12 teams

[cpwigan]

LATEST in League Express TODAY

13-0 to reduce SL from 14 to 12

Catalans abstained

7-6 to opt for 2 x 12 then 3 x 8

Catalans AGAIN abstained

6 clubs against Hudd, Hull FC, Hull KR, Salford, Warrington and Wigan

NO DECISION YET ON HOW SKY MONEY DISTRIBUTED (FUTURE MEETING) If no agreement is reached SL clubs will continue receiving £1.2 million, Championship clubs £90,000

Sadler in the LE argues that how can you decide one (structure) without deciding the other (SKY money share)

6 AGAINST proposed creating a SL BOD to include as it does now the RFL Chairman AND CEO BUT 3 NEW ROLES SL CEO, SL SALES/MARKETING DIRECTOR and EXTERNAL INDEPENDENT NON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

6 AGAINST proposed their own league structure. P&R would take place every 2 years and be a big TV Draw

THE ????? The Fat Controller announced at the meeting that the RFL had been approached by more than 1 broadcaster to negotiate a new TV deal after 2016 with a significant rise in ££££s from the present deal. The broadcaster apparently really like the Fat Controllers/RFL ideas. BT Sports has been mentioned in media circles.

Sadler raised the 2 x 12 becomes 3 x 8. The only time it has been used was by Swiss Football between 1988 and 2003. IT WAS A DISASTER, UNPOPULAR WITH FANS (Attendances fell), The Media and Sponsors who felt it was too complicated and that the relegation game became more important than the Championship deciders. Scottish football decided against the structure the RFL wants.

Dennis Betts is totally against the new structure/P&R and very PRO franchising BUT Widnes BOD went the opposite was supporting the RFL and changes.

[Mike]

That;s great - an 8 team Promotion and Relegation competition where 4 teams receive £1.2M and 4 receive 90K. Four pro teams vs 4 semi-pro teams. How many of the championship four are going to get promoted on average? I'd predict 0%.

Looking at the CC - how many championship clubs have beaten a SL opponent over the last 10 years? And those that did are just one-offs - in this system they'd have to repeatedly beat multiple SL opponents to gain promotion.

[DaveO]

That;s great - an 8 team Promotion and Relegation competition where 4 teams receive £1.2M and 4 receive 90K. Four pro teams vs 4 semi-pro teams. How many of the championship four are going to get promoted on average? I'd predict 0%.

Even if the semi-pro sides got more cash all this "eight" is, is as you say an 8 team Promotion and Relegation competition.

That means four clubs facing just what relegated sides faced under the old P&R system: potential relegation that will result in their salary cap being reduced.

Looking at the CC - how many championship clubs have beaten a SL opponent over the last 10 years? And those that did are just one-offs - in this system they'd have to repeatedly beat multiple SL opponents to gain promotion.

Even so I still think the lower SL clubs will look to sign experienced players rather than try and develop their own. However unlikely, relegation is such a disaster financially (and remains so under this system) they will want to avoid it at all cost.

The only way a competition can work that has 24 teams in it is if they are all working to the same salary cap.

The fact that is simply not possible given current funding without the entire game going semi-pro should have kicked this idea into touch.

[butt monkey]

I think some are missing the point that the majority of the club's have voted for it!

Perhaps, they know about what it entails than supporters!

You really ARE a fruitcake!

So out of those clubs who voted for it, you have: Bradford (who are bust), London (who are bust), Wakefield (who are bust), Widnes, Castleford and Leeds (who we know the Hetherington's rule the game fr

Saints as CPW has all ready eloquently put, have most definitely got skeleton's in their closet - hence there voting.

This voting is nothing more than everyone in it for themselves and if you cannot see that you might as well be a Saints fan for all your blindness, pig-headidness and ignorance

Despite your comment, the fact remains that the majority still voted for it and as for calling me a fruitcake, that's a bit rich from someone with a reference to a person's backside and a primate in their user name.

I called you a fruitcake, you could be called worse.... much, much worse for your continued ignorance and even stubborn arrogance to the point of stupidity that "you think so you must be correct"

Bradford Bulls coach calls Super League relegation plans 'rubbish'

Plans to relegate two teams from Super League this season are "rubbish", according to Bradford Bulls coach Francis Cummins.

So now you have one of the club's coaches stating the plan is "rubbish".

It was not a majority as you claim either. Seven for and 6 against with one abstaining is NOT a clear majority in any language you may use

When you realise those clubs who voted "for" this are simply attempting to protect themselves rather than the good or future of the entire game as a whole, you might then realise that those clubs with no money/stadiums owned by the RFL/loans owed to the RFL/close to administration etc all voted the way they did.

Cummins told BBC Radio Leeds: "I think it's rubbish personally.
"My concern is we'll take our focus off promoting young players because teams will be worried about relegation."
He added: "Teams could take money out of their academy and put it into signing a player hoping they won't get relegated.
"I just don't think it's thought through. It needs to be worked towards but there has to be criteria because we haven't got the clubs to do it. There are no teams from underneath who could come up and be mid-table.
"I think it's more of an idea for the television companies than the sport as a whole."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/25815885

[cpwigan]

ST HELENS GIVE BACKING AND SUPPORT TO NEW LEAGUE STRUCTURE

ST.HELENS have stated their strong conviction that the newly agreed league structure, to be adopted in 2015, will benefit supporters, players, clubs and the wider game alike and will lead to a new era of sporting excitement and financial stability and prosperity for the game at all levels.

St.Helens Chairman, Eamonn McManus stated:

We have been wholly supportive of this new system from its formal tabling some months ago, which followed a year of analysis and detailed discussion. Supporters, Super League clubs and the wider game should all benefit significantly and in equal measure.

