So in theory, should there be only one Grade B side in SL and they finish top, go the full season undefeated and win the treble they would still be relegated? Yeah i can't see that proposal going far.

Why is RL in a position where a club the size of Batley can table something like this? Why don't the rfl have control over the structure of the competitions?

Because this is the RFL we are talking about

It should either be any team that finishes top in the Championship gets promotion (should they meet the criteria and grading) and the team that finishes bottom of SL gets relegated whether A or B grade, they simply allow 2 up next year and expand the league.

Riddled in self interest Indeed!!!

Absolute lunacy just step back a moment out of the parochial world of British RL and you have to ask don't the clubs and the RL realise that the whole of the sports world is laughing at us, the current IMG regulations are bad enough but at least making clubs like Cas., Leigh and Wakey get their houses sorted out, but when it comes down to the number of Pixels on a screen deciding a clubs fate and even perhaps the difference between relegation and promotion, it buggers belief. Some would say you would say that, but everyone agrees outside the game when you explain it that it's just stupid and just shows us up. A recommendation yes, but basing points on it is ridiculous.

Now we have not even started the first season under the new regime and we have a massive change being suggested, based totally on self interest, from a club with a great heritage who I have always followed and admired and who have some dedicated supporters but that should on the present parameters never get in Super League (a harsh statement I agree but one I feel is justified). I'm sure Rochdale, Cornwall and Goole will be all for the change.

Now, Whilst all this tom foolery is going on the clubs are called in for another emergency meeting (almost an annual occasion these days) to bail out Salford (Again) who are in danger of going under next month and are relying on an advertising board on the M60 to save them. Whilst all the while observers from other sports look at the gates at Salford and Huddersfield and scratch their heads as to why they are Grade A clubs. As I say we are a bloody laughing stock.

P.S. Dan at the Mail is back from holidays tomorrow just in time for the fixtures being announced.

Salford and Huddersfield are GradeB, Salford were in fact not far off being demoted, so while I still have my concerns over the IMG system, they have been marked down for crowds and income so the scores have worked in that respect.

The problem for the league is the dwindling TV deal, costs are going up and up due to inflation but SKY get more and more content for less. I've said it before and I say it again this league could go part time within the decade.

Toulouse must be feeling slightly aggrieved, 0.39 points off Salford and their financial issues only come to light post IMG gradings

Salford are a shambles. I feel sorry for the fans and players but how the hell do you suddenly realise you need £1/2 m quid? It's down to really poor management of the club.

Haven't the council just bought the ground? Maybe they're trying to leverage something from them?

Thanks for that I got that wrong but the point I was making was that from the outside our game is baffling for many and just a case for laughing at for others. Only today I read an article by A RU pundit who stated in passing that it was hard to understand a game that was haemorrhaging attending supporters that sanction every game being televised. People are baffled by the goings on in our game and often quite frankly am I.

Don’t agree with the SL haemorraging attending supporters.

Haven’t got the actual stats to hand, but think average SL crowds has been increasing season upon season.

Easy to think crowds were huge in the 80’s. That may be true for Cup games, with all semi finals attracting 20k+ and big Wembley crowds.

However, many club’s league gates were modest. Early 80’s, Hull and Rovers were comparable to today. However, until Wigan struck gold, their gates, along with Sts, Leeds and Bradford were often c6-7k.

Yet for those already actively involved in supporting and loving our game, every game being on TV is the best thing that's happened haha.

Some investment from the NRL would be the best way for us to go, even if that means become a feeder league to them. For me it's the only way we keep it a full-time competition. Give players over here more of a platform to shine, whilst being able to bring in young up and coming Aussies to compete at a level above the Queensland and NSW cups

Think live TV affecting attendances is a bit of a myth.

If you look at other sports, most Premier League and England Test matches sell out despite wall to wall live coverage.

Quote: Rugby Raider "Don’t agree with the SL haemorraging attending supporters. Haven’t got the actual stats to hand, but think average SL crowds has been increasing season upon season. Easy to think crowds were huge in the 80’s. That may be true for Cup games, with all semi finals attracting 20k+ and big Wembley crowds. However, many club’s league gates were modest. Early 80’s, Hull and Rovers were comparable to today. However, until Wigan struck gold, their gates, along with Sts, Leeds and Bradford were often c6-7k.'" I'm sure your right but cos I don't get out much I read a lot of national sports stuff and radio and I'm just saying what the perception of many sports writers etc. about our sport seems to be. the term haemorraging fans was the words used on talk sport when the fixtures were discussed. It's a perception thing. We are 'knee deep in the hoopla' as far as the game we love is concerned but to continue to attract national media attention in national newspapers TV and radio etc a level of national credibility is important particularly if we are to reverse sponsorship trends, tv money allocations etc. At present the perception out there does not match the reality. Incidentally not as straight forward as Salford thought, they hoped it would go through the special meeting today perhaps some clubs have reservations this time around. https://salfordreddevils.net/club-statement-21-11-24/

Quote: Rugby Raider "Don’t agree with the SL haemorraging attending supporters. Haven’t got the actual stats to hand, but think average SL crowds has been increasing season upon season. Easy to think crowds were huge in the 80’s. That may be true for Cup games, with all semi finals attracting 20k+ and big Wembley crowds. However, many club’s league gates were modest. Early 80’s, Hull and Rovers were comparable to today. However, until Wigan struck gold, their gates, along with Sts, Leeds and Bradford were often c6-7k.'" I'm sure your right but cos I don't get out much I read a lot of national sports stuff and radio and I'm just saying what the perception of many sports writers etc. about our sport seems to be. the term haemorraging fans was the words used on talk sport when the fixtures were discussed. It's a perception thing. We are 'knee deep in the hoopla' as far as the game we love is concerned but to continue to attract national media attention in national newspapers TV and radio etc a level of national credibility is important particularly if we are to reverse sponsorship trends, tv money allocations etc. At present the perception out there does not match the reality. Incidentally not as straight forward as Salford thought, they hoped it would go through the special meeting today perhaps some clubs have reservations this time around. https://salfordreddevils.net/club-statement-21-11-24/

The NRL are already beginning to sow the seeds here I think, inviting Wigan and Warrington to Vegas, the switching of the ashes series to the UK, clubs announcing partnerships with NRL clubs. If the NRL were going to invest, I think they'd contact the clubs they wanted directly and set up their own comp, that way you don't need to pay the rfl anything. Also as seen with IMG, you can come up with recommendations but club chairmen still rule the roost with their self interest. NRL Europe should dictate the terms to the clubs, not vice versa as it is currently

True. You focus more on the referee rather than the "action" and wait for the inevitable penalty which often goes against the attacking team which I find puzzling.