I said 16 no loop
Ok for French if they are growing the grass roots in France
No 10 x 10 two tier SL (such restrictive thinking would end me as a fan of UK footy)
Yes to 9s comps
No to Yorks v lancs
No to cricket like gimmicks

I winder what the fans of the "big" clubs are saying ?
Tbf, cutting the league from 16 to 14 to 12 has done nothing to improve quality and where do we go after it's been cut again, down to 10 ?
Let's face it, the only reason for reducing the numbers is to allow those in SL to maintain a similar level of funding from Sky, with a reduced pot. The so called "driving up quality" is a smoke screen.

The million dollar question is just how we make the game more appealing to those outside the heartlands and to more people inside the heartlands.
There are no quick fixes or silver bullets and there needs to be a long term plan for growth across all areas of the game, from junior, community and right up to the pro game.
Hopefully, the success of Channel 4 this season, shows that with a bit of a revamp, the game can at least gain some TV viewers, which should help to increase TV monies.

I went with 14 teams and keep magic, 27 games, cant stand the two 10's idea.

Improve the player pool by changing the quota rule from 7 non fed trained to 7 non eligible for England/france by birth country/parent or grandparent birth country. An example would be victor Radley, not that he would come, but he's going to play for England through his dad being english, but would still count on the overseas quota under the current rules, id change that. I was going to say eligible for all home nations but there arnt any clubs in SL from any atm, so bit pointless

Better salary cap exemptions for home grown players

Thought the question re the challenge cup was interesting about it being a straight knock out comp. I've said no to loop fixtures but if the CC became a word cup/champions league structure that could work.

Said pretty much the same as you Barnsley

Have always said likes of Leeds et al will only be happy when it’s a 5 team league , playing leeds saints hull Wigan Warrington playing each other 4 times a year no relegation promotion in a format like baseball if we go to ten 2 of Salford Wakefield and cas would effectively be relegated into,a in funded second division semi professional game - and in 3 years time they’d be talking about an 8 team league

I said I wanted Franchising back.
Prefer 14 teams.
And a fixed international calendar.

8 then 6, than 2 and then Wigan and Leeds left paying with themselves every week. I hope that I worded that correctly.

Can you imagine if there were 10 teams and constant TV loop games between the likes of Wigan/saints Leeds. It’s bad enough now. I always thought the league was better with 14 teams in and no loop fixtures. Also, six again that was brought in for Covid needs to be dropped fast. I like the idea of it but as a spectator it’s terrible. It’s so inconsistently applied by officials it’s more frustrating. Catalans game a prime example. Trinity got penalised for holding down yet Catalans seemed to be allowed an eternity. There just seems to be no consistency in it.

I do believe though that moving to 14 teams would be correct. Though I would also reduce the championship and league 1 leagues to fewer teams to create a comp of higher quality.

Promotion to SL should happen next 2 seasons to raise to 14 and during that time no relegation should happen. Also once the SL reaches 14 that year should be a no promotion/relegation closed year to allow the 14 teams to build/promote youth and get ready for a highly competitive comp the following year when promotion/relegation is put back on the table.

Also academy should be compulsory and there should be some central funding ringfenced for each team that can only be used on academy to help grow that side of the game and bring more participation and quality to the league medium to long term.

Just a few things I’d like to see.

But if six again is inconsistently applied, why would a penalty be better? Its the same, just slower.

Because a penalty includes the indication of what the offence was. Six agains give the refs the luxury of being the only one on the planet knowing WTF some were given for or not given sometimes. We got one against us v Wigan and the only obvious reason was because the home fans chanted that the referees a banker.

Maybe the ref could signal why the 6 again ?

That would work for me. They say it in the Mike on Sky games.

Maybe, half the time fans have no idea why they’re given as it’s down to refs interpretation and they’re hardly consistent between different officials and tolerances. It’s quite frankly frustrating.

Penalties also tend to be reviewed on the TV games which gives some accountability and explains as to the reasons behind them.

I think the game has been sped up too much also which has led to a decrease in quality. You have some tired teams after relentless repeat sets with no break and it leads imo to some sloppy play.

I think we need to go back to the way the game was managed 10-15 years ago personally.

I watched a game from many years ago and it was far more exciting than the tiresome predictable tactics of today. Teams of the past used to have to break down teams with quality plays/kicks and create the gaps and space.

These days the tactics mostly are to get on front foot with fast plays and one up drives behind the ruck to force six agains and capitalise on a team on the back foot with a more direct but less exciting style. Quite frankly it’s boring.

snap