Over the last decade, I have been openly sceptical of some of the major commercial and strategic decisions adopted by Super League and endorsed by its clubs. There is no doubt that expansion to 14 clubs and the adoption of the Licensing system with expanded playoffs produced a season where the league has become somewhat of a protracted precursor only to the playoffs.

Every game every week must be of high quality, important and competitive: the current system is capable of improvement on all of those fronts. Under the new system, the reduction to 12 teams and the splitting of the league season into two phases, culminating in a short and sharp playoffs, will provide interest and excitement for fans of every club every week. The season will be of continuous quality and intensity and will gradually build throughout and into a fantastic climax at Old Trafford.

There is no doubt that it will also provide a very strong foundation to the critical strengthening of the clubs' and the game's commercial performances and financial positions. It will also provide a compelling attraction to sponsors at every level. This should in turn ultimately be reflected in a materially improved media valuation which will further benefit the clubs and the game. There have been too many financial crises at club levels in recent years. The new system, with its consequent real and significant benefits to all, will produce meaningful financial benefits and ensure stability. We can then approach our future with clarity and with confidence.

I certainly do not agree that the new system is too radical and complex. It is a solution tailored to the particular strengths and weaknesses of professional rugby league in England today. Although new, it is readily understandable and is certainly much more straightforward than the current playoff system which was zealously agreed to by most Super League clubs five years ago.

I also believe that the new system of possible promotion and relegation addresses the problems historically encountered by the system of automatic promotion and relegation which was so harmful to clubs when previously adopted: then the promoted club never had the time or resources to prepare adequately to compete in Super League, and the relegated club was more often than not subsequently decimated.

In 2015, a possible promoted club from the Championship will have to prove itself, in terms of investment and playing strength, that it is better than an existing Super League club in the season before promotion. By definition it will be ready to compete in Super League if it wins promotion, and vice versa.

No system is perfect, but this one produces the most benefits for Super League and its supporters at this point in our history and evolution. We have a year to prepare for it and, if constructively received and professionally launched, I am sure that it will herald an era of improved excitement for spectators and of financial stability for clubs and players, which will be the envy of other sports.

It has been clear to me for many months that, under the new Chairmanship of Brian Barwick, the game's recent problems and issues are being properly identified, addressed and dealt with and that he is adding a real and professional focus and direction to the senior management of both the RFL and of Super League.

The RFL have hosted and delivered a magnificent and successful World Cup which made us all proud to be rugby league supporters in this country. This is now being followed promptly by implementing strategic and structural changes which will provide a more exciting and competitive professional league system. In turn, this will be reflected in a better funded and financially stable game which should be self-sustaining at all levels in the long term. Brian and his senior management teams deserve our full support as we move towards a new and exciting era for us all. We all have much to look forward to.

[Mike]

So what is the new system exactly?

Playoffs after the league split into 8s. How many qualify? What's the system.

In the middle 8 who qualify for playoffs. How is promotion and relegation decided?

Its great the McManas thinks its a well understood system. I don't yet.

[DaveO]

Its great the McManas thinks its a well understood system. I don't yet.

This bit takes the biscuit for me from what he said:

"There is no doubt that expansion to 14 clubs and the adoption of the Licensing system with expanded playoffs produced a season where the league has become somewhat of a protracted precursor only to the playoffs."

What on earth does he think the new system is then?

[markill]

At least 2 coaches of 'yes' clubs have spoken out against it. Over 90% of the players didn't want it. Most of the fans that have voiced an opinion don't like it. Who's this system for exactly?

[DaveO]

At least 2 coaches of 'yes' clubs have spoken out against it. Over 90% of the players didn't want it. Most of the fans that have voiced an opinion don't like it. Who's this system for exactly?

The championship sides who see it as a way to get into the top flight (whatever that is in the new system) without having to gain a license.

The championship sides concerned will be, off the top of my head, Halifax, Leigh, Fev and Sheffield.

Several other championship sides have no intention of going full time at all so will never be in a position to move up the league from the bottom 12 to the top 12 and will forever be in the bottom 8 come the split.

As mentioned above what this will do is focus a lot of attention on the "middle 8" come the split. Remember ow the focus was on us in 2006 more than anything else as we faced relegation? It will be like that every year with this system.

The whole thing is predicated on licensing having failed and I think that is complete nonsense. The failure was the RFL's inability to manage it.

Unfortunately the alternatives put forward by IL and the rest which is basically simple P&R all be it every two years remain unworkable with the implications of the drop from pro to simi pro not addressed.

What it needed was for someone to stand up to the RFL and say when the RFL said licensing had failed to refute that and say Widnes prove it hasn't and any SL clubs who went bust under it (this is the main reason why they say it failed) would most likely have gone bust under the new system anyway.

In fact why Widnes voted in favour of this I do not know given they are one club that can certainly say they are a product of the licensing system, especially since Betts is one of the coached against it.

[i'm spartacus]

The league review published the following in respect of P&R

But promotion and relegation works in football, so why not in Rugby League?

That’s not a like for like comparison. The difference between Premier League and Football League clubs is tiny compared to the gulf between Super League and the
Championships. To compete in Super League, a club needs to have a squad of exclusively full-time players backed up by a fully professional coaching and administrative staff; Championship clubs are by necessity semi-professional in nature, both on and off the field. Making the transition from one to the other is a difficult and protracted process and, as history has demonstrated, unachievable over the course of a few short months.

If you've come to that conclusion on that question, why would you then go on introduce P&R?

I'm disappointed that the threatened rebellion didn't hold it all together and come up with some sort option that can improve the standards of Super League overall. The players in a relegated team will end up moving into promoted team and it will just turn the bottom half of the table into a revolving door. The twelve team SL is a good idea, but P&R, especially in the format suggested, seems like a bad idea