Tbf I would have gone with 1 up 1 down.

This negates the possibility of a team finishing 9th (within a couple of points of the play offs) and still getting dropped.

All that would then need to be decided is which CC club to promote, either top of the ladder after the regular rounds or GF winners and there should also be some minimum criteria attached.

The main difficulty with P/R between SL and the CC has been the huge gap in funding, making it almost impossible for the CC clubs to build a decent squad but, this has been addressed (at least we think so)

I realise this is too simple for our sport and doesn't offer a raft of contrived new meaningful fixtures, so I remain disgruntled and with even less faith in the clowns that have a duty to improve the sport.

I suggest people STOP moaning and get on with it.

Thank God there was no internet and messageboards back in 1895!

12, or 14 ?

Either

The key element to P/R was the disparity between the SL income and that of the CC
The lunacy of the new structure is that you could win the title from 8th and be relegated from 9th

Not really, your season doesnt end until you have played 30 games

So in order to reduce the comp to 12 teams, we now have some contrived relegation play off involving 4 SL teams, plus 4 CC teams just to balance the fixture programme ??

Just out of interest, what does CC mean?

Well, in this instance it's not The Challenge Cup

Only 1 ' C ' in Championship

Championship Clubs

" Championship Clubs teams " ? Nah, you've forgotten its not sponsored by the Co oP anymore, havent you?