The Potential Relegation / Promotion Farce....

Okay guys,

As you will all be aware, the Falcons should be relegated...but there is still a possibility that due to application issues, we wont be.
Only two of the four championship play off sides have applied for the premiership...and even theirs havent been approved yet.

Now how do you view this?

That which ever championship side wins the playoffs should rightly be promoted, and the Falcons beng so horribly bad for the majority of the season deserve to go down?...

OR

Do you think, that the championship teams are well aware of the promotion requirements and so should have them fixed prior to pushing for promotion...and if they dont fulfill the criteria...its their own fault....

What do you think...

Falcons deserve to go down.

BUT

Championship sides know the rules - and to be honest most are not geared up for promotion financially, let alone structurally. Bedford have no interest in promotion (good job you could say as they lost on Friday) and London Welsh are still close to going bust. The Pirates decided not to apply and seem willing to wait till they have developed a ground.

Are the rules around entry wrong - in most cases no.

Surely there is no point in having a promotion/relegation if you have conditions that are more important than being able to be promoted.

The decision is governed by wealth and not ability.

This has created a ring-fenced premiership where the threat of relegation is conditional.

I may be wrong, but I think only Rotherham were denied promotion (in the early part of the last decade) for failing to meet the criteria.

Having said that, they are the exception as the three teams who seem to yo-yo between the Premiership and Championship (Bris, Leeds and Worc) have grounds that meet the requirements.

It's a bit of a shame for most teams though, because to generate enough income to improve their grounds they need the cash that comes with Premiership rugby, but they are effectively being denied access to that cash.

Talking of which, how the RFU haven't come up with a sponsorship deal for the Championship is nigh on criminal. They want the teams to run Academies that produce English qualified players but seem to do next to damn all to help finance them.

Sorry, rant over.

maestegmafia wrote:Surely there is no point in having a promotion/relegation if you have conditions that are more important than being able to be promoted.

The decision is governed by wealth and not ability.

Only in part.

Everyone chooses to ignore the Health and Safety aspects which form the bulk of the regulations, or the facilities needed to permit TV to visit.

Having jumped through the hoop of regulations 2 seasons ago our (Exeter) Chief Exec has recently stated he can see why they are in place. At the time we were applying I know we had to meet the majority of the criteria before the Championship final. Including having to upgrade our already excellant lights to TV standard and position the toilets/bars/eateries so nobody had to walk more than 60 metres to get to them There are such regs that beggar belief and are clearly not met by some of the long term Prem sides. But I think the main criteria should be about sustainability. I't's no good getting to the Prem if you can't afford to run a Prem side with all that's associated with that. I hope Wasps get out of the mess they are in but any side being promoted needs to ensure they won't end up in the same boat.

I guess Aironi have effectively been 'relegated' because of lack of finance.

I agree Harrow the RFU should do more to assist teams in the Championship & of course sponsorship would be the knock on for more TV coverage of their games.

Exeter have been a revelation this season & I guess if you have a solid fan base initially like they had/have you can plan ahead financially with more confidence.

Great to see Jersey promoted into the Championship & win their last game in front of 3,500 fans.
That would be an fair crowd for some games in the Rabo.

It may not be right or fair but the rules are there at the beginning of the season for all to see.

If the Falcons go down then its their own fault likewise if the winner of the championship is denied promotion due to poor or in correct facilities then again its their own fault.

Make the top flight Regional and then ring fence it, it works for us

bedfordwelsh wrote:It may not be right or fair but the rules are there at the beginning of the season for all to see.

If the Falcons go down then its their own fault likewise if the winner of the championship is denied promotion due to poor or in correct facilities then again its their own fault.

Make the top flight Regional and then ring fence it, it works for us

Thing is that the financial bar that the Championship winning teams have to jump to please the PRL is too high. All this system does is encourage clubs to find wealthy private backers to bring to the elite game in the premiership.

It does nothing to encourage better rugby.

bedfordwelsh wrote:It may not be right or fair but the rules are there at the beginning of the season for all to see.

If the Falcons go down then its their own fault likewise if the winner of the championship is denied promotion due to poor or in correct facilities then again its their own fault.

+1

Moorsman wrote:Having jumped through the hoop of regulations 2 seasons ago our (Exeter) Chief Exec has recently stated he can see why they are in place. At the time we were applying I know we had to meet the majority of the criteria before the Championship final. Including having to upgrade our already excellant lights to TV standard and position the toilets/bars/eateries so nobody had to walk more than 60 metres to get to them There are such regs that beggar belief and are clearly not met by some of the long term Prem sides. But I think the main criteria should be about sustainability. I't's no good getting to the Prem if you can't afford to run a Prem side with all that's associated with that. I hope Wasps get out of the mess they are in but any side being promoted needs to ensure they won't end up in the same boat.

