The point I was making was it makes no sense to have promotion and relegation simply on who finishes top of NL1 and bottom of SL ever since the game went full time. That is why franchising is a good idea IMO. If the rules of the franchise are wrong, that's a different issue.GeoffN wrote:You're contradicting yourself there Dave - one of the criteria is turnover. SKY cash alone means a NL club can't compete with a SL one, no matter how well run. The same applies to attendance figures - the highest NL figure (Widnes) is still lower than the worst SL one (Quins).DaveO wrote:
The point I was making is it is possible for a top NL side to outscore an existing SL side on the criteria (including support) so they don't need a promise of a side being promoted come what may, Widnes being the example.
If Widnes got wiped off the face of the earth tomorrow the RFL would be in a position of having promised a side would be promoted and none of the the others actually meet their own criteria for promotion so what is the point in the promise in the first place?
As to SL sides being at an advantage, some SL sides have clearly failed to take that advantage over the last three years hence they are at risk of being demoted. So currently the franchise system would not lead to a closed shop - provided there was an NL1 side up to being promoted. Luckily for the RFL there is so they can keep their promise.
Eventually you would expect all the SL sides to be running a top operation so yes it would be very hard for a side to get promoted but that is whole point. There is simply nothing to be gained by promoting a side not up to competing and demoting another side who have a large commercial operation that simply could not be supported in the semi-pro National League.
Like it or not the move to professionalism has made this gulf between the top clubs and NL1 what it is as there is only so much money in the game. Simple P & R simply doesn't work between a pro league with clubs turning over 4m pounds+ and semi-pro one where clubs turnover a few hundred K a year.
Dave
Dave