Which 14 teams should it be?

[ellis9]

Premiership rugby have said they are going to seek RFU permission to expand the Premiership to 14 teams as they believe it will benefit the England Rugby team.

This means there will be no relegation which I completely disagree with. What I also want to know is, who are the 14 teams going to be?

The current 12 with Worcester and Bristol? Worcester and Bristol and 11 of the current 12 excluding London Welsh which makes 13 so who is the 14th in this scenario?

What happens if 1 or 2 of the 14 teams are another London Welsh who get thumped every week? Instead of them only being in the league for 1 season, they will be there for 3 or 4 seasons getting thumped. What good is that to anyone and how does that help England?

[JackFlashJonny]

I would say it would surely be Yorkshire Carnegie...although both Rotherham and Nottingham (above them in the table) may have something to say about that..

[biffer]

Premiership rugby have said they are going to seek RFU permission to expand the Premiership to 14 teams as they believe it will benefit the England Rugby team.

This means there will be no relegation which I completely disagree with. What I also want to know is, who are the 14 teams going to be?

The current 12 with Worcester and Bristol? Worcester and Bristol and 11 of the current 12 excluding London Welsh which makes 13 so who is the 14th in this scenario?

What happens if 1 or 2 of the 14 teams are another London Welsh who get thumped every week? Instead of them only being in the league for 1 season, they will be there for 3 or 4 seasons getting thumped. What good is that to anyone and how does that help England?

Are they saying this is a permanent arrangement (i.e. same 14 teams in perpetuity) or for one season and then promotion and relegation returns?

Also, this is likely to remove the smaller nations' teams (Romania, Georgia) from the European Challenge Cup.

[Iain]

I don't want there to be ringfencing, but it is a valid conversation to be having. Someone may know better than me, but I think there are only about four Championship clubs who want to be or could be promoted. That being the case, either you support Championship clubs so that they all can (fat chance!) or you put all those that have the resources into a position where that's possible.

Incidentally, the bigger issue for me is the additional games. Is this going to be at the expense of the LV Cup (in a which case a bigger chunk of the season happens during internationals) or players just play more games (when the season is already cramped and players already struggle with the long season). Which is sacrificed?

[ellis9]

They are saying it will be the same 14 teams for 3 or 4 seasons. So if a club as London Welsh have done this season only gets 1 point for every one of the 3 or 4 seasons then they will not be relegated.

Also once the 3 or 4 year cycle is over, which team/s get relegated to the Championship and which team/s get promoted if any?

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/m ... -promotion

Quote from Mark McCafferty:
“The game is growing significantly and its rate is such that we are looking at plans for expansion on a number of fronts,” said Mark McCafferty, the chief executive of Premiership Rugby. “The size of the league is one of them. We think it might be possible to develop the league in a way that includes one or two more clubs in terms of the competition. We know there are sensitivities around that but it is a basis for putting strength into the English game.

“You need time to prepare to be a Premiership club and to be competitive on all fronts, on and off the field. One of the more attractive ideas that has been mooted in the past is that perhaps there is a period of time during which there is no relegation and we expand the league carefully during that two or three-year period.”

[ourla]

They are saying it will be the same 14 teams for 3 or 4 seasons. So if a club as London Welsh have done this season only gets 1 point for every one of the 3 or 4 seasons then they will not be relegated.”

That is what they are trying to avoid. Clearly if it happens they would have failed and they would have to have a rethink.

[Iain]

They are saying it will be the same 14 teams for 3 or 4 seasons. So if a club as London Welsh have done this season only gets 1 point for every one of the 3 or 4 seasons then they will not be relegated.”

That is what they are trying to avoid. Clearly if it happens they would have failed and they would have to have a rethink.

Plus Welsh are unable to build and plan for next season as they know they are going to be relegated. If they knew they were staying up they would be able to rebuild and invest to improve for next season.

There does need to be a deterrent to finishing bottom though, and I'm not sure how you do that with ringfencing.

[ellis9]

There is no guarantee that they will be able to avoid it though.

Also, Iain you do make a fair point that teams can plan for the next season but what about when they are going into the final season of the cycle? How can they plan for that season and when will they find out if they will be playing Premiership rugby. As we know, most players are signed by Feb/March so how can any club, let alone, clubs near the bottom, plan for the 1st season of the new cycle when they don't know whether they can sign players on Premiership wages or Championship wages? Will it always be the club/s that finish bottom/bottom two in the final season of the cycle or the team/s that have been the worst for the 3 years?

[ourla]

Not sure if it is too late to expand for next year. But asap they should get Bristol and Worcester in to expand to 13. That should then allow another Championship team to show themselves capable of competing in the Prem. Yorkshire is probably favourite. But I don't think a timeline or commitment needs to be made on that. The Championship needs to be better supported and marketed regardless.

I don't see why promotion and relegation should be sacrosanct. More often than not it's clear if a club has the established infrastructure, academy, fanbase, finances, management, etc. to be able to make a fist of it. I do think there needs to be a way of moving a perennial underperformer out and/or a stable but growing force in. Relegating and promoting a team each year just because makes no sense to me.

[ourla]

There is no guarantee that they will be able to avoid it though.

Correct. And?
What sort of guarantee are you looking for?

[ellis9]

Not sure if it is too late to expand for next year. But asap they should get Bristol and Worcester in to expand to 13. That should then allow another Championship team to show themselves capable of competing in the Prem. Yorkshire is probably favourite. But I don't think a timeline or commitment needs to be made on that. The Championship needs to be better supported and marketed regardless.

They want it in place by 2016/2017.

Correct. And?
What sort of guarantee are you looking for?

The ONLY guarantee I am looking for is that the worst team in the Premiership, the team that finishes 12th, gets relegated and the best team in the Championship (which in my opinion should be whoever finishes 1st, so scrap the play off but that's another discussion).

Is that a simple enough guarantee for you Ourla?

[Cagey Tiger]

Also, this is likely to remove the smaller nations' teams (Romania, Georgia) from the European Challenge Cup.

One way to prevent this AND have something for the teams in the lower reaches of the table to play for would be to restrict Europe to the top 12 at the end of the season. Bottom two miss out.

[TTRITH]

I agree with this on the condition that the RFU and PRL increase funding to those in the Championship and below and generally look to develop the game as oppose to turning their back on them.

[ellis9]

I agree with this on the condition that the RFU and PRL increase funding to those in the Championship and below and generally look to develop the game as oppose to turning their back on them.

Can't they do this anyway? Why do they need to ring fence the league to do that? In fact there is more of a reason to increase funding to Championship teams whilst there is promotion and relegation.

[ourla]

Correct. And?
What sort of guarantee are you looking for?

The ONLY guarantee I am looking for is that the worst team in the Premiership, the team that finishes 12th, gets relegated and the best team in the Championship (which in my opinion should be whoever finishes 1st, so scrap the play off but that's another discussion).

Is that a simple enough guarantee for you Ourla?

Well it's simple alright. But all you are saying is that you don't want the change. Which is fair enough. But I don't think it's fair to then spark on about "guarantees" of a new way of working. If you don't want the change a guarantee isn't going to mean diddly to you, even if it were possible, which it clearly isn't.

If we continue with promotion and relegation what guarantees are there that we don't have another London Welsh debacle. It's alright saying we should get the whole of the Championship up to standard. But then there is reality.

There is no "ideal" solution or "guaranteed" solution. But there are perhaps better or worse solutions. And that, surely, is the whole point of the discussion and the proposals.