+1 The width of the pisser should be irrelevant, for example, but the same criteria (re sustainability) should be applied in equal measure to all sides currently in the premiership not just those competing for promotion from the championship imo

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:Talking of which, how the RFU haven't come up with a sponsorship deal for the Championship is nigh on criminal. They want the teams to run Academies that produce English qualified players but seem to do next to damn all to help finance them.

+1 Woeful amount of financing received from the RFU, certainly not enough to run a business with a view to gaining promotion and a long-term plan of being able to stay in the top league. And the competitive disadvantage that is 'P' share is equally a farce, effectively ensuring that teams not in the 'premiership club' operate at a significant loss relative to the big boys. The whole structure needs looking at, alongside all the other idiocies that make up the general structure of the English game (see any of Portnoy's post for examples of these)

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:Talking of which, how the RFU haven't come up with a sponsorship deal for the Championship is nigh on criminal. They want the teams to run Academies that produce English qualified players but seem to do next to damn all to help finance them.

+1 Woeful amount of financing received from the RFU, certainly not enough to run a business with a view to gaining promotion and a long-term plan of being able to stay in the top league. And the competitive disadvantage that is 'P' share is equally a farce, effectively ensuring that teams not in the 'premiership club' operate at a significant loss relative to the big boys. The whole structure needs looking at, alongside all the other idiocies that make up the general structure of the English game (see any of Portnoy's post for examples of these)

This effects the premiership and national team, the lack of investment in academies in the championship encourages teams to look elsewhere for mature players.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Hound_of_Harrow wrote:Talking of which, how the RFU haven't come up with a sponsorship deal for the Championship is nigh on criminal. They want the teams to run Academies that produce English qualified players but seem to do next to damn all to help finance them.

+1 Woeful amount of financing received from the RFU, certainly not enough to run a business with a view to gaining promotion and a long-term plan of being able to stay in the top league. And the competitive disadvantage that is 'P' share is equally a farce, effectively ensuring that teams not in the 'premiership club' operate at a significant loss relative to the big boys. The whole structure needs looking at, alongside all the other idiocies that make up the general structure of the English game (see any of Portnoy's post for examples of these)

I agree to a certain extent but the RFU also have to strike a balance and ensure clubs sustainability. We don't want clubs like Coventry, Birmingham/Solihull over stretching themselves for a quick fix & when they don't achieve on field success the backers pull out & you have no club.
Sustainability is key.
I am looking forward to seeing how Jersey develop now - they appear to be on a slow burn building up a club using local players & building the crowds, investing in their ground & have a 600 + strong group of academy players.

And Jersey are already getting gates in NL1 that are the envy of most clubs in the Championship. Not many teams will fancy going there next season.

I think Falcons will come straight back up if Bris gain promotion. Wasps just need to make sure that we are not in the same position next season. Some of the youngsters have been exposed to plenty of 1st team action this season, which should stand them in good stead.

Won't Jersey lose their financial helping hand from the RFU tho for travel expenses?

As a Newcastle supporter I believe we deserve to be relegated, but I wonder what the point of it all is when only us and Leeds will be able to regain promotion. It sometimes seems to me that relegation is there simply to punish the team who finish last, rather than give a new team an opportunity.

Mind you, when you look at some clubs in the Championship they look like amateur clubs. I’ve read London Welsh are considering legally challenging the criteria if they win promotion. But the crowds they play in front of are tiny. Even on sky a couple of weeks ago against Bris there could have only been about 1500-1600 people there and a good portion of them appeared to be Bristol supporters. As a friend said to me, Old Deer Park looks a bit like the grounds we were playing at when we played schoolboy rugby.

For all the talk of the new 10,000 seater stadium for Cornwall, Pirate’s average gate is 2,200 (one of the best in the league), just over half the capacity of Mennaye fields. I don’t know that much about the rugby landscape in Cornwall other than that they supply a lot of good players, would the public turn out if they got to the Premiership?

I like what Exeter have achieved and would love to see Rotherham get another crack at the Premiership, but to me a lot of the regulations make sense. What I would like to see is the RFU try to help the Championship clubs meet them. Maybe offer interest free loans to get grounds up to scratch and set up a proper flipping website for the league too.

The leagues should be ring fenced with one club going down and another up every 3/4 years. So all clubs have that time frame to build squads, grow the fan base and start to create a sustainable franchise. Whichever club doesn't manage this then gets punished.

