of moving between pro and semi pro down the road.
There is also the issue of the play offs themselves. Though it has not been announced a lot of people seem to think it will be a simple semi-final/final set up between the top 4. If so that isn't a play off but a simple knock out competition with even less of a link to the regular season than any play off format we have had previously.
For me the new format is a case of the tail wagging the dog. Yes P&R between a pro and semi pro league doesn't work but this new system is little different in reality. It gives some championship clubs a potential path into the top flight but instead of being based on criteria besides where you finish in the league you can progress regardless.
Licensing was a far better approach but was just badly administered and I can't see why any of those clubs that went into administration under licencing would not have done so under this new system either.
|
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 2797 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2017 | Oct 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
39978_1327618193.jpg :d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_39978.jpg |
|
| Quote: DaveO "Holding back for the playoffs
The current system DOES lend itself to that sort of thing, because you can finish less than half way down the league table and still have a chance of being champions. I'm sorry but reducing the number of teams who qualify for the playoffs will definitely change the mentality of the weekly rounds. In the last few seasons Leeds have won the POs from 5th position in the league, and we rested a lot of our star players and lost the majority of our games from July-Sep to let a big lead in the table slip, eventually finishing 4th but still won the GF. If there's a genuine advantage for finishing higher in the table then tactics like this become obsolete.
Quote: DaveO "Most NRL players do not take part in SoO and so no you cam't argue there is little difference because of the SoO.'"
I wasn't trying to claim we don't play significantly more games than the NRL do, I was saying that there won't be more games for the SL teams than there are now. The poster I quoted incorrectly stated that the NRL has 22 weekly rounds, when it's 24, and the players who will be playing in the end of season internationals will more than likely feature in Origin, so it is relevant. Nobody ever said the aim of this new system was to reduce the number of domestic games in the SL season to make our players play a similar number of games to the NRL players.
Quote: DaveO "I don't see how it is. It has not solved the issue of what happens to a current SL side if they drop out of the top 12 in terms of salary cap and players wages. Are they always going to be considered a SL side from a salary point of view so can maintain a £1.8m salary cap? Or at some point are they going to have to adopt a reduced cap level a and so rip players contacts up? If it is the latter all this does is kick the issue of moving between pro and semi pro down the road.'"
Difficult 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?
Quote: DaveO "There is also the issue of the play offs themselves. Though it has not been announced a lot of people seem to think it will be a simple semi-final/final set up between the top 4. If so that isn't a play off but a simple knock out competition with even less of a link to the regular season than any play off format we have had previously.'"
The link is the positions you have qualified in. The higher you finish in the league, the better you're chance of reaching the GF. The POs don't need to be 3 weeks long and include 8 teams, a lot of the 7 games after the split should be played at PO intensity to either qualify or cement the highest possible finishing position. The current system has killed the incentive to try and win the league, see Danny Brough's recent comments.
Quote: DaveO "For me the new format is a case of the tail wagging the dog. Yes P&R between a pro and semi pro league doesn't work but this new system is little different in reality. It gives some championship clubs a potential path into the top flight but instead of being based on criteria besides where you finish in the league you can progress regardless.
Licensing was a far better approach but was just badly administered and I can't see why any of those clubs that went into administration under licencing would not have done so under this new system either.'"
