Quote Cokey="Cokey"When there is no relegation, the bottom clubs have nothing to play for,hence meaningless games,hence poor attendances. Atm it is all to play for,so this structure is proving to be working nicely.'"
How come that doesn’t happen in the NRL though?
There are plenty of clubs who can’t make the playoffs in the NRL yet they don’t get meaningless games.
As for attendances are they higher now than under licensing?
What actually happens when there is no relegation is that it gives clubs towards the bottom of the table the opportunity to plan and to grow instead of constant panic short term decisions to avoid relegation.
The sport isn’t big enough for P&R. We have what, 14? fully professional clubs? And even then whilst the players might be fully professional the clubs themselves are not in a good position with low crowds, poor facilities and very poor infrastructures.
We have probably 5 or 6 clubs in anything like a position that’s comfortable off the pitch.
That does NOT lend itself to a P&R system. To constantly weaken and hinder the development of already weak clubs is not healthy for a sport in our position.
P&R would only work if we had 20 ish clubs that are fully professional both on and off the pitch.
It works in football because they have 90 clubs that are full time.
If you compare RL to football it would be akin to being relegated from the Championship and going straight to the Conference and a Conference team being promoted to the Championship. It’s massively destabilising for both the clubs relegated and those not relegated but involved in the relegation fight.
Most RL fans cry out for the sport to put some medium and long term plans in place. And then demand a system that ONLY allows short term planning.