Stinks a bit of ‘let’s see who is heading for the middle 8s and then make the decision’. The suspicion being that there’ll be more impetus to do away with relegation if one or two of the wealthier and more powerful clubs are struggling mid-season.
If they’ve run out of time and don’t want rush it, keep things as they are and plan for 2020 ahead of 2019. That’d be transparent, reasonable and fair.
It seems very clear that, if there is no criteria set well in advance, "we" have to be playing the "wait and see" game and if none of the expansion clubs are doing sufficiently well ie, competing at the top end of the Championship, the decision to expand SL will de deferred for another 12 months. As stated previously, there is no way that the plan to increase SL to 14 clubs, is for any other reason than to include Toronto + 1. It's not as though Sky have offered a whole extra wedge of cash to facilitate the change (ie to give them some additional TV games), in fact the opposite is true and the current Sky monies will need to be spread across more clubs and I dont see too many of the SL CEO's voting for reduced TV income ??
Its simple then keep it as it is until the sky contract finishes no need to change anything million pound game as normal if that means leigh replace the Vikings or Catalans then so be it
Agreed, what I'm saying is that it's unacceptable not to have it set out before the season starts, as it absolutely will impact decisions taken by teams towards the bottom of the table. FWIW, I'd advocate a hybrid structure, where some teams are protected if their off field performance warrants it (hitting criteria in terms of crowds, profit, running an academy etc), but there is still a route into SL via on field success.
Ah. Missed the point of your previous post haha! Yes I agree. Clubs needs to know before pre-season starts the structure of the leagues etc. Tbh I am getting sick of all the tinkering. Go back to one down, one up or franchising. Top 6/8 playoffs and just leave it at that!
Not a bad idea the hybrid structure. It will at least encourage clubs to better themselves in areas such as youth development. How clubs are allowed to run without academies is beyond me and I am also so pleased that clubs are reintroducing the reserves. Shout out to the likes of Keighley and Halifax who have always had one. But SL clubs should have a mandatory one. And pleasing to see after the Bulls and Fev paved the way we now have a Women's Super League!
The only problem with a hybrid system is those in areas which will never get the crowds or decent youth. When you have say three clubs in very very close areas it's always going to be hard for them to build a good fan base. Furthermore those in areas not in an RL hotbed will suffer as they don't get the crowds. However they are at least creating a small interest in those areas especially at a grassroots level.
Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.
The_Enforcer wrote:
Most idiotic post ever goes to Grimmy..... The way to restart should be an arm wrestle between a designated player from each side.
I've been giving this more thought and have come up with a marketing slogan for the unprotected SL teams:
There to fall when others fail
That'll help them enter a upward cycle of self-improvement, I'm sure. Who wouldn't want to see their team subjected to that kind of indignity, after all?
Crowds, profit and a successful academy are their own rewards for goodness sake!
Tbf, if you're on a wind-up, it's quite a good one.
More realistically, you could achieve the same aim by having a re-election system like the Football League used to.
My genuine view I'm afraid! I just don't think we can afford to have the situation where Catalans, for example, can go down on the back of a bad year, as nearly happened in 2017. We aren't strong enough to take risks like that. At the same time, we need to reward good on field performance by allowing a route into SL purely by winning games as you guys have done.
I'm not familiar with the re-election system, how would it work? Widnes finish bottom and the clubs vote whether to keep them or promote Hull KR?
The only problem with a hybrid system is those in areas which will never get the crowds or decent youth. When you have say three clubs in very very close areas it's always going to be hard for them to build a good fan base. Furthermore those in areas not in an RL hotbed will suffer as they don't get the crowds. However they are at least creating a small interest in those areas especially at a grassroots level.
Clubs are allowed to market themselves and recruit talent from beyond their own postcode.
My genuine view I'm afraid! I just don't think we can afford to have the situation where Catalans, for example, can go down on the back of a bad year, as nearly happened in 2017. We aren't strong enough to take risks like that. At the same time, we need to reward good on field performance by allowing a route into SL purely by winning games as you guys have done.
I'm not familiar with the re-election system, how would it work? Widnes finish bottom and the clubs vote whether to keep them or promote Hull KR?
Agree with you here. And I have no idea of the re-election system but I hope it doesn't work like that. The SL chairman will just vote who they want in (their mates) and opens up a possibility of bribery etc. For that sort of system to work at all we need a strong, transparent governing body which unfortunately we do not have.
'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.
I'm not familiar with the re-election system, how would it work? Widnes finish bottom and the clubs vote whether to keep them or promote Hull KR?
For example, yes.
Bulls Boy 2011 wrote:
Agree with you here. And I have no idea of the re-election system but I hope it doesn't work like that. The SL chairman will just vote who they want in (their mates) and opens up a possibility of bribery etc. For that sort of system to work at all we need a strong, transparent governing body which unfortunately we do not have.
Because there's no risk of chicanery in using 'independently assessed criteria' to divide SL clubs into first- and second-class citizens? They're not going to be deeply trusted after last time. Also the unprotected teams won't accept it - because it is degrading and that. There's a reason the Washington Generals didn't have many fans.
My genuine view I'm afraid! I just don't think we can afford to have the situation where Catalans, for example, can go down on the back of a bad year, as nearly happened in 2017. We aren't strong enough to take risks like that. At the same time, we need to reward good on field performance by allowing a route into SL purely by winning games as you guys have done.
I'm not familiar with the re-election system, how would it work? Widnes finish bottom and the clubs vote whether to keep them or promote Hull KR?
If we have a route into SL achievable by on-field performances, then there obviously has to be another team going the other way (unless the numbers in SL do change that season). I'm confused why that shouldn't be Catalans (or indeed any other SL team) if their on-field performances that season puts them in the relegation spot?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 157 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...