promotion general discussion

If this is already being discussed then please merge. But I'd thought I would point out a post by Chairman Moore
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/9249565/Aviva-Premiership-Its-time-to-end-the-unfair-protection-for-the-big-boys-of-the-top-flight.html

Exeter are fairly close to where I live on the south coast and following their progress has been amusing, particularly as a mate at work is a die-hard Exeter wendyball fan (I may have got him converted).

Most of the time these discussions tend to end in two camps:

Ring Fencing

relegation/promotion

what do you think about BM's suggestion of a three year protected period?

I would do promotion relegation but ring fence the promoted team for the first year as long as they meet a certain standrad e.g. 15pts or 7 lbp

I've said for a while I'd prefer a Super League franchise system. It would also protect the northern clubs to a degree. If you have it so one team HAS to be relegated, teams like Exeter would still have a good chance.

There's a similar discussion going on over here: https://www.606v2.com/t28720-the-potential-relegation-promotion-farce

I'm all for relegation/promotion, but I have grave doubts about the current play off system in the Champoinship at the minute.

I can understand (sort of) why it's there for the premiership - its a safety valve so that teams who lose a lot of players to international duty can hang on in there and have a chance for the title as their players come back at the end of the season.

However I cannot see how this appliies to the championship and seems like an unwarrented hurdle - if you are the team that wins the most games then you should go up.

I feel sorry for Bristol.



(As long as the facilities meet H&S rules)