There will always be winners and losers in sport, changing the structure of the leagues will not change that. What it will change however, is the income of clubs, the wage's of players and reduce sponsorship.

It will almost certainly reduce opportunities for youngsters to progress which since the introduction of franchising and a 14 team comp has thrived but still needs time to further develop. It will also take away that opportunity for clubs to move up.

Some suggest this because a few clubs have been mismanaged, but i do not see what this would change? Clubs will continue to be mismanaged regardless of alterations made. You cannot control this by putting constraints on them, it is their mentality and approach to the situation that causes the problem. Clubs continue to spend well over what they can afford, they knowingly do this even with the salary cap in place. It's the entire RL attitude and mentality which needs to change, not the structure's in place

Just googled Jamie Peacock and according to Wiki, he has averaged (inc internationals) 34.5 games per season over 12 seasons, 6 at Bulls 6 at Leeds.
Now I'm no expert, but if a prop can sustain that level of fitness in SL, so can anyone else.
As Bren has said the clubs are in control as to who plays where and when, and the clubs (certain clubs) are the one's who seek to benefit financially by a) being successful in the first place and b) wanting more of the pie for themselves.
I think Jamie needs to speak to his employers about their duty of care over himself and his colleagues at Leeds if he has concerns, rather than trying to push the responsibility elsewhere.

will mr peacock be taking a big pay cut as his club will have less gate and sponsorship revenue?

Good post that Bren! I was going to say something similar regarding squad rotation!

I get the feeling they want to remove certain clubs rather than lower the number of games, just like they did prior to 'Super' League and this could just be their excuse. They more than likely know who they want out, it's probably just a matter of how many seasons are they going to give London to get above the cut off point before they do it!

If they do think they play too many games then why are they on about extending the World Club Challenge and also playing more games against the Exiles?

I'd welcome some changes, as long as that change was promotion and relegation related.

I think there might be some crossed wires here... indeed mine might the ones crossed!

I thought the recent talk of a 10 team Super League was actually the adding of a second tier SL of a league of 10. The idea being that you would have 20 full time clubs in Super League in two division (still under licensing) and that P&R would happen between the A league and the B league on a yearly basis. Sky would have broadcasting rights to the whole thing and show games from both Super League A & Super League B and that the number of games would decrease but only slightly, because you would have a SL Champions play-off for the SL title and some sort of play-off between the bottom of League A and the top of League B to decided who came up to League A & who went down to League B. The number of promotion & relegation slots between the leagues would be quite high, so at least 3 and if not 4 clubs per season between each league.

If say the top 5 clubs in league A played off for the Champions Title, the bottom 5 clubs from league A played off the top 5 clubs from League B for at least 3 potential P&R spots between the leagues and then the bottom 5 clubs of league B played an end of season play-off with the part-time clubs, for say a Northern Rail style trophy allowing the part time clubs to get some TV money at the end of the season, this might have some legs!

This system does allow for the league to expand into new geographical areas without jettisoning any current and probably heart-land club as well and allow the likes of Leigh, Halifax and Featherstone a shot at full-time RL. As long as the potential P&R between the two divisions is at least 3 if not 4 clubs per season, then this would not turn SL B into a '2nd' Division but it would be a minor division! In fact SL Major and SL Minor would be good titles fp0r the two leagues!

That all said, I think this plan would be at least 6 to 10 years away and the until then SL should stay at 14 clubs but it might be something to think about!

It could well be that's what they mean - but then they're ignoring the underpinning facts of the matter; Sky won't pay more, or even the same, for fewer televised matches and even if they would, they don't own the broadcasting rights to the lower division.

Some people are preaching a culling of SL in the mistaken belief that it will channel more money to the 'top' clubs and increase the salary cap - neither of which would happen.

As I said - I'm sure JP is a good bloke and he's certainly been a cracking prop forward, but a RL administrator he is not.

This would be the right way to go, ps do you think my Avatar looks like Vastman

Gets me when players say they play to many games per season yes they are pro players but look back to 1962 Wakey played 44 games and those players were part time with full time jobs..

No,and just a wee bit

Back on topic please.

Back on topic I have thought for ages that if other clubs could somehow be in a re-structered SL or leagues then all the extra support at such clubs as Halifax, Fev, Leigh etc could be tapped into. I'm sure clubs like Halifax would instantly attract more supporters! Just a thought though don't know if it could be done-finance obviously the key factor!