This annual yo yo is a farce and only ends up costing the RFU £2 mil at the end of it in parachute payments, wouldn't that be better spent on investing in the championship and the leagues below that every season?

yappysnap wrote:The leagues should be ring fenced with one club going down and another up every 3/4 years. So all clubs have that time frame to build squads, grow the fan base and start to create a sustainable franchise. Whichever club doesn't manage this then gets punished.

This annual yo yo is a farce and only ends up costing the RFU £2 mil at the end of it in parachute payments, wouldn't that be better spent on investing in the championship and the leagues below that every season?

I would increase the Premiership to 14 and replace 1 spot every two years if there is a team that meets the requirement in playing and infrastructure backgrounds (though you get 4 years grace if you go up). Give all Premiership teams the same funds, and lose the parachute payment.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Won't Jersey lose their financial helping hand from the RFU tho for travel expenses?

I read somewhere that they will lose their travel subsidy, while visiting teams will get no central allowance either.

As expected, Mooro has something to say on this topic in his column in today's Torygraph:

Aviva Premiership: It's time to end the unfair protection for the big boys of the top flight
Hands up and without using Google: what is a vomitory?
Aviva Premiership: It's time to end the unfair protection for the big boys of the top flight

By Brian Moore

No, Perkins Minor, it’s not the name of the bar where the England players went to have a go at dwarf-tossing in New Zealand. Anyone else got a sensible suggestion?

If you had studied the Professional Game Board’s Minimum Standards Criteria for clubs in and aspiring to be in English Rugby’s Premiership, you would know it is an access route built into the gradient of a stand which directly links spectator seating to concourses and/or routes for ingress, egress and emergency evacuation.

That little trivia nugget for nerds is one of many in the 60-page document that is devilishly difficult to find but which forms part of the Saracens’ planning application for reviving the Barnet Copthall Stadium. It can be accessed at http://bit.ly/JpFAav. They are talking of little else in the Dog and Duck because last weekend – the denouement of the domestic regular season – saw Newcastle win at Wasps, only to find that they were still relegated to the Championship.

Well, not actually relegated, but put in a position where they could be relegated.

This is the point at which the worlds of the romantics and the pragmatists collide.

I have always been a hopeless romantic, as witnessed by the fact that I once bought my first wife a cordless iron for Valentine’s Day, and yet I now find myself firmly in the pragmatists’ camp because I cannot indulge the disingenuousness of those who argue against any form of ring-fencing the Premiership.

At first glance you probably have to agree with the idea that in a perfect world each and every club in England should have the right to ascend to the summit of English club rugby, even if the prospects of this are minimal. This is surely equitable and principled.

It gets less so when it comes to making the final leap to rugby’s big time, that one sees the process is rigged in favour of the big boys, as demonstrated by the fact that Newcastle have to wait until we find out in a couple of weeks time which team will win the Championship play-offs and be eligible for promotion.

Then we will have to study whether they meet the said standards, even though they are not met by many of the clubs already in the Premiership.

I make no apology for the virtual repeat of a similar column written this time last year because the situation has not changed and the need to resolve this unfair state of affairs outweighs the charge of indolent journalism.

The fact is that clubs like London Welsh and Nottingham, along with Bristol who do apparently fit the stipulations, are now fed up with this iniquity and are considering mounting a legal challenge to the rules.

They will argue that although they agreed to the rules they were forced to do so as it was mandatory for them to be allowed to play in the Championship in the first place. Furthermore, they will say that teams who do not fulfil the critical criteria, especially ownership of their grounds and primacy of tenure, have not been forced to comply within a rigid time frame, as is prefaced in the agreement.

Additionally, Premiership clubs who did not own their grounds or otherwise did not meet the standard and who were relegated, appear not to be in the same position as the others in the Championship when it comes to regaining top-flight status.

How long must rugby go on pretending that it is possible to have seamless progress from top to bottom and that all clubs are equal? Not only is this disingenuous, it prevents a proper debate about ring-fencing, allowing opponents to rely on a principle that they know, de facto, does not a exist.

Meanwhile, both the bottom Premiership club and top Championship club are forced to plan on a ruinously short-term basis, looking at the raising of the salary cap to fund the purchase of top players, often from overseas, and underwritten by wealthy benefactors.

The pressure on the issue of salary caps is one which will not go away and increases have to be based on organic growth, rather than borrowing or philanthropic sugar daddies. Protected periods of three to four years, with promotion and relegation at the end of each period, would allow slower and more sustainable organic growth.

