I know there is a thread on this somewhere but I've gone back a fair few pages and can't see it so if someone wants to consolidate this with that thread feel free.

I was reading Wilf's piece about promotion/relgation etc. which got me thinking. If I recall the main reason for the current system was to give a degree of certainty to the clubs and also to prevent the yo-yo scenario.

Wilf commented on parachute payments to help with the certainty position, I know it doesn't stop the fear of relegation but it should stop clubs going bust as a result of relegation.

As far as promtion goes I would propose a system whereby the team that finishes top of the second tier is promoted but the promotion is defered by a year. The team would be provided with additional funds from the RFL to build a squad whilst competing in the second tier.
If as is likely to happen the "prefered team" finishes top of the second tier in year 2 then the runner up will receive the deferred promotion.

A long way from ideal and would need funding somehow but at least it gives the newly promoted club the opprtunity to build a squad capable of competing in Superleague without becoming the competition whipping boys and whilst there is a degree of complication at least everyone knows what they are doing before the season starts.

Interesting post.

Personally I think the gap between full time and part time professional is so large that it is unbridgeable now.

Lets be honest - only Featherstone, Halifax and possibly Leigh are remotely credible candidates for promotion, yet when the door was open all 3 failed to make a go of it. Why would they do any better now.

Having said that I would rather have Halifax in there instead of London, but that's just a personal preference as I think there is way more potential there. If London hasn't taken off after 33 years it never will.

It's simplemake it work".

If there's any money floating around then scrap the barmy dual-registration madness and bring back the Alliance. That would do more for player development and allow senior players a competitive route back from injury.

You speak a lot of sense

For all the mithering about too many games, I don't think there are enough. Most teams finish in early September, it's 5 months until the season starts in February. The season also includes weeks off for the exiles game, and if you're out of the cup early, a further 4 weeks without a game. 13 home games a year isn't enough, financially or in terms of opportunity for fans to engage with the club IMO. This was a side benefit of the Alliance competition, in addition to the primary ones you state.

That's because he doesn't work for the RFL.

Correct but Richard Lewis did and he should be thanked for saving club chairmen from themselves. Unfortunately there were legions of fans who blamed him for all the game's woes and plenty enough chairmen that allowed the situation to continue.

I seriously fear for the future of our sport because I don't think Barwick is anywhere near as strong a character as Lewis

I agree Mrs B that there aren't enough games and I think a 5 month break between seasons is too much. I am not entirely sure how to fix it and create an acceptable structure either though.

I would like to see another cup competition brought back. Lets face it, only 3 or 4 teams are winning the GF and a tough away draw in the CC could mean the season is effectively over for most teams by end of April!!

An end of season knock out competition akin to what the premiership trophy used to be maybe or even the reintroduction of the Yorkshire and Lancashire cups??.......

There isn't enough quality for a 14 team comp , Some results this season have proved that .

The solution is not to reduce the number of teams playing at the elite level but to work to produce the number of quality players required.

We're only mid-way through the 2nd round of licensing and already we have people wanting to rip it up and try something different. That's not a solution, it's a bloody cop-out.

Money needs to be found for grass-roots player development. The RFL and Superleague clubs should be working even closer with amateur teams to develop a pathway that can identify talent at any level and then nurture it towards a greater number of elite players to choose from. It's not too many years ago we couldn't cobble together a 3/4 line capable of contesting on the international stage. Now we have competition for places.

It needs investment and it needs time. the licensing system was supposed to move away from short-termism, looks like the clubs and speccies want to go back to the old days

I broadly agree.



Licensing as it was sold was, with hindsight, the cop-out IMO. It was a Blairite 'solution' from which everybody thought they got most of what the wanted. 'Stability' for the SL clubs, while still providing the prospect of 'mobility' for the rest - a mechanism for those outside to replace SL clubs that failed to take advantage of that stability.
However, events exposed the natural tension between 'stability' and 'mobility'. We have to choose, now, we can't have both. I'm fine with franchising, as long as it admits what it is and we don't have to keep messing about with the pretence of assessments.



I think the issue is more that it is spread unevenly. There mightn't be enough money at all 14 teams, but that is slightly different.
Also, we do have a pretty restrictive non-fed rule, brought in to give kids and talent in the championships their chance. If we decide the 'untapped potential' isn't there after all, I'd let in a couple of extra overseas players per team rather than shrinking SL, for shrinkings sake.

Clubs are going to have to start investing in youth now because of the talent drain to and from the NRL. At the invention of SL , All SL clubs should have been made to spend a certain % on their academy's instead of topping up there teams with average Antipodeans .
SL now could have been hell of a lot better with an even bigger player pool which could easily support a 14 team comp.

I'm fully in favour of the current 3-year franchise system too.

After just 4.5 seasons, were already seeing teams crammed with homegrown youngsters & a lower reliance on Aussie imports.

I also don't understand the apparent need from some supporters for Superleague to be ultra-competitive, that all 14 clubs should be in with a shout of winning the title and blowout scores make SL a joke. We as a group of fans need to be realistic.

If, a team is constantly underperforming, both on the pitch and off it, then they should lose their license at the end of the franchise period should there be a club in the Championship that could do better & bring more to the competition. At the moment, I'm not sure there is.

The fact there are less aussies is more to do with to do with the respective salary caps and the exchange rate than any positive move by clubs.

The only thing wrong with the franchise system has been the lack of balls from the RFL in dealing with the clubs who have gone into administration IMO

Don't think there's been many better overseaers in the SL era than Pat Richards.
An all-round class act.
Big boots to fill.

*Meant to be on the Briscoe thread.