Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:58 am  

This chopping and changing of the format/entry criteria has done nothing for the game. If we want a traditional format with promotion and relelgation then there's only one way to do it successfully imo.(10 FT teams per division(1&2))

If we don't want P/R then it has to be on franchising with 16+ teams(NRL Style)

We need at least 2 divisions of full time sides for promotion/relegation to work consistently.

[Bulliac]

Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:38 am  

Bulls4Champs wrote:

This chopping and changing of the format/entry criteria has done nothing for the game. If we want a traditional format with promotion and relelgation then there's only one way to do it successfully imo.(10 FT teams per division(1&2))

If we don't want P/R then it has to be on franchising with 16+ teams(NRL Style)

We need at least 2 divisions of full time sides for promotion/relegation to work consistently.

To be honest, I suspect that licensing, in some format or other, is what the SL clubs are really chasing, Along with having a bigger share of, whatever everyone seems to agree will be a smaller pot, in the next TV deal. As you say, two divisions of full time sides are really necessary to have a workable P&R system

Personally I don't think 12 clubs is sufficient to run a 'proper' league anyway, not even with the 'loop' games and even then without the play-offs it becomes a pretty season bare, imo. in fact, as soon as you introduce 'loop' fixtures it ceases to be a proper league anyway, imo. Whether they believe there are lots of overseas clubs busting a gut to enter SL or there are lots of big investors hiding in the bushes ready to jump into existing British clubs when the new deal is announced is anoyone's guess. All in all, it doesn't seem very well reasearched.

Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:38 am  

So the vote is underway. Secret ballot, so to me that means its going to pass the way the SL clubs want it as the clubs that have been bullied/warned/threatened can vote as their masters wish in private and not have to own up to it publically.

We could be promoted within the hour....but I'm unhappy about it...very odd, bloody rugby league.

Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:41 am  

Bulliac wrote:

To be honest, I suspect that licensing, in some format or other, is what the SL clubs are really chasing, Along with having a bigger share of, whatever everyone seems to agree will be a smaller pot, in the next TV deal. As you say, two divisions of full time sides are really necessary to have a workable P&R system

Personally I don't think 12 clubs is sufficient to run a 'proper' league anyway, not even with the 'loop' games and even then without the play-offs it becomes a pretty season bare, imo. in fact, as soon as you introduce 'loop' fixtures it ceases to be a proper league anyway, imo. Whether they believe there are lots of overseas clubs busting a gut to enter SL or there are lots of big investors hiding in the bushes ready to jump into existing British clubs when the new deal is announced is anoyone's guess. All in all, it doesn't seem very well reasearched.

Do you class the NRL as a proper season then because in Australia not all teams play each other home and away.

Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:13 am  

Changes voted through. Have to see if we are now promoted along with it.

Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:33 am  

'Bloody RFL's pets! You watch, they'll get promoted form second place!! Don't deserve it....and my grans gardner who once walked past Odsal says he know's a man on the inside of the ground who heard from the man next to him in the toilet that they are breaking the salary cap, not paying employees and forcing sudanese children to cut the pitch with rusty nail scissors... as usual... one rule for them.....'

What a deeply disappointing decision...

Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:53 am  

Scarey71 wrote:

'Bloody RFL's pets! You watch, they'll get promoted form second place!! Don't deserve it....and my grans gardner who once walked past Odsal says he know's a man on the inside of the ground who heard from the man next to him in the toilet that they are breaking the salary cap, not paying employees and forcing sudanese children to cut the pitch with rusty nail scissors... as usual... one rule for them.....'

What a deeply disappointing decision...

That's a very puerile response. Its not the clubs fault that the league structure may change. If it does and it benefits some clubs then that's what happens. I think you should be venting your disgust towards the RFL and the SL clubs

[Bulliac]

Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:04 pm  

redeverready wrote:

Do you class the NRL as a proper season then because in Australia not all teams play each other home and away.

To be right the NFL works very well, but it's their traditional system, not ours.

The general British league system, in most major sports, is home and away when possible and top is champion. RL has deviated from that many times in the past but invariably due to the numbers not adding up. I'm certainly under no illusion that some sort of similar league will apply, in one league or another, any new set-up for exactly the same reason - the numbers don't stack up.

[Bulliac]

Re: Oldham away : Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:08 pm  

As I suggested earlier in the piece:

Bulliac wrote:

Of course, we can all visualise the situation where some decision is arrived at on Friday but then, for "fairness and not wishing to ruin the season endings in the different leagues" they then decide not to announce anything until all the play-offs are completed.

..And then, it all dribbles out on twitter or 'leaks ' from clubs, over the following week or so. Oh, and of course, at least half a dozen on here will know the full decision but be uabable to pass on the details as their mate could be compromised....

Re: Change to P&R likely?? : Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:26 pm  

Faxlore says above .... "I think you should be venting your disgust towards the RFL and the SL clubs"

Two points:

a) If the Bulls were in SLE then Chalmers would have also acted with self interest.

b) In any case Faxlore is very right to say that he thinks we should be venting our disgust towards the RFL. They have for years, and still are, ruining the sport. Today's vote is another step towards bringing the three main people to account who have (it is commonly believed) been, and still are, bad for the sport, namely Wood, Rimmer and Moorhouse. Let's hope that they are gone as soon as possible. We need a fit and proper governing body that is subject to fair and proper independent audit. Until that happens the sport will remain in the doldrums and not attract the investment and TV deals etc it deserves.