Allied to this, the Premiership needs to revisit the flouting of the salary cap by clubs who circumvent the totals by using a variety of ruses like employing partners, facilitating advantageous property purchases and paying school fees. In turn, the clubs who do know what is going on have to name names. If they don’t have the courage to do so, they should not whine about it.

Championship sides, their importance in producing players and overall relevance to English rugby seems to be of no interest to the RFU. The lack of sponsorship is a major handicap and their attractiveness for investment/support by wealthy benefactors or companies is necessarily limited. I doubt there are many clubs, Prem or Championship, who could survive without a wealthy owner/investor. Both Leeds and Newcastle have strong academies which have supplied many Premiership and International standard players but this doesn't translate to succesful clubs for lots of reasons but they, along with others, should benefit financially and structurally more than they do. It's time for the RFU to wake up.

The relegation/promotion situation needs a massive overhaul. With nothing but kudos at stake for most top Championship teams the play offs are a waste of time and I don't see how any of them gain from it. If you are going to have meaningful relegation/promotion you have to restrict the process to those who can meet the requirements. If a club in the championship wants to be involved they should be required to make their intention clear and be given help to develop infrastructure etc. over a number of seasons if necessary, and only when they achive the standard should they be involved in the play offs if that's still in place.

Leeds, like Newcastle, have made mistakes in management and coaching which have been a big part of their erratic performance and ring fencing would have simply consigned them to the foot of the table. Relegation forces re-appraisal and action but it needs to be handled in a much more professional way. Exeter have been a breath of fresh air with few 'big names', just sound structures. They have proved what can be done, it's up to the rest of the Championship to emulate them.

"Both Leeds and Newcastle have strong academies which have supplied many Premiership and International standard players but this doesn't translate to succesful clubs for lots of reasons "

Thats because those pesky felines...keep coming and nicking our players!!

Have you seen the Cornish Pirates vs. Bristol score marra...?

Cumbrian wrote:Have you seen the Cornish Pirates vs. Bristol score marra...?

Good result for the Pirates.

Shocking collaps by Bristol though.

Seems to me that the UK taxpayer should bung each Championship club about £15million quid to redevelop their grounds.

I feel for Bristol, it's a farce that they've worked hard and finished top of the league two years running but they've got to put up with this.

They missed out on top spot last year I thought, Wuss getting it, but were ahead of Exeter the previous year.

don't they lose a big chuck of their P shares if they fail to get promoted this time?

Oops, I was thinking back in 2009-10.

It seems unfair though that they've had the best team and crowds over the season only to be denied by a team who can't even progress.

Geordie, you know as well as I do that's only part of the story. Coaching and management have both failed and the clubs have suffered. We are not alone in that. Your persevering with Alan Tait and our expensive gamble with Neil Back were both misguided and led directly to where we are now but you are in the stronger position. It remains to be seen if either of our clubs can come up with a viable plan.

Cumbrian, so do I. Bristol should not be in this position, they were clear and away the best team, promotion should have been automatic.

LondonTiger wrote:They missed out on top spot last year I thought, Wuss getting it, but were ahead of Exeter the previous year.

don't they lose a big chuck of their P shares if they fail to get promoted this time?

Exeter are allowed to force the sale of them I think, you've got to believe they will too.

What are the chances of London Welsh being promoted?

wales606 wrote:What are the chances of London Welsh being promoted?

Zero

Here we go again. Pirates just hammered Bristol 45 - 24. Looking ever less likely Falcons will actually face the drop.

Aye from 24-19 up that was a poor finish to the game by Bristol.

LondonTiger wrote:

wales606 wrote:What are the chances of London Welsh being promoted?

Zero

Why? I don't know how the playoff thing works, but according to the BBC they are 2nd in pool A with a game left to play.

wales606 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

wales606 wrote:What are the chances of London Welsh being promoted?

Zero

Why? I don't know how the playoff thing works, but according to the BBC they are 2nd in pool A with a game left to play.

they are odds on favourites to make the play-off final. However as they currently play on public land (well not currently as the Cricket Season is started so they get priority) with few facilities, they did not apply to be audited and hence are not eligible for promotion.

wales606 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

wales606 wrote:What are the chances of London Welsh being promoted?

Zero

Why? I don't know how the playoff thing works, but according to the BBC they are 2nd in pool A with a game left to play.

Even if they win the Championship, they won't be promoted. As LT says, they don't meet the requirements.

robbo277 wrote:

wales606 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

wales606 wrote:What are the chances of London Welsh being promoted?

Zero

Why? I don't know how the playoff thing works, but according to the BBC they are 2nd in pool A with a game left to play.

