I can see it being a real dog fight next year with any 2 of 7 clubs losing their status. Could become very messy if clubs sign players now on 2-3 year contracts and end up going down. I wouldn't have thought there is enough money in the game for parachute payments for the two relegated teams.

It makes you wonder if some clubs will field weakened teams against the top clubs and just target the 4 pointer matches with a relatively fresh team.

The same clowns who said licensing was the future are now changing their tune without any sense of embarrassment.



Whatever you think of licensing, creating a massively short-term focus is a recipe for disaster. The RFL needs to open up a licensing process for 2015 for both 12 team divisions to avoid catastrophe.

We might just have to increase Rangi's price tag now

Karl Harrison tictacs.

Steve O’Connor gave an impassioned speech at last week’s RFL Council AGM on this very issue. Of course, as is the case with Council members since year dot, he clearly has Widnes in mind. We have to assume that two clubs will be relegated next year, possibly three if Toulouse win their plea for a Super League licence in 2015. However, I suppose mergers cannot be ruled out either, especially if O’Connor’s assertion is a genuine threat.

Fiddling while Rome is burning!



I've made the point on another thread, but to constantly tamper with the game's format is counter productive. Have a league and competition structure that is simple and straight forward and where the most consistent team during the season are crowned as champions. By all means add other cup competitions to it, but then leave it!!



Don't rush into it until you are sure you have got it right.



I wonder if the "elite club" representatives were the same clowns who sabotaged youth development last year? In that instance, I believe it was the Chief Executives, half of whom have little , or no, understanding of the game and only look at today's income and expenditure, rather than the future.



The game needs to consider what it needs to do to provide regular competitive matches at each level. Over the past few years, there have been too many absurdly one sided matches, many on Sky, which have been a poor advertisement for the sport.

Well watching Super League back chat and three off them reckon London & surprisingly Bradford will go down next season

I really fail to see why it isn't easy for the powers that be.



Two x twelve team leagues.



At the end of the season bottom two from the premier competition go down and the top two teams from the league below get promoted.



None of this rubbish where then you have play offs to see who gets the league title, rather award it the team at the top on the final day and if you really must then have a different play off competition culminating in the same grand final type affair.



Reinstate GB tours in the old style, with a three game mid season series or Lancashire v Yorskshire.

That's great on paper MR but in reality it's not all good.



Two Championship sides coming up would be unable to go fulltime, would struggle to compete even at the lower level, and would become yo-yo sides. How is the intensity of the competition maintained when someone like Warrington play Fev? Would more 80 point drubbings help out SL? How does the relegated Clubs fit existing contracts/players under a reduced cap? How is it fair for a fully professional side to exist in the same league as part time clubs?



Financial stability is more precarious for teams at the bottom end of the league and may result in teams living beyond their means again to stave-off relegation. Without a play-off system there would be no incentive for any side if the league is sewn-up months in advance. There would also be no incentive for a lower league side to attain anything but not finishing in the bottom two.



Lancs v Yorks is a relic of the past. Has no relevance to the modern game. Generates no interest and has no bearing on International selection. It also makes RL look more parochial than it already is.



I agree with GB. We're not a strong enough sport Internationally to dilute what little talent we have, or isolate fans who are basically, not English.

Many will know that I've argued for a long time for one-up, one-down automatic promotion and relegation between the leagues and now it is coming about.



I expect my proposals (see other thread) for a structure relating to scrapping the salary cap also to be adopted before too long.



To answer your question, however, all responsible directors should include a clause in player contracts giving the club the option to terminate the contract if the club ceases to be in the current division (ie if it is relegated).

I understand that but, that helps the relegated Club how?



Having their better players contracts become void so that they can get snapped-up as squad players for those SL teams in danger of the same thing. Leaving the relegated Club in a far worse position, player-wise, as they would struggle to retain any players that they may want to keep.



P&R is the ultimate solution, but is it the right solution at this time? There is too much of a gulf between the best Championship sides and the bottom few teams in the SL. How is making the Competition less competitive better for the game? It's fine if you're a top five Club who is largely unaffected by any changes except it's extra 'free-money' with two less teams. You're reducing the professional player pool again when it is already pretty short atm. What effect would that have? Would SL teams be forced to bolster numbers from Championship sides? That sounds fine in practice but then how do Championship sides retain players to gain promotion? The licensing system has been a farce with regards to entry into the elite Club and what warrants staying in it, but not having P&R has helped Catalans, Hudds, and Widnes become possible contenders. Even Salford have benefited in that if we would have been relegated we wouldn't have attracted Koukash to the table. Us simply being in SL has helped us, hopefully, to be contenders in the next year or two.



I'm not against P&R but things need to be thought through before changing them.