promotion but no relegation?

[GeoffN]

Didn't see Boots 'n' all, but this is what's on sky website.
http://msn.skysports.com/skysports/arti ... 55,00.html


Wonder how he'll get the clubs to agree to both a lower share of the Sky income (more clubs to share amongst), and lower gate receipts (less games).
And what happens when SL is up to 14 clubs, and the next NL1 side qualifies, as he says will be allowed?

[Doveoverdave]

I did see B'n'A.

There's nothing new under the sun.

They want a SL team in S. Wales. Good timing now that RU has just crawled out of it's biggest slump in history by winning the grand slam, but this must grow from grass roots!! No chance there then.

London is apparently untapped area of strength for league and the brass believe that another London club is viable. Next year there is no 1st class RU in London. Londoners don't know what an oval ball is never mind untapped area.

More French teams to compete in SL. This is because the player strength in the UK cannot support another SL team. (Unless it is in London I suppose).

SL has nothing against Cumbria. However Workinton and Whitehaven know the rules of SL and their stadia is not up to scatch.These clubs should contact Wakefield for some advice on this issue.

Same old stuff and nonsense.

[robjoenz]

Doveoverdave posted:
SL has nothing against Cumbria. However Workinton and Whitehaven know the rules of SL and their stadia is not up to scatch.These clubs should contact Wakefield for some advice on this issue.

A lot of people up here feel that the RFL are keen not to let Whitehaven (and other NL1 teams for that matter) into SL next season. It's a very big ask to get each club to have ground modifications in place by 31st August when they don't really have the money to do so.

On the point about their stadia, they are both awful, Workington is worse than Odsal with having the speedway track around the pitch and Haven just doesn't have any facilities.

[GeoffN]

A little light reading...
http://www.superleague.co.uk/pub/video/ ... esheet.doc

http://www.superleague.co.uk/news/1176

[DaveO]

GeoffN posted:

A little light reading...
http://www.superleague.co.uk/pub/video/ ... esheet.doc

http://www.superleague.co.uk/news/1176

Well thanks (I think!)for links GeoffN. I have read that lot and watched the video on the superleague site and I am none the wiser how this will all work as regards promotion and relegation.

They seem to be saying its a good thing that UTC have 18 monbths to prepare so will hit the ground running when they enter SL next season and so wouldn't it be a good idea if the same applied to NL 1 clubs.

The trouhle is UTC know for certain they are in SL in 2006. From what I can gather that isn't necessarily true for an NL 1 side 18 months down the track from when they might apply.

What I mean is if you said to Whitehaven, right in 2008 you can join SL if you do x,y and z off field but what guarentee is there that 'Haven would win NL 1 at the end of 2007?

UTC are signing contracts with players like Stacy Jones because they know for certain they are in SL next year. 'Haven couldn't say for certain they would be in SL in 2008 so how can they hit the ground running with players like Stacy Jones already signed up?

What happens if they do make commitments to players and then don't win the final? Do they get promoted anyway just because they are "ready" and an SL side gets relegated because it's their bad luck to finish bottom when an NL 1 sides preparations for SL are complete?

If so surely the SL sides will still be looking over their shoulders worried about relegation as they are now because they can't be certain one of them won't be relegated at some point.

It is bizarre and seems to be an attempt to have your cake an eat it. That is to get the stabilty the NRL has in Australia due to them having no relegation while still actually having relegation!

Dave

[GeoffN]

DaveO posted:

It is bizarre and seems to be an attempt to have your cake an eat it.

Dave

That about sums it up, I think! Probably ok for the first 2 NL1 teams, as they're looking to increase to 14 clubs..I don't think they've looked further than that.
I still wonder how they persuaded the club chairmen (philanthropists though they are..) to accept a cut in income both from Sky and from gate receipts.