I'm on about just registering lol, not the alternate sides... that's fine - phew!

I'm pretty sure that's how it works. After round one, you'd just de-register 4 players on the team changes thread, and then register the new 4.

IF that's how it is then that's fine, just didn't want to have to tell 4 players they are omitted from the SL. More than likely lose the players from ALL competitions if that were the case.

I think interchangeable teams would just be a backwards step, it was much better this season without them as Uprising had ran themselves and how the original super league was (just about).

Tbh, you only need a decent 12 players for 2 teams I you keep on top of activeness and do a bit of extra captaining to sort matches out. If it was 4v4 I think Uprising could run 3 teams with a full roster . With a good enough team you only need swaps not subs most of the time.

Ultras have come as close at winning with 5 vs 5 as 4 vs 4, I don't think it affects our chances at winning.

Of course that wouldn't happen, the limit is just per set. There hasn't been a discussion on maximum numbers in a clan per league, so I don't know where you plucked that from . Its not gonna be different for each league

Think that's me mate. For "match day" if you like, I would like a maximum squad of 10, which would give a sub for every single player. I think it's overkill myself, and would like to see squads of 8, but I think 10 would be a compromise to the teams that are only entering one squad.

I just think 8 players from a team of 16 encourages clans to field two teams, rather than giving then the option to pick like having the full 16 would encourage clans to field one team. In the middle gives clans the option to pick either without them suffering or benefitting either way.

1 team..full squad

5 v 5

5 subs

interchangeable after each set so all players get a game etc.

Basically what it says on the tin, 1 team to shorten the season, 5 v 5 has always been a decent amount. 5 subs in each set (subs being all those on named in the squad.)

Then just change your team up for each fixture (when asked for team lists) so all players get a game. Quite easy really.

Keep bonus for GB and run-racks only.

Edited at 19:13 Fri 21/11/14 (GMT)

One of the best things about the SL is the short format and lots of teams to go to 5 v 5 with one team is a huge step backwards. If you want 5 v 5 go back to interchangeable teams each set so teams can still have 2 teams. If not and you want fixed teams stick to 4 v 4.

I agree regarding there being lots of teams, which in enjoyable - but there was also a massive number of defaulted games. Far, far more than when it was 5 v 5. Making it 5 v 5 would discourage clans entering 2 teams, that clearly can't complete their fixtures.

The amount of matches had nothing to do with the amount of defaults, the option to only select a portion of the team were the main issue. Players selected would be active then disappear without a trace only to return nearer deadline day and not really be fussed. If other players names could be submitted along with the original 8 or 10 (assuming 1 team) then more flexibility would definitely help reduce or even obliterate any possible default.

No-one is suggesting there is a correlation between defaults and the amount of matches played. Some teams do not have enough playing resources to field 2 sides, whether that be 4 v 4 or 5 v 5. Players disappearing should be easily covered with active subs.

The extra defaulted games was caused because the teams were fixed. Example - Unbeatables had one team that finished there games no problem the other team lost 4 players after the first few fixtures if we still had flexibility we could have completed all games no problem. Thus why go back to the teams being interchangeable. If you want them to be fixed let the clans decide to do it, the SL was far more fun and easy to play when you could interchange your players.

I understand what you're saying mate, but to me if the teams are interchangeable - you've not entered two teams - you've entered one. We cultivated a genuine rivalry between Uprising and the Ultras that simply wouldn't exist if we interchanged players. I think there was several example last season of players swapping sides to get games played anyway - and it's allowed if both captains agree.

What definitely isn't fun with unrestricted movement is if say team A completes 3 of their fixtures early and look to be easily winning the game, and swaps two better players into team B to manipulate a better result. This can lead to some teams holding off playing games until they see a result starting to form and can lead to many, many more issues.

There won't be unrestricted movement. But of course if players drift away from one team then they can be replaced between fixtures with transfers from the other team or replacements can be drafted in from outside.

I think whether it is 5 v 5 or 4 v 4 will solely depend on how many clans want two teams. I think Uprising are probably the only clan that could run two teams of 5 v 5.

If Uprising are the only clan that wants two teams then it will be 5 v 5. If other clans such as Unbeatables, The Pros etc want to enter two teams then it will be 4 v 4 as per this season but with a tighter control on which clans can sustain two teams.

Edited at 20:27 Sat 22/11/14 (GMT)

Super League VII

Accepting entries for this season.

Please post if you wish to join and if you wish to have two teams.

No major rule changes for the season other than Rule 7.5 covering subs into partially played games. This rule has now been standardised across all three Leagues.

http://funkypoolclanleagues.weebly.com/super-league-rules---partially-played-games.html

Edited at 20:29 Sat 22/11/14 (GMT)

Uprising are in - Ultras and Divas (champions)

Unbeatables A and Unbeatables B

(As per matty)

Pros in (one team only)

XVth Man - (one team ONLY)