In defence of the drop
By Leipziger
March 9 2012
It’s around this time of year that the relegation argument always rears its head, as the Falcons and whoever our rivals at the bottom of the Premiership happen to be fight to retain their top-flight status.
I’m a staunch supporter of keeping relegation, so I thought since the Falcons don’t have a game this weekend I’d address some of the common arguments put forward in support of making the Premiership a closed shop.
--------------------------------
Removing relegation will make teams play more attractive rugby.
I do not agree with this at all. The Falcons or whoever is at the bottom of the league do not play attritional rugby because they are in danger of relegation, but because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that such a style of play represents their best chance of winning.
So let us say for a moment that if there were no relegation, the Falcons would play a more attractive game. Since we do not have the players or (previously) the coaching to pull it off, we would probably lose most games, and lose heavily. Do rugby fans in the North East want to watch a losing team just because they are playing attractive rugby? I have my doubts.
Removing relegation will make teams bring through young English players rather than buy in foreigners.
This is another I really do not understand. The Falcons did not sign Jimmy Gopperth over Jonny Wilkinson or Toby Flood – they signed him because Steve Bates believed Jimmy was the best fly-half available to us at the time. If there were a better English fly-half who would sign for us, we’d have him.
This also completely ignores the fact that the Falcons, Leeds, Worcester etc. DO bring through young English players. Not to mention that the top teams in the league such as Leicester and Harlequins also have plenty of foreigners. Heck, Saracens have built most of their success on foreigners, and made no secret of it!
Perhaps these clubs have their foreigners so they can win trophies – which is surely an ambition of all clubs.
If the Falcons couldn’t be relegated and played more young English players, they would logically be worse than the current foreigners we have. That would mean we would be more likely to lose games. Continuing the crowd issue from the previous argument, we would surely have lower attendances because the standard of play would be lower.
Not one that is mentioned that often but has been in the past: removing relegation will encourage clubs to invest in their facilities due to them having more long-term security.
You only have to look at Kingston Park and Sixways to know this argument is completely flawed.
Only two or three clubs in the Championship are capable of promotion.
Under the current system that is the case. But just because Bedford, Cornish Pirates, Doncaster etc. cannot currently be promoted, that is not to say that they will never meet the criteria.
Having an election system (like Super League) will encourage Championship teams to plan for the long-term.
Sandy Park and new stadiums for Plymouth Albion and (eventually) Cornish Pirates prove that teams will invest in their grounds under the current system if they want to and are able to.
Say we did have an election system, whereby every three years a new club was chosen to join the Premiership at the expense of a current incumbent over the past three years. Leaving aside the ethical argument of having a team’s status decided in a committee room rather than on the pitch, why would a team invest when there was only a chance of promotion every three years if they don't when
there is a chance of promotion every year?
--------------------------------
All of this is not to say that the current system does not need improvement. If you've made it this far and want to read more, click here.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
a] 2 up/2 down each season. Top of Championship and bottom club in Premiership automatically promoted/relegated. 11th in premiership plays off with with 2/3/4th in Championship for other place.
b] A proper knock out cup competition for English clubs
c] A more balanced Heineken Cup with 8 English and French clubs and 2 each from Wales, Ireland, Scotland and Italy
A big problem with the premiership is that it is alien to a lot of the country because we've choked off the access to it, an odd chap here or there from Plymouth might go up to Exeter or come from Coventry to Leicester but you'll never get the sort of widespread interest in the premiership that you have in the football version until it feels connected to the rest of the pyramid.
For instance has the premiership become less popular in Bristol since their relegation? I don't think so, and I don't think you guys would lose interest if you were in the championship either.
2 up 2 down would also hopefully increase interest in the championship, if half the league was genuinely worried about dropping into it surely the press and TV would have to increase its coverage of it?
In your ideal world of two up & two down which will open up all sorts of opportunities, they would introduce something even more insane than the current play offs. What you have suggested is altogether too simple, too sensible, it simply must not happen. The play offs would have to be expanded to encompass not just eight teams, at least sixty four would be necessary. The play offs would be extended to cover a period of several years, and would have to include English qualified players who haven't even been born yet.
Alternatively, we could scrap the pointless waste of space that is the RFU, introduce 2 up 2 down, scrap the play offs, and scrap the ridiculous stadium nonsense. I know there will be a few down sides but the benefits would be enormous & it would all even out after a few years into something quite superb.
I like it & I propose SK for President.
But who ever comes down, will bring there pot of cash with them and as per normal go straight back up again!
Dean Richards is not joining Newcastle for his health.