Pemps for Prime Miister

How many leagues do you know in any sport where the whole league is in contention for a spot in the top 4 or 5 with two thirds of the season gone? Even in a well structured league it doesn't happen.

Your answer of "improve and compete" works at the individual club level, but if a couple of teams get better, somebody else will slip out of contention and their matches will be meaningless instead. I'm not saying this because I want to reward the clubs themeselves. Meaningless matches are no good when you're trying to market the competition as a whole.

The current system is not perfect either. The best solution, IMO, is to try to drag the quality of the Championship up to a higher level. You could then go back to P&R with a viable top 5 play-off - which I think is by far the best play-off format we've had in my lifetime.

Surely you are ancient and loyal enough to remember the old Premiership? An end of season seeded knockout competition for the top 8 teams? You should remember, it was around in Wigan's glory days and most of the winners' spoils will be gathering dust quietly somewhere at the back of the Wigan trophy cabinet. It doesn't exist anymore. And it doesn't exist because after the novelty wore off, fans, players, sponsors and media were disinterested in a second or third tier additional competition at the end of the season. If you separate the play-offs from the league, you should scrap them altogether.

Of course the Challenge Cup doesn't detract from the SL Grand Final, its a different competition so not a valid comparison.

I agree the top 8 system is not perfect, but you seem to be missing the fact that 1-4 get a second chance, so how finishing 5th is 'easier' than 4th is a mystery to me. Just because Wigan couldn't use their advantage doesn't mean there isn't one.

What extra money?

It's a cap not a minimum spend. If clubs can afford it then they will use it, if they cannot then they won't.

It's simple isn't it?

If there is to be a review then it should cover the three competitions. That's if it is considered there are three comps and not two.

Super League,
Challenge Cup
Grand Final Play Offs.

Super League should to me remain at 14 clubs and each should play other clubs home and away making 26 fixtures. A league where everyone plays on a equal basis. The "Magic" weekend should be cancelled as a Super League Fixture.

Challenge Cup. The competition needs to be made more competitive. Super league clubs should come in at the last 16 stage.
Fourteen SL clubs plus two Championship Clubs. Sixteen clubs, eight games over the two days. The draw for the quarter finals made after the final whilstle of the final game. Eight knockout C Cup games would be a sell out for the two days.

Grand Final Play Offs.
There are poor crowds for the rounds prior to the final which is very much a great event in the RL calendar and last week drew again a crowd of over 70k.
This indicates fans are not interested in paying for games that are not knock out and competitive and the series is a week too long. To make it more competitive the top eight should run with 1 v 8, 2 v 7 etc. So the first week we have four games, second week two and then the final. Win you're through, lose and you go out.

The salary cap needs to be re-addressed as it has failed in it's remit of stopping clubs going into administration. Also it has failed to achieve a better spread of players to make a more competitive Super League.
Catagories of "Club Trained", "Federation Trained" and "Non Federation" players needs to be looked at. Instead of three years at a club by age 21 to considered a club trained player that should be increased to six years which would stop certain clubs picking the best talent around at 16-18 years of age then being able to class them as "Club Trained". That would give us a far better spread of players. Especially for clubs like Cas & Wakey who produce untold amounts of talent and then have them plundered by wealthier clubs.

Can go on but that's enough!

Quote: XBrettKennyX "What extra money? It's a cap not a minimum spend. If clubs can afford it then they will use it, if they cannot then they won't. It's simple isn't it?'" viewtopic.php?p=17161839&tsmp=1350065827#p17161839

Quote: XBrettKennyX "What extra money? It's a cap not a minimum spend. If clubs can afford it then they will use it, if they cannot then they won't. It's simple isn't it?'" viewtopic.php?p=17161839&tsmp=1350065827#p17161839

As to the advantage doing well in the league gives - there isn't any. There is no difference between 1st and 2nd except the club call gimmick and if you finish 5th you get an easy game at home v 8th while 4th is away at 1st. Any team who needed two points to finish 4th in the last game of the season will throw that game. Guaranteed
........................................................................................................................................

I have deleted the first part of Davos post because it was the last bit above which stood out which made me think.

Leeds last 4 fixtures gave one the impression that they should be aiming for at least 4th place,what bad luck they had.
They lost 3 out of the 4 and finished 5th.

The fact is there isn't an easy answer and no solution is going to please everyone. The RFL can't just keep the current league format but revert back to a top 5/6 playoff structure as it leaves too many teams with nothing to play for, so you would need to bring back automatic P+R to keep it interesting at the bottom, but that is going to result in teams yo-yoing between the divisions and swapping players etc etc.

Then you'd have to look at reducing the amount of teams in SL, but who goes? Everyone has a license for 2 more years (except Bradford). So then what, mergers? - not going to happen.

FWIW of the 11 issues raised on the OP I agree with all bar the automatic P+R one. The fact is someone needs to take the RFL as an organisation by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale changes across the board. Some clubs won't like the outcome but they are needed to keep the sport competitive with other codes.

The best idea I've seen that keeps coming up time and time again is a "two tiered" SL.

They would only have themselves to blame though. Far too many clubs are sat on their arris knowing they're safe as houses because the RFL don't have the balls to do anything different and every time one of the big clubs wants to change something they'll be out voted.

I've posted my ideas numerous times but whoever takes over needs to speak to every club in SL and ask them "Why should you be in Super League?" Forget that they have a licence or that they've promised a new ground by 2065. What will they offer in 2013. If the answer isn't good enough, then sorry you're out.

There used to be a saying in the 80's:

Rugby Union - An amateur game ran by professionals.
Rugby League - A professional game ran by amateurs.

Sadly for us, Union has moved with the times and is now lightyears ahead of our game at club level, whereas League slowly trundles on regardless.

Union has always been way ahead of us internationally. I'm talking about at club level now with these European cup competitions they have, massive massive money every year!

I really don't get this idea we need to keep it interesting at the bottom. It is the tail wagging the dog. If a team's season ends early when we have a cup and a league to play for then its because they are a poor side and they need to improve.

I have not got the time or inclination to work it out but I bet given Leeds lost 11 games, Hull who finished 6th 10, Hudds 13 and Wakey 14 the season would not have ended for the 6th 7th and 8th places sides as early as you may think.

What I am certain of is the old top 5 system will have all the teams going at all league games full tilt for much longer than a top 8 system does.



I think unless some of the senior figures in the RFL don't like the outcome of any review i.e. it recommends they leave we will never progress.



You can fiddle with the structure all you want but it all boils down to one thing, money (or rather the lack of it).