Here: "Saints back new structure" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3728 Glowing endorsement of Barwick.

Here: "Saints back new structure" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3728 Glowing endorsement of Barwick.

It would appear that the players are not so convinced. www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21

It would appear that the players are not so convinced. www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21

Quote FearTheVee="FearTheVee"Here: "Saints back new structure" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3728 Glowing endorsement of Barwick.'" anf no mention of mr wood says it all

Quote FearTheVee="FearTheVee"Here: "Saints back new structure" www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3728 Glowing endorsement of Barwick.'" anf no mention of mr wood says it all

Quote Rogues Gallery="Rogues Gallery"It would appear that the players are not so convinced. www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21'" Who'd have thought sl players wouldn't like the idea of being relegated? No relegation and increased salary cap please.

Quote Rogues Gallery="Rogues Gallery"It would appear that the players are not so convinced. www.leaguethirteen.co.uk/news/2013/10/13/21'" Who'd have thought sl players wouldn't like the idea of being relegated? No relegation and increased salary cap please.

and playing more games for the same money

League 13, have they ever come out with anything positive about the game since they started.

It's looking more and more like a moaners forum.

I think we can say that Big Mac is definitely pinning his colours to the mast on this one.

Interesting to see that on the Virtual Terrace where there is a poll about the league structure.

That the naysayers waded in early to say everyone is against it. But actually it's a pretty even split.

Ok 150 is not a scientific study, but it's more than most adverts bother with when quoting that a certain % of people agree.

Some high profile nay sayers have loved saying that the fans are against it, but actually its far less simple than that.

Rather like the vote the clubs had, a difference of one vote but we're all still stuck with the format even though half the clubs didn't vote for it.

He's really stuck his neck out with those predictions of financial prosperity. I have a suspicion that this restructure has been done in consultation with Sky and an improved TV deal is tied in with it.

Does his glowing support not seem a tad hypocritical given he was one of the Chairmen that walked out of the previous meeting?

Can someone also tell me what all the fuss was about last time, when suddenly they all love the idea?

Seems a tad silly to me. I'm not overly concerned about promotion and relegation, but don't really understand what the three 8's is about. I can't see it existing in 5 years time. It also makes it look like the decision to move away from promotion and relegation was done for reasons other than avoiding financial meltdown and now they are using the desperation of avoiding relegation as the main PR point about the new structure. 'Bringing back the £1m match' isn't a great tagline to go with.

Has anything been released with regards to the funding? The only thing I've read is a promise from the RFL that the clubs outside the top 12 will get a 'far greater' share of the central funding. How will that work without the top 12 clubs being pillaged for that? The title sponsorship deal is another thing I would have thought the clubs would have prevented. £4.5m over 6 years is pittance and will likely mean no additional funding to the clubs at all, that'll disappear on overheads at the RFL. Rugby Union's Aviva deal was £20m over 4 years, signed at the height of the recession and gives more money per year than the RFL got in total over 6 years.

Unless there is a promise of significantly increased funding from Sky, the u-turn from the guys who walked out is just mystifying?

You beat me to it, far more efficient typing there Dux.