• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Relegation (or lack thereof)

TRF_Olyy

English Arrogance
Staff member
TRF Legend
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
100,018,257
Country Flag
England
Club or Nation
Sale
Vote to be held tomorrow on whether to scrap relegation this season,
13 team season next season,

Whilst I do think that it'd be harsh to relegate a team this season, with the number of cancelled games etc., I do feel very strongly against the permanent scrapping of relegation - and I think that's what will inevitably happen after this.


 
Vote to be held tomorrow on whether to scrap relegation this season,
13 team season next season,

Whilst I do think that it'd be harsh to relegate a team this season, with the number of cancelled games etc., I do feel very strongly against the permanent scrapping of relegation - and I think that's what will inevitably happen after this.


Concur with your thoughts here. I don't mind them scrapping it this year under the circumstances as long as it was a one-off. Relegation should be back next season with two teams going down.
 
Vote to be held tomorrow on whether to scrap relegation this season,
13 team season next season,

Whilst I do think that it'd be harsh to relegate a team this season, with the number of cancelled games etc., I do feel very strongly against the permanent scrapping of relegation - and I think that's what will inevitably happen after this.



I know of 12 teams, but who's 13?
 
Pulled from the agenda late last night as the clubs haven't received sign off from their commercial partners.

You might have thought that would have occurred to them.
 
There is only 5 games cancelled, and i fail to see why they can't be played before the end of the season. European weeks will be spare for those games to be played. They could have been played a couple of weeks ago if there was a desire to do so but why would they, if it guaranteed that no one would be relegated.
If the cancelled games compromise any relegation issues , then they also compromise the validity of the Whole league.
They should play the cancelled games and have a complete season with bottom team relegated.
Also there is no guarantee the points awarded for the cancelled games will have any effect on who finishes bottom. The bottom team might end up so far adrift of the rest it would have made no difference.
Its all about self preservation and thats wrong.
 
Guessing everyone signed a contract at the start of the season agreeing that cancelled games would be cancelled not rearranged, as the calendar was choc full at the time

Now that there's room you'll never get teams who have benefited from the cancelled games to agree to play them, and I imagine breaking the contract would require unanimous support
 
Its the right decision, I guess (given that the season isn't just going to be cancelled).

But I hate it.
This season simply hasn't piqued my interest in the slightest, far too many asterisks (I assume) on the table, forfeited matches, disrupted preparations...
I doubt that even the 6N will get back interested in this season of domestic rugby now.
 
I'm not sure the 13th team conversation would be happening if it wasn't sarries that were relegated. We shouldn't bend the rules for them. Stop relegation this season and start as normal next season.
 
They have a vote on the PRL and, from what I've gathered, big decisions require a unanimous vote so they could veto relegation being cancelled
 
Apparently BT pulled the plug on this - from what I've read they've (successfully) argued that it'll breach their contract so they'll want to renegotiate for cheaper terms if there's no relegation as it'll mean more games with nothing on the line.

For once our corporate overlords have done something good
 
Now confirmed:

There will then be engagement with the league's broadcaster, BT Sport, along with clubs, sponsors, players and fans on what happens for future seasons.
That's concerning
 
13 teams sounds so stupid.
Imagine getting a bye week in week 1......

Personally I feel it needs 5 seasons of ringfenced, with regular and strong investing into the championship infrastructure, thinking academy systems, thinking maybe even stronger uni linking for example Nottingham rugby has a really good partnership with Nottingham trent and better playing facilities.
Maybe even make it a smaller league of 10 teams, and then hopefully when it reverts back you have a league where nearly all 10 teams are capable of promotion from a structural POV.
 
Also how about the the bottom 3 teams loan their best players to Ealing?
1. VPR
2. Dunn
3. Stuart
4. Slater
5. Ewels
6. Hill
7. Polledri
8. Mercer
9. Spencer
10. Wier
11. McConnochie
12. Redpath
13. Lawrance
14. May
15. Watson

Could be a decent team v Saracens end of season.
 
13 teams sounds so stupid.
Imagine getting a bye week in week 1......
the team getting the bye in the last weekend gets it worse. Especially if that team is top with others close behind or just above the relegation spot
 
Stupid, we won't have 13 teams if it wasn't cheating sarries in the championship. The fans and players get punished but Wray who should be banned from rugby gets nothing.
 
Stupid, we won't have 13 teams if it wasn't cheating sarries in the championship. The fans and players get punished but Wray who should be banned from rugby gets nothing.
Not sure that's quite fair. Sarries may have a louder voice than any of the others, but whichever of the 13 were facing an additional season on the outside looking in would have done everything in their power to get back up.
 
Times suggesting it's highly likely that there won't be any relegation until at least 2024. Not entirely clear but they also seem to be suggesting that promotion would still be possible for clubs meeting certain new strict criteria. So the league could get bigger than 13? At the same time Premiership Rugby is also promising to discuss more preparation time for the Eng team for 2023.

I prefer promotion / relegation but have long believed that ringfencing is inevitable at some point.

A saving grace is that BT Sport seems to have the hump over non relegation, albeit may seek a rebate so that would be less money flowing into the game.
 
If the fans don't want it and the sponsors don't want it then why are the blazers pushing so hard for it?
They think there's too much money in the game and really want BT to pay them less?
 

Latest posts

Top