I don't disagree with the theory of balancing things out, but I think in practice, a team might be relegated because the fixture list was heavily stacked against them.

You only need to finish 5th to get relegated.

There is also the probability that SL teams destined for relegation will prepare early for stage 2, with teams in mid-table having to battle to the bitter end.

But what do you do, try to create a system where more games matter less?

SL is the pinnacle of club RL here. Youth development should take place first and foremost in academies, and then youngsters should earn their chance and should be picked because it gives their team the best chance of winning.

There's not a lack of opportunities, more of sufficient players properly prepared and equipped to step into SL. There'll be some strong salary cap incentives in place, that the wealthier clubs can take advantage of, also.

The policy review document suggests a one-off 'final' game between 4th and 5th, so there's an 'out'. On the other hand you could come in 4th and lose that and go down due to a bad 80 minutes. And finishing not better than 9th of 12 in the regular season and being mediocre even against weaker opposition.

There has to be an element of jeopardy in any P&R system, and at least with this with this there's a path back without necessarily losing everything. I'm not a huge fan of this system, by any means, but there does seem to be an almost exclusive focus on its drawbacks.

After reading a few threads on other teams board the statement below says it all for me

A look at the results of SL vs Championship Challenge Cup games would suggest that the four who finish in the bottom of SL are going to be the top four in the middle tier playoffs.

Playing to a different salary cap, different overseas player rules, it's hardly a fair fight.

Any word on whether the Championship in 2015 will scrap the bonus points system or whether this system will be introduced for all league games?

Apparently the vote was 7 in favour of the new structure with 6 against, with Catalan abstaining.Against were:
Wigan
Wire
Hull FC
Hull KR
Hudds
Salford god knows if it's true though tbf

Quote: Legends and Icons "Apparently the vote was 7 in favour of the new structure with 6 against, with Catalan abstaining.Against were Not according to the mail today. www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull-FC- ... story.html

Quote: Legends and Icons "Apparently the vote was 7 in favour of the new structure with 6 against, with Catalan abstaining.Against were Not according to the mail today. www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull-FC- ... story.html

According to the BBC the vote was unanimous, so take your pick.

By the way, this structure appears to be different to the original 3 x 8 proposal. In fact in practice it's a standard season with 2 smaller playoffs at either end of the table.

Season passes look like they'll be sold in 2 blocks - one to cover the 11 home games in the regular season and another to cover the 'phase 2'/playoffs.

Not clear from the article if 4 places are up for grabs or a smaller number based on a playoff system similar to the one for deciding the champions.

The rlRFL's websiterl says



So it was a seven/six split in favour, virtually unanimous or unanimous.

That's cleared that up, then.

I can't see how that could work. If Championship teams are in the top 4 places, I can't think of any fiddle which would allow 3 of the 4 SL teams to stay in SL.

I think we need to wait and see.

The sky sports news app states

"A democratic decision was made by Super League clubs on the recommendation of the RFL on the future structure of the competition,

I'll think we will know by Wednesday either way after the fans forum