I think it is the opposite. I was all for licensing at the beginning, as I thought it would make the lower teams get their act together. Two license periods down the line and the promise stadia of Wakefield and Castleford are nowhere to be seen, Bradford and Salford have nearly gone bust, Crusaders have gone and London are nothing short of a complete shambles. It's clear that something needs changing. The top flight is being reduced from 14 to 12, and then a further 4 could drop out if they don't perform on the field. Licensing didn't force the lower end SL clubs to buck their ideas up, but this might. Meanwhile fans of the top teams get to watch their team play in more intense games against better opposition instead of seeing them put 50 or 60 on teams without breaking sweat.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1979 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2012 | 12 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2018 | Jan 2018 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
68548_1368547004.jpg "Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try
No hell below us, above us only pie"(John Ono Lennon born Wigan 1940):d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_68548.jpg |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 14395 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | May 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
26.jpg Last league derby at Central Park 5/9/1999: Wigan 28 St. Helens 20
Last league derby at Knowsley Road 2/4/2010: St. Helens 10 Wigan 18:26.jpg |
Moderator
|
| Quote: WARRIORCRAIG "The current system DOES lend itself to that sort of thing, because you can finish less than half way down the league table and still have a chance of being champions. I'm sorry but reducing the number of teams who qualify for the playoffs will definitely change the mentality of the weekly rounds. In the last few seasons Leeds have won the POs from 5th position in the league, and we rested a lot of our star players and lost the majority of our games from July-Sep to let a big lead in the table slip, eventually finishing 4th but still won the GF. If there's a genuine advantage for finishing higher in the table then tactics like this become obsolete. '"
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? '"
According to Martin Sadler it has not been agreed and if no agreement is reached it will mean SL clubs keep £1.2m and the championship sides get £90K.
Apparently SL clubs voted 7-6 in favour of the new structure (Les Cat's abstained, God knows why). The dissenters were Hudds, Hull FC, Hull KR, Salford, Warrington and Wigan.
Interestingly both Betts and Cummins, coaches of clubs who voted for the proposals have come out against them with Cummins saying all this will do is get clubs back again to the dark days of buying players to ensure they don't drop down the pecking order.
Quote: WARRIORCRAIG "I think it is the opposite. I was all for licensing at the beginning, as I thought it would make the lower teams get their act together. Two license periods down the line and the promise stadia of Wakefield and Castleford are nowhere to be seen, Bradford and Salford have nearly gone bust, Crusaders have gone and London are nothing short of a complete shambles.'"
It does not follow that licensing is to blame for that. The fact the RFL failed to spot problem clubs and awarded them a license anyway points squarely at the RFL's incompetence. Similar system work elsewhere.
Quote: WARRIORCRAIG " It's clear that something needs changing. The top flight is being reduced from 14 to 12, and then a further 4 could drop out if they don't perform on the field. Licensing didn't force the lower end SL clubs to buck their ideas up, but this might.'"
Why? As Cummins has said bucking their idea up may well result in spending on players they can't afford to avoid dropping down the pecking order. The idea this new system does away with all the old problems associated with P&R such as that is far fetched IMO.
Quote: WARRIORCRAIG " Meanwhile fans of the top teams get to watch their team play in more intense games against better opposition instead of seeing them put 50 or 60 on teams without breaking sweat.'"
It was voted 13-0 to reduce the SL to 12 teams. That and a top five play off would deliver everything you want.
By the way a big reason why this system failed in Switzerland was due to attendances falling and the focus seemingly making the relegation game more important than the championship deciders.
If you think about it you can see why because the middle 8 is an 8 team P&R competition! So much for doing away with the problems of P&R as well.
It was also felt too complicated by sponsors and fans so the only time it has every been tried, it failed.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1789 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2011 | 14 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2017 | Feb 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
: |
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 8147 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
: |
|
| 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.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1008 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2011 | 13 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
62118_1550845628.png Everything [i:1c0rjla2]is [/i:1c0rjla2]Awesome:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_62118.png |
|
| I give up...They're making this up as they go along
rlhttps://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_14072-the-million-pound-match-to-decide-final-super-league-spot-from-2015.htmlrl
Is anyone in charge over there?
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 519 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2013 | 11 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2017 | May 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
: |
|
| Quote: CyberPieMan "I give up...They're making this up as they go along
rlhttps://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.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1008 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2011 | 13 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
62118_1550845628.png Everything [i:1c0rjla2]is [/i:1c0rjla2]Awesome:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_62118.png |
|
| Quote: andyh0064 "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
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 519 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2013 | 11 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2017 | May 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
: |
|
| Fair one!
|
|
|
|
|
|