Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Tue May 31, 2016 7:30 pm  

Clearly the best system would be Bulls promoted and not bothered who is relegated.

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Tue May 31, 2016 10:20 pm  

The middle 8 is a fair system in the sense of 8 teams, zero points, straight through top 3, playoff for 4th spot. That bit for me (yes even as a lofty cashed up wire fan) is completely fair.
If the championship sides are able to spend the same amount of money and have the same quota rules too then all is fair (I'm sure there are different rules, if not I stand corrected).
But the fixtures need to change, they need to change to reflect positions more.

Ideally but won't happen it should be

Leeds for instance finish bottom, should have to play all their games away, all 7 away.
Leigh finish top play all 7 at home.
2nd championship all but Leigh at home.
2nd bottom SL all but Leeds away.....so on and so forth.
But

Revenue needs to be split fairly to accommodate that system and that's the sticking point.

But yes fixtures need to be looked at.

[Bulliac]

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Wed Jun 01, 2016 8:33 am  

Wire Yed wrote:

The middle 8 is a fair system in the sense of 8 teams, zero points, straight through top 3, playoff for 4th spot. That bit for me (yes even as a lofty cashed up wire fan) is completely fair.

It would be fairer if all 8 teams had been playing the same level of competition all season, but they haven't. The SL teams have been playing against SL opposition at SL speed, whilst the championship sides, well, to be blunt they haven't. Even the bottom end SL teams play at a quicker pace, and their games are generally refereed at a quicker pace than championship games. I'm thinking chiefly of ruck speed and the expectation that defenders will stand square or get back the ten. It is very difficult for players used to the holding down we get in championship football to instantly up the ante for these games. Maybe the fact that a few of the championship refs seem to have been promoted to doing SL games will help them to realise how fast the ruck should really be policed and maybe, just maybe, they'll apply that to the championship games...though I won't hold my breath on that one.

Many people mention that 'cup shocks' happen, which they do occasionally, but cup games are not at the same intensity [well, not till you get to Wembley..] as fighting for your professional career in a one off game. The advantage is, and imo always will be, with the club which has been playing at the higher level.

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Wed Jun 01, 2016 8:55 am  

Wire Yed wrote:

If the championship sides are able to spend the same amount of money and have the same quota rules too then all is fair (I'm sure there are different rules, if not I stand corrected).

This is the problem. Money. The SL clubs now get £1.8m central funding and the salary cap is £1.8m. Theoretically all SL clubs should be at the cap limit as TV money covers the cap in its entirety.

Championship clubs get a sliding scale of central funding from £900k down to about £200k. But are allowed to spend up to £1.8m as well as long as their income (approved by the RFL) covers it. That needs a chairman with cash and a bit of creative accountancy. We don't have that.

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Thu Jun 02, 2016 12:21 pm  

FevGrinder wrote:

Why having played a whole season home and away and finished 1st in the league should the top team top of the championship have to play the next 3 best teams in the championship again to prove they are the best. They have proved it already!

I'm with Bulls4Champs - one up one down

What if then, presuming the RFL are intent on keeping some sort of play off situation:

Top of the Championship automatically go up and bottom of SL automatically go down.

2nd, 3rd and 4th in the Championship play each other home and away. Pool A

9th, 10th and 11th in SL play each other home and away. Pool B

Top of Pool A and the Bottom of Pool B play in the Million Pound Game.

It (mostly) keeps the pro's and cons of what I said before, but get's rid of the whole 'proving themselves twice' situation you pointed out. Admittedly there's no advantage to finishing 2nd to finishing 4th, or 9th rather than 11th. Maybe if each team only played each other once you could solve that with Home/Away fixtures.

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Sun Jun 05, 2016 5:09 pm  

Doesn't appear as though anything connected to the middle 8s will have any impact on us now.

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Sun Jun 05, 2016 9:40 pm  

One up, one down. It's clean and easy, and provides a great climax to a championship season, especially if through a grand final. For the super league sides, it gives an equal punt at coming back up. As it stands, the only Championship club with a realistic shout is one that can afford to spend the same as a super league club, which skews the championship.

Some clubs will yo-yo, some won't. For instance, Wakey never went down again after coming up, nor Hull. Can and Hull KR have never finished bottom since coming up, even through the franchise years.

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Sun Jun 05, 2016 11:03 pm  

rugbyreddog wrote:

Clearly the best system would be Bulls promoted and not bothered who is relegated.

Would that be wise on your current form

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:55 am  

RoyBoy29 wrote:

Would that be wise on your current form

It's our only chance. We can't beat anyone on the field.
N.B. Is there a Bottom 8's?

[Bulliac]

Re: Middle 8s - a fairer system : Mon Jun 06, 2016 9:44 am  

RoyBoy29 wrote:

Would that be wise on your current form

Lol, probably not.

You need to be the best in your division to go up and, in general, we certainly aren't playing to anywhere near that description. Though, the thing about promotion is that everyone knows the team which gets promoted is always augmented when in the higher division, so my view is that being good enough for SL is actually irrelevant; until you get there.