Even if they win the Championship, they won't be promoted. As LT says, they don't meet the requirements.

I thought they were trying to get a groundshare which would allow them to play in the Premiership.

I'm not 100% sure, but it was my understanding that they couldn't get promoted. I think they were looking to challenge the ruling if they won the Championship however.

any groundshare needed to be arranged early enough for them to apply to be audited. This they failed to do.

I think it is a terrible shame that teams that have fought tooth and nail all season to try and better themselves and reach the pinnacle of English rugby are prevented from doing do because they don't have the cash reserves, or a ground share with a soccer club.

I can understand the reasoning for the legislation, the demise of Richmond and London Scottish all those years ago caused a stark reaction to the sustainability of clubs.

It appears that Tigers, Saints, Sarries and Bath have created a successful and profitable business plan that keeps them in profit each year. I know that many of the other clubs are struggling and that the PRLs concept of auditing is to prevent failures at premiership level.

But unless the ability to promote from the championship is not made attainable for those clubs that have won their league then their very little point in having promotion or relegation any more.

It seems that it may be better off simply promoting the one or two who can be saved and ring fencing the Premiership.

Ringfencing would be the very worst option. The RFU operate a league system whereby if you're good enough to be promoted then you are or relegated if you aren't.

The grounds criteria isn't brilliant, but I can understand why they insist on it. The financial strain is far more intense in the Premiership.

If anything, the farce lies with Premier Rugby and the RFU for creating this whole fiasco in the first place. And as for people bemoaning Bristol losing yesterday despite being the only club ready for promotion, if they lose 45-24 to the Cornish Pirates (a side looking to build a stadium worthy of the criteria) then what would they be like in the Premiership? Shocking.

I'd much prefer a competitive league with promotion and relegation than ringfencing like the Pro12 or Super 15.

SB, it's not so much bemoaning Bristol's woeful loss to Pirates but the fact that their ultimate fate is not going to be based on the season's performances but on the outcome of what is little more than a knock-out competition which we all know doesn't necessarily reflect a teams overall performance. Pirates win was deserved, they played well but it doesn't change the fact they were what 7 points adrift in the league proper? As you say, the farce lies with the RFU who treat the Championship with contempt.

Bit left field but...can the team who is being relegated lend their bogs to the team coming up, problem solved! Oh and Bristol knew the risks back in 2010, they pushed hard all season while Chiefs played a more canny game. It paid off, you'd have thougt they'd have learnt by now.

I guess so. It reminds me of when Gloucester won the league table by a country mile and then Wasps turned them over in the first final - the 2003 season I think? Topping the league is nice but in theory the hard work starts in the second phase of the tournament with the top eight.

I totally agree with you on the fact that the RFU treat the league with contempt. Such factors as failing to find a league sponsor, the television coverage which has failed to materialise and yet these sides are expected to splash out for full-time squads and a national fixture list with overnight travel and the like? It's total madness.

maestegmafia wrote:I think it is a terrible shame that teams that have fought tooth and nail all season to try and better themselves and reach the pinnacle of English rugby are prevented from doing do because they don't have the cash reserves, or a ground share with a soccer club.

I can understand the reasoning for the legislation, the demise of Richmond and London Scottish all those years ago caused a stark reaction to the sustainability of clubs.

It appears that Tigers, Saints, Sarries and Bath have created a successful and profitable business plan that keeps them in profit each year. I know that many of the other clubs are struggling and that the PRLs concept of auditing is to prevent failures at premiership level.

But unless the ability to promote from the championship is not made attainable for those clubs that have won their league then their very little point in having promotion or relegation any more.

The main reason for the criteria is to stop a sugar-daddy coming in, buying some good players and gaining promotion. They'd have to invest in the infrastructure first and build support (e.g. Exeter).

The only bad thing about this is that the current Premiership sides don't seem to have a strict deadline by which they have to comply with the criteria. If they did it would be much fairer.

I said on the other thread I'm in favour of the Super League franchise system. Every three years all eligible teams are scored based on: performance, attendance, finances, distance to other applicants, etc. The best XX are in the premiership, the rest are in the championship. Every three years they're rescored and relagation/promotion is decided by this. If nothing is changed the worst score from the premiership is relegated and best best from the premiership is promoted. Chosing the weightings is very important and could be largely based on performance to ensure good performing teams are picked.

Will this impact Bristol's promotion chance? (what's left of it after the 2nd half collapse on Monday anyway! )

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-18007310

Bristol share a ground with Rovers, but the audit will be carried out on the Memo ground, I presume? Bristol have been invited to move wih Rovers, but what guarantees will the RFU require?