Which, if course, it does. Hence



Just like all the other Championship clubs that didn't do the necessary on the field.








just thought I'd say, like …

TB - Are you ignoring Salford, Castleford and Hull KR who have all been promoted to Super League?

What????????



There is some way in which that is relevant to my last post, responding to your previous comment? (clue, the answer is 'no, there isn't')

I see you've turned up again

so I'll ask again

The answer is ?

Interesting conclusion , especially as the SL entry criteria was changed to allow your club back into SL in 2005 , if they hadn't changed it , you would still be in the Championship now

they found a money tree.

Call me suspicious but do you not think the ground would have gone up much faster if that indeed was the case and the rules had stuck?
Im sorry but 2 should go, you've had ANOTHER 3 years and theres no bricks up yet.

TB - I don't want an argument. Look back on my previous posts. It's you who appears to be taking my comments out of context.

My point is this. Perform on the pitch and get promoted. Several people on this site seem to have the view that there is no way a lowly championship side can get promoted and compete at Super League level. However, a lot of people on here seem to conveniently forget that this is how Salford, Castleford and Hull KR all made it into Super League. We then all completely forget the long and interesting history of the sport before Super League started. The league has always looked different year to year especially during the 3 up, 3 down times.

We then all start quoting Leigh about how they were such an embarrassment to the game when they got promoted in 2005 but then conveniently forget the Fartown Ferrets who bumped along the bottom of Super League in the early years.

Even though my own club Halifax have all the necessary boxes ticked I firmly believe Widnes will be in Super League in 2012. They have more money and as such have been able to build a platform which means that when you compare us with them it simply has to be Widnes.

It saddens me that I wasn't able to celebrate our GF win with the knowledge we'd have a chance to visit Headingley or Odsal and face up to some of our old foes as a direct result of winning the Grand Final. Us Championship sides are now forced to see Super League as almost an unreachable dream. What other popular spectator sport in our Country has such limitations?

I'm expecting a response picking tiny holes in my argument or a response which says I'm bitter because I'm a Halifax fan. I always have been a Rugby League fan first and foremost and I firmly believe that the pros for P & R massively outweigh the cons.

for the fact we used almost 40 players that year due to injuries

SL did not harm leigh one iota , neither did it harm SL one Iota , Crusaders got how many points more than us ?

Just thought I'd clear up some of the oft quotes bull

No he's missed the point again Starbug, nothing to do with Leigh's 05 season.
This really isnt that difficult.

Leagufan claimed on pitch performance had nothing to do with moving divisions. I used Leigh as an example of a side who had the stadium, but hadn't completed the right ON FIELD criteria to even apply. Whether they would have fallen down elsewhere I dont know but it really wasn't that difficult a point to grasp.
I think our Halifax based friend couldn't see the forest for the trees.

Likewise.....

Did you bother reading or just jump in with both feet?

The poster was saying that once the one up had been sorted all the others would be assessed together, I just wondered if they were to be assessed by Champ or SL criteria.....read back posts.

I then suggested that to be in contention for the drop you should have either finished in the bottom 2 within your licence period or had financial discrepancies.
This would mean at least 2 would be eligible for the drop..

^^^^ The Answer Is ^^^^

Dico - I don't disagree with you in the slightest. I think it's you looking for trees that don't exist.

If you look back on my posts you will see that I think this whole criteria thing is nonsense. I don't care if you have a new shiny stadium. I don't care if you have won a Northern Rail Cup, I don't care if you got to a GF and didn't win it. I really don't care what your average attendance is......I could go on for a while here.

What I care about is.....did you win the league or win the game which meant you won the league competition?

Some teams will get promoted and struggle, some will survive and some may indeed thrive. All it takes is a change in ownership at a club to change it's wealth. Wealth brings talent, talent brings success, success brings fans, fans bring more money. Some clubs overstretch and dissapear, new clubs appear and thrive.

It's the way I remember our game once operating and in my opinion is the key to the future longevity and success of our game.

