The play-off system really does need to be changed.



I wan't to see all clubs going all out, all season.



There's a sense of holding back during the SL regular rounds, bar when the top sides play each other.

Lets have good people in the right positions at the RFL, I am like most people when they say it is vital to pay the correct salaries to people with the correct skills.



Mcmanus and now the Hull FC Chairman has eluded to the missed marketing opportunities for the game and it is high time this is rectified amongst the many other issues

Yeah that's the issue and is the reason I'm unsure on trying to bring back a promotion/relegation system.



It would add a lot to the game and both leagues but you only need to look at Widnes to see that even with time to plan it's still a very tough ask to get a really competitive side together.

It's time to sort the problem out.



The Championships are dying in my opinion.



I can only think of two ways to sort them.



1. Controversial, but they become feeder clubs like in Australia. Those clubs had history also.



2. Plough money into the league, get clubs in a position to spend money and grow. Both unlikely, but they can't just leave it as it is.

Noble tried to do it with us and was massively unsuccesful. I cant see why we cant keep it at 8 teams with the teams that are in 1st and 8th place play each other, 2nd vs 7th, 3rd vs 6th and 4th vs 5th in a straight knock out format. No silly rest weeks or club/coaches call business.

The playoffs at the moment are a rubbish set up imo.

If we had a 5 or 6 team system, then there's a very real chance that good teams that suffer a blip (Leeds last season and Saints this, for instance) will fail to qualify. Meaning whoever qualifies will deserve it, rather than the 8 least sh*t teams qaulifying.

Can't really argue with that. Leaving the 14 SL clubs as they are, I'd set the feeder clubs up like this:



S.Wales -> Wigan

Leigh -> Saints

Cumbria (W'ton, Barrow, Haven) -> Wire

Hunslet -> Leeds

Keighley -> Bradford

Dewsbury -> Wakey

Batley -> Cas

Fev -> Hull FC

Sheffield -> Hull KR

Fax -> Hudds

N.Wales -> Widnes

Toulouse -> Catalan

Skolars -> Broncos

Manchester (Swinton, Oldham, Rochdale) -> Salford



That leaves the likes of York, Doncaster, Gateshead and the expansions in Northampton and Hemel to either join up with any of the teams listed above or to form a secondary championship. They could then join up with the other teams as and when needed.

I go along with Scouse Pie 2 still with the 14 teams. Scrap the Magic weekend. The exiles games will bring in more money, plus it can never be a fair reflection whichever way it is done, such as Wolves V Widnes . Certain points for Wolves which could make all the difference at the end of the season. No team should have an advantage over any other. Top 5 play off only, the top of the league club to get the advantage as reward for finishing top. There would be a couple of games less to play without getting rid of anyone, our game should grow with our own teams not throwing them out.

So who is to be booted out then?

Why dont we start with the clubs that dont have a ground

Well share the bloody money out more evenly then, then there wouldnt be such a gap,

Yawn.

I would get rid of Salford (no fans, ground is very far from the town centre, been unsuccessful for as long as I've been watching, the academy tend to feed off Wire, Saints and Wigan rejects too) and Wakefield (rubbish ground, unsuccessful for as long as I've been watching apart from one year when they made the play offs, not many fans, went into administration not long ago, Castleford and Leeds both nearby)



Go back to having 12 teams (23 games inc magic weekend) with a 6 team play off structure (same method we used to employ). Reducing the number of games makes each league game more important, I don't like meaningless games. With the extra weeks gained by reducing the amount of games I would extend the World Club Challenge to a 6 or 8 team competition between our best and their best, maybe extend the exiles series to three games too. We need to market close games between quality sides.



Internationally I would bring back the NZ and Aus tours. Maybe go:

2013 World Cup

2014 Ashes tour

2015 Four nations

2016 Kiwi tour

Rinse and repeat every four years, being sure to alternate the location so each hemisphere has either the extended WCC competition or an international event

Which clubs don't have a ground?





This doesn't seem the most useful contribution to the debate.

The issue with tours is who does the 3rd team of Eng, Aus and NZ play when the other tour are playing in a 3 game series? The lack of any further quality opposition within the international game is obviously the reason we have moved towards the tri/4 nations. In theory I agree with a cycle, I just don't see any of AUS, NZ and Eng/GB being willing to have effectively a year off while the other 2 teams play each other. The current 4 nations series' are getting pretty stale imo.

