European Qualifier Discussion - 2013 and onwards

You said 1 or 2 teams wouldn't be able to get to the Euros? Please explain which teams and why this is fair?

Let's theoretically say that we are only given two spots for a future year's Euros. Is it still a fair system to propose?

Nobody is suggesting any of that Jono, not sure where you are getting this from.

Using last season's results in a bad precedent to go down, I gave the example of a London "Super Team" forming and no longer having a route to the Euros.

1 place for the winners of the primary competitions in the UK, not passed on, not for the lower teams. The rest still qualify as normal. If the winners choose not to take it (ie they choose to form new teams), then it gets returned to the qualifying tournament.

What if that team is not a top 10 team for next season, can you guarantee this?

The reasoning behind it is that the qualifying is already over subscribed, and that's going to get worse in future years, making it less and less accurate, this is one way of solving that, and a nice way to reward the winners of what should be the most important tournaments for UK players, outside of the Euros or Worlds.

You're taking a simple problem (over-subscribed tournament) and have proposed a confusing ("muddying") way forward that doesn't even guarantee that it solves the over-subscribed problem? I don't see the logic.

Just make the UK Champs (or qualifier) be over two days (or more courts), problem solved? What other reasons are there for proposing the (new) distribution method for Euros spots?