more the fact the new ground

saints have a sugar daddy and have won everything in the game, and look how poor their crowds are

Hull FC and wigan both have much higher crowds, and less recent success.

reason = new ground

hey dont shoot the messenger ....

im giving you franchise predictions 2 years out.

barring divine intervention is clear how its going to go.

if i were you id be spending more time in a church

wakey have hardly any fans in wakefield let alone to have any in burwood in sydney

every SL club thats moved to a new ground has had a massive increase in crowds

ie hudds < 3000 at the low point to 8000 now
FC 4000 - 5000 to 14,000
Warrington 5000 - 10,000 now

even wigans crowds with a poor team compare well to a beloved old ground like central park

bradford and saints are 2 very succesful clubs playing in poor grounds, thats why their crowds are poor.

if new grounds dont make such a difference why is every club trying to get one

london skolars arent in the heartlands, and dont have the other things wakey have going for them

in the heartlands there is a competetion for spots so the RFL should pick the best

if its a choice between widnes and wakey now i pick widnes, mainly on the ground. their other benefits cancel each other out

new grounds are very important for the future of the game. clubs can progress in old grounds and indeed can decline like bradford have

improving spectator facilities is clearly important for a game which relies upon paying fans to survive

ive been to Knowsley Rd. for one of the best english clubs to play in that is a disgrace to them and the game

I don't think you can claim Huddersfield's recent increases in support to the stadium. They've been playing there for years. While I agree it seems that new stadia can boost attendance in the short term, I suspect mostly from people gawking at the building, there are clearly other factors equally as important as the stadium itself. And indeed, once the gawkers are in there needs to be something of (long term) interest,to encourage them to return.

Clubs are trying to get new grounds because they need to meet the 10 point criteria for the next round of franchises, which is why most of the new grounds are around 12,000 capacity or just over (that is one of the criteria)

To be fair to Dally, I think that the RFL will deny an established SL club a license. I believe they will need to show their teeth for the licensing system to have any credibility. This will also open up the way for any pet club to be included along with Widnes.

I think Salford, Wakey, and Cas are probably most at risk, unless there are significant strides forward regarding the grounds, although I wouldn't exclude Hull KR from the "at risk" list they are less likely to go at the moment, I think. Even Crusaders could be for the chop if the disasters keep on coming.

Make your mind up. Earlier in the thread you said Wakefield were "Hopeless".

Rather obssessed aren't you?

Oh dear.

I think the ground capacity is a bit of a red herring.

Just look at the record attendances of most clubs and when they were achieved.

Would love to see some of the capacities for the new stadia be fully filled but somehow this is all pie in the sky unless the promotion of the product is made to make it become a "must see live" experience.

Sadly the game does not have a clue how to do that!!

omg . how can anyone seriously regard widnes and halifax as good candidates for superleague. the fact is they have decent stadiums and that is it. both have struggled to even survive recently. neither team has even dominated in what can only be regarded as a very poor league.

superleague has never closed its doors to these clubs. in fact originally i believe both clubs were members at inception. both then got relegated and failed to win back promotion. this is why they are not in sl simple as that

there is no conspiracy against widnes they are not in because the on field product is not good enough.

if any national league team should b considered for sl next time around my money would be on whitehaven for consistently being in or around the top of the league.

if hull kr are struggling financially to be competitive in sl then i think fax or widnes would struggle too.

Clueless

Your figures are wrong. And the Giants gates did not jump hugely when they moved to the Galpharm. Likewise the Bulls and HKR have experienced very large increases in attendances in their 'old' stadiums.

furthermore Wigan are not a poor team (they may not dominate as they did in the 80s).

No one has said grounds do not make a difference. It has been suggested that attributing increased gates to grounds alone or mainly to grounds is stupid.

What has he put that is wrong?

What has he put that is relevant?

1 st , Widnes were not in SL at the start

2 nd It is no longer neccessary to actually win the 2 nd tier to qualify and both clubs have done enough to qualify to apply , unlike his suggestion Whitehaven

3 rd His suggestion Whitehaven have had financial troubles of their own

4 th His suggestion Whitehaven dont have a stadium that the RFL would consider suitable for SL

5 th His suggestion Whitehaven have smaller fan bases than both Widnes and Halifax

That do

They have competed in SL though. And didnt really do a lot. So the principle of what he has put there is correct

and he didnt say it was. He simply said that Widnes had failed to be promoted when they had that opportunity

? There isnt a suggestion at all in that post regards whitehavens finances

nor is there even a mention of Whitehavens ground

What post did you think you were reading? This wasnt even mentioned either?

In fact your last three appear to be criticising points he didnt make? and Also he seems quite positive about whitehaven

erm not really

You do realise that Haven would have to win the NRC or get to the CC Grand Final to apply dont you?

Other things to do beside have a ' borefest ' with you today , so




Yes they have COMPETED in SL , unlike Whitehaven

Failed to get promoted , well they have been promoted once , unlike Whitehaven who have failed at every opportunity

He mentions both Widnes 's and Fax's finances , but as he obviously doesn't know of Whitehavens financial issues of the recent past

He doesn't mention Whitehavens stadium because it is a dump compared to bothe Widnes;s and Fax's and it is not up to the RFL's SL standards

He obviously has no comprehension of Whitehavens situation , ie their stadium,finances,fan base or their suitability for SL at this present moment , therefore he was being clueless , just as you are being stupid trying to justify his argument

Ahhhhh

so the 'clueless' argument he made wasnt the argument he made but the one you made up in your head for him then described as clueless

fair enough

Well considering that the Whitehaven club dont consider themselves ready for SL would suggest he was clueless , as for yourself well

Well then you should have probably focussed on the argument he made rather than the one you made up shouldnt you

You seem to be the only one making up your own argument.

Do you also see Whitehaven as the best Championship club for a 2012 licence?

No. I havent said i did.

Though as i have said before, the level of entitlement some Widnes fans feel towards Super League is out of place. (which was a much larger part of that argument than Whitehavens stadium)

So, what was your point?