What did the odd team out do in the past when we had tours? Aren't the NRL coaches complaining about too many games anyway? The reason I want to bring back tours is because they seemed to get people's attention more than the four nations do now.

People should stop perpetuating the myth that Leeds last year 'proved' end of year positions are meaningless. Apart from last year hasn't the title been won by the club finishing 1st/2nd? All Leeds proved is that it is POSSIBLE to win from as low as 5th - its not likely, and certainly not something any club should aim to do.

The play-off system has changed so the fact that a club has won it from fifth when previously (I think) only one club had won from third and the rest from 1st or 2nd is evidence that the change has made it easier for lower ranked clubs to win the SL. It doesn't mean the end of year positions are meaningless, but many question whether the advantage of finishing 1st or 2nd is significant enough under the new system.

one simple way of making sure that teams strive to finish as high as possible in these financially hard times is to have bonus payments for league placings that have greater rewards for the higher you finish. Also the higher placed team in any play off match always get home advantage and keep all the gate receipts etc etc...... All clubs need the finances so make the rewards for finishing higher worth it

You really think you're onto something with this, don't you,.



You aren't.



Wigan's lease on the DW will likely outlast the period of your lifetime.



What's really funny though is that much better trolls than you - from Wire, Saints, Leeds, etc - all realised this at least 10 years ago.

Whilst the suggestion that Wigan shouldn't get a place in this revised Super League is obviousdly stupid the stadium issue is a valid point within this debate.



Deloitte's recent report into rugby finances across Europe made it quite clear that the key to raising revenue and being sustainable was through the utilisation of stadia to increase revenue from non-rugby related uses outside of matchdays.



The reduction of the competition to 12 or 10 teams would, unless the proposal is to play teams numerous times throughout the season which history has shown to be a turn-off to fans, lead to reduced number of fixtures and consequently for clubs leasing stadia a drop in revenue with the associated consequences (reduced money for wages, reduced quality, etc etc).



There is no magic wand. The RFL are continually criticised but in truth they do a decent job with the cards they have been dealt. It is alright for McManus to have a go at them; truth is, if the RFL had lost the money Saints have over the last 10 years the game would have now been bankrupt and its regulative governing body (the RFL) ceased to operate.



Personally I would go to a 12 team competition (London are looking more and more difficult to justify (and I've been a supporter of expansion) who together with Cas, Wakefiled, Widnes, Salford and Bradford being the clubs under threat), worked on a three year licence basis, playing each other home and away plus a magic weekend like event (probably a heritage weekend concept) and a top five play-off system uses the same format as it use to be.

A magic weekend is a bit of a farce as you could get uneven match-ups. One of the top teams in the league could get to play the worst team for a 3rd time and be gifted an easy 2 points, where as 2 other teams who are at the top could end up playing each other.

So if we do persist with this idea lets play it at round 15 and the fixtures are based on the league table after half a season once all teams have played each other at least once. then we play 1 v 2, 3 v 4, etc etc......this way all games should be close and competitive.

if we do keep the magic weekend hows about turning it into a sevens tournament, could be cool if marketed properly, though my favourite idea is to have a 3 game Exile series mid season and market it like the Aussies do with SOO, could bring a much needed boost to the game if handled correctly

Not often I agree with you, but near enough spot on.



I'd try to expand the international game/Exiles concept using the spare weekends from reducing the teams, as well as having a second french team in the competition to try and build on the success of Catalans.



The reason a salary cap works well (in the broad sense) in the NRL is that even a club at the bottom of a table can a) afford to sign a star player, and b) attract them in the knowledge that they can challenge.



Wigan

Wire

Saints

Leeds

Hudds

Hull

Catalans



...they are all teams I'd put in that Category at the minute, that can challenge at the top and can spend to the full cap (in a 12 team league). Put another French team in there, tax breaks + living in france would be an attractive proposition, which takes it up to 8. Hopefully Bradford can sort their act out as well.

So now you want cash hand-outs as well as demanding that other teams have star-names dropped for when they play you?



Just out of interest, do you live your personal life on this 'charity, yes please' basis?

One thing that makes no sense at all, whichever way you cut it, is both Cas and Wakey seeking to separately build new stadia.