Also as someone else stated give the mid-season internationals a weekend of its own. With say England vs Wales and France vs Ireland at wigan and tolouse for example resepctively. Get the details and tickets out early and cheap to get the crowds in.

David



I would rather have a 12 team competition actually, which gives a minimum of 11 home games. How the game sets itself up has nothing to do with SKY. They don't call the tune. They are the major broadcast partner and no more. It's ridiculous at the moment where we have the season starting at the end of January and playing through February. Summer rugby was meant to eliminate all of this so the players could play in better conditions. It would, as had been mentioned also leave time for representative games to be played and not have the ridiculous situation of club games taking part at the same time as the international.



I admit any reduction in games would not benefit the "smaller" clubs in the competition as they "big" clubs make more of their money through their corporate sales rather than joe public on the terraces.



Ticket prices are going to rise next season now that the VAT rise has been announced. But game day prices have doubled in the last 10 years. Clubs can't rely on just game day income anymore they have to expand and find new revenue streams to keep them going.



I'll admit, I'm a Club > Country man. But at the end of the day we harm our prospects in the international "Autumn Tournament" by making the players play too many games. Some England players are going into this having played around 35 games in some cases. You could get some blokes in the opposition who have only played 24 all year and it's a big difference. It's very difficult for England players at time in these competitions as they have simply played too many games through the year and they have nothing left in the tank for the internationals.



Quality, not quantity for me and I'd rather see 22 great regular season games than some of the crap that has been turfed up at times this season.

You're talking sense sheffieldliam mate! Dangerous doing that on here!

I was meant to include Barrow. I was doing it from memory.

Players currently at Hull KR are attempting to take advantage of an RFL rule. I expect there are others at other clubs too. These players, with their exemptions, are free to play for whosoever they wish.

The dispensation, in these instances, would be to the players, not the clubs.

HKR will have the same 5-12-8 squad restrictions as most other clubs next year.







From a sport POV I'd go for:

16 teams divided into two pools of 8. Play your own conference (eg 'East' or 'West') H and A, and those in the other H or A (alternating each year). 22 games competing for your Conference League, then a play-off system for the Championship. Two seperate but linked competitions, with the Championship Grand final being the most prestigious, but winning the conference league more than just a lengthy prelude with a hub cap attached.



It'd mean splitting the (possibly smaller due to fewer fixtures) sky money between more teams, and less games to generate gate and match day revenue.



Our chairman wants fewer teams and more games. Our coach wants fewer games. The current balance isn't too bad - you'll never please everyone.

Haha thanks! I know the play offs are money spinners for clubs and the RFL being tickets only but we need to reward the consistence and improve the international scene drastically. Look at cricket. Poor club attendances but get so much coverage at international level. On a side matter the RFL needs to pull their finger out and annouce the strucuture of WC 2013, stadia then get the tickets out soon thus advertising it none stop ala Wigan do with their "the big one" and "st georges day game"

Do you fancy stopping posting now please mate, people will think i've got two accounts to back up my points like Barry McKenzie does!

You're going to get lynched for talking sense!

I think Barrow would HAVE to be included in the 2nd tier. Our stadium is no worse than Cas, Wakey, Salford and Fev. Plus, we actually won the league and GF in 2009 (something the RFL don't seem to care about) and we knocked Cas out of the Cup.



Out of curiosity, why are Sheffield in that list ??

I said on the last page that I forgot to inlcude Barrow I was doing it by memory.



They are on of the first on the list after the super league clubs.



Sheffield are playing in a big, quality stadium in a big city, they used to be in super league, they have been getting some decent crowds. Huge potential.

Sheffield are on the up...very slowly but there trying

we do need fewer teams in the top division, more teams overall

the increase to a fourteen team league was a mistake, there are 14+ viable clubs who can play in the division, what there are not are 14 squads of European players with sufficient quality, moving to franchises would have been more problematic if they had kept the division at 12 beecasue they would be cutting off more viable clubs for three years or more from one of the two biggest sources of income and reducing the other

it also maintained the high numbers of fixtures which is bad for the players but better for the clubs

the RFL needs to look towards "super league 2" a division of clubs that could be in superleague but are not and split the income from television accordingly, a return to smei automatic P+R would be great too

I notice that no one put forward these ideas last year when Bradford and Hull were near the bottom





Just because Warrington have some mug throwing money at them all of sudden doesnt mean that they should get all smug. It was only a couple of years ago that Warrington were a mid table team at best!