I remember every professional team being in one division (therefore no P & R)....it worked pretty well with no club restricted in its ambition and always playing its local rivals home and away.

To get back to a situation where no team is put upon then conferencing a la the NFL is the way forward. Effectively promotion of the able without necessarily relegating anybody.

:10cmwcnq

This was your post

, but both are highly unlikely

The answer is either a return to P & R which is highly unlikely or as would happen with my other post a transparent way to decide who can be eligible for the drop which takes it out of the RFL's hands.
The way it is at present it turns into a RFL judged beauty contest, if your face doesnt fit then no tiara.

Can't believe the RFL would even consider kicking out Cas or Wakey, absolutely disgusting IMO.

But that is what the licensing has come to, RFL to kick a team out.
On the field in the past 2 yrs we aren't the worst, grounds we are in a pot with a few others, financially we are o.k., and youth&english we do well but are still one of the favourites for the drop.
A more transparent and on-field results orientated selection of candidates has to be the way to go.
If you finished in the bottom 2 or financially mis managed your club then you deserve to be considered for the drop.

Blame the clubs. They're the ones who voted to keep SL at 14, even knowing that one championship club was guaranteed a licence if it met application criteria.

I'd like to think Cas voted for potential expansion, but I wouldn't guarantee it.

I still feel that the 'Bottom 2 or Financial' is a way of appeasing those who still would rather have P&R while still having the licence procedure, chances are that if you are in the bottom 2 you will deserve the consideration and you cannot just spend your way out because of the financial side.

It's certainly confusing isn't it! We get told P&R isn't the way forward, franchises are... Right ok. But then as clubs in the Championship strive to achieve what the RFL asks whereas the 'lower grade' SL sides have done nothing to address their issues yet we are now hearing it's a farce and all teams should be left in... Why?

But when 'lower grade SL sides' are striving to acheive but still find themselves with a favourite to drop moniker then what?

I would personally give Salford the chop but you and Wakey are the closest to them, its a fact, cry all you want but if you scored the points up then i'd hazard Salford scored the lowest, then Wakey, then Cas. Maybe Crusaders too

But thats not how most see it if you have the expansion teams exempted and then the city clubs looked on with a bit more favour....

p.s. not crying, debating..

The expansion clubs get the extra point in the old system, that was it. Personally, other than that point I dont see how you can judge them any differently other than, scoring that 1 extra point out of ten for expansion and I believe this to be fair imo.
Either way, someone like Quins still beat Cas and Crusaders are thereabouts.

Is the system weighted too much on facilities? Maybe so, but there are plenty of other points available HOWEVER without the facilities its difficult to achieve some of these points, the turnover of £4 million, the 10,000 average and THAT is why it becomes a stadium race. I don't mean to sound awful but sing about planning permissions all you like, youve had ANOTHER three years and not a single brick is laid and we have teams in Chp who were unlucky to miss out who delivered on these promises. SL shouldn't be a closed shop, there should be room to move and right now i'd go 2 up 2 down next time.

But the fact is a few clubs were given franchises in 2008 on the basis of promises to have a new ground by the next round... well they get handed out in 6-8 months and not one side will have that new stadium?

Let's be completely honest if the RFL turn around and told Wakey, ok you can have a new franchise but you must have it done by 2015. Do you honestly think they'd be any further along? Given they have the made the same promises almost every year for a decade!

Now I really like Cas and feel you will stay and Wakey will go *(should be Salford but the RFL will buy Manchester card again). And now you have sold land you have got new sponsors in and improving squad etc etc.

But you can't say what Wakefield are doing is sustainable for a SL club? Ground no closer yet cut backs have been made in every department as well. If Widnes don't get in and Wakey stay in the game below SL and tej franchise system will collapse as it would be failing to reward those who stuck to the RFL's model and rewarding those who ignored it yet again.

Whether the franchise system is right or wrong is another debate. But unless the RFL make an example if you like of a side bot progressing as a club and a business then what are we left with 3 years later on? NOTHING!