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!

Well your going to be pretty disappointed then dico, Salford have a very strong, finacially astute and promising application, we won't be going anywhere apart from moving to a fantastic new stadium and up the table. If anybody is going to be crying I hazard a guess it will be wakefield. Salford are here to stay..whether you like it or not

Why should It be Salford? Come on I'm all yours. ..why don't you go on the salford forum and ask them why we should stay?

As I keep pointing out: that wasn't a factor in assessing licences, it was a factor in grading licences once granted.

I agree



I disagree.

I can see why they did it, but I think they made a rod for their own back in promising that one championship club would definitely go up this year, irrespective, and it would be wrong to repeat that mistake in the future.

Personally, this year I'd have awarded the licences to the 14 best applications (given the clubs' insistence on keeping the league at 14) - and I wouldn't necessarily expect that to be the 14 current clubs, I'd still expect Widnes to put in a strong bid and get a licence.

In future years, I'd like to see licences given to the best applications - but without a limit on numbers: if 15 or 16 applications are strong enough to convince that they can really add to a professional full-time league, then have a 15 or 16 strong league. That's expansion





I'd generally agree with that as well. Some of us got in in 2008 on future plans - and while we can all probably cite mitigating circumstances around the banking crash and recession - those can't be strung out forever, and we (and Wakey and Salford) knew that in 2008.

As it happens, I'm reasonably confident (and admittedly biased) about Cas's bid, but it does rely on building work taking place early next year and a stadium that is on course to being ready to play in by the start of the 2012 season. And the same applies to Wakey and Salford imo.

If your going to say it's Cas vs Wakey vs Salford for the drop...

Lowest crowds! As poor ground. Worst league position. Poorest academy set up!

New ground won't be complete until after franchise bids go in, so too little too late IMO. New squad also irrelevant as you can't gurantee it will work out!

tb I think thats the way it will go, but right now, in the current climate, staying at 14 was the right way to go.

J20, nail on the head there. Cas and Wakeys youth setup is streets ahead of Salfords and on the pitch they've been better for the license period. There's just two examples. As I said before I'd go 2 up 2 down and see how we go

Surely after just posting a million pound profit in thus current climate you have to bring Widnes up? I feel that's the major thing in our favour for the RFL we wouldn't be using SKY money to cover bills etc we'd spend it all on players and investing in our academy and community / development work etc without needing an extra penny... Surely this can only be a good thing?

Out of interest, if its 2 up 2 down, who is the second club to come up into SL?

If it were to be two up two down I would of gone for Toulouse sneaking in, but I can't see anything other than one in one out and that being Widnes in, Wakefield out all things considered. Though I think the next apps will be interesting if Barrow & Halifax keep progressing, Leigh also, maybe Featherstone and then the relegated side get's back on track we could have 4/5 really strong candidates!

I feel it should be 2 in 2 out and hopefully it will. Under the old promotion and relegation system over the licence period there would of been 3 in and 3 out so this still gives clubs more continuity than before. Widnes and Toulouse in, Wakey and Salford out.

if and i repeat if the new stadium is not started/completed in time.
wakefield have an agreement to share a suitable stadium for the duration of the next franchise period.
also have a huge amount of community and education programs running.
they tick a lot of boxes.
not sure what plans some of the other candidates for the drop have.

Ok. My brief return onto these boards has come to an end again. Once more I'm reading nonsense conversations we're forced to have to accept because the 2nd/3rd highest spectator sport in the UK has gone down the licencing route. If you heard any of the following quotes in football, cricket, rugby union etc people would think you were mad;

1. We deserve to stay up because we're building a new stadium.
2. We have to stay up because we're Welsh/French.
3. We deserve to go up because we made a profit last year.

Aaaaaaargh!!!!!!!!!!!

In every other significant sport in this country only two things matter:

1. We won the league/came 2nd/won the playoff, we're going up!
2. We were rubbish this season and are getting relegated. Time to rebuild and be stronger the next time.

I'm not having a pop at individuals here. The surrent sytem means we're forced to have these bull crap conversations due to a governing body which has forced us to accept mediocrity. You might like licencing. You might believe it's doing the game good. I don't have to agree with you and I never will.

Rugby League - the great innovator. A sport I once loved and now just about like.

Well a suitable stadium, such as Oakwell, carries a very high rental (say £15000+ per game) and may take a larger cut of corporate sales. Also a suitable stadium tends to be out of district and overall fans will not travel.

Given Wakefield's dreadful finances and a Chairman in an IVA how do they afford a financial hit of around £200K-250K?

As I keep pointing out every time people mention this in relation to licensing: there is no promotion and relegation between the professional and semi-pro ranks of cricket. There never has been. No winner of the Minor Counties Championship has ever been promoted to the County Championship. No team finishing bottom of the County Championship have ever been relegated to the Minor Counties Championship. The splitting of the County Championship into two divisions doesn't alter that. The only team to move between the two competitions in recent history has been Durham - who were added to the County Championship as a franchise.

People who cite cricket as an argument in favour of promotion and relegation between the professional and semi-professional competitions in rugby league just show that they have no idea what they're talking about. imnaaho, of course.

A rather simplistic way of arriving at a figure.

Have you considered the costs they wouldnt have to meet by no longer playing at Belle Vue?

If Wakefiled promised the RFL a new ground to secure 2008 franchises and Ted Richardson said he'd fully back them, don't you think a last minute move to Oaskwell won't exactly impress them too much?

Quote ="J20"If Wakefiled promised the RFL a new ground to secure 2008 franchises and Ted Richardson said he'd fully back them, don't you think a last minute move to Oaskwell won't exactly impress them too much?'" It would meet with the requirements of what is required and what was requested of them in the warning letter - significantly enhanced facilities. www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=14771 If(and thats an almighty big if),it was a short term measure because construction of new stadium was well advanced,but wouldnt be completed for start of new season,then i wouldnt see an issue.

Quote ="J20"If Wakefiled promised the RFL a new ground to secure 2008 franchises and Ted Richardson said he'd fully back them, don't you think a last minute move to Oaskwell won't exactly impress them too much?'" It would meet with the requirements of what is required and what was requested of them in the warning letter - significantly enhanced facilities. www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=14771 If(and thats an almighty big if),it was a short term measure because construction of new stadium was well advanced,but wouldnt be completed for start of new season,then i wouldnt see an issue.

Sorry for the ignorance but where's oakwell?

8 mile down the A61 from Wakefield to Barnsley hth.

Quote ="TURFEDOUT"It would meet with the requirements of what is required and what was requested of them in the warning letter - significantly enhanced facilities. www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=14771 If(and thats an almighty big if),it was a short term measure because construction of new stadium was well advanced,but wouldnt be completed for start of new season,then i wouldnt see an issue.'" That letters based on what the clubs promised though, Wakefiekd promised to move to this new ground at new Market so a move to Barnsley would be breaking that promise as the RFL mentioned in notes that Wakefirkd worryingly had no plan B at the time.

Quote ="TURFEDOUT"It would meet with the requirements of what is required and what was requested of them in the warning letter - significantly enhanced facilities. www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=14771 If(and thats an almighty big if),it was a short term measure because construction of new stadium was well advanced,but wouldnt be completed for start of new season,then i wouldnt see an issue.'" That letters based on what the clubs promised though, Wakefiekd promised to move to this new ground at new Market so a move to Barnsley would be breaking that promise as the RFL mentioned in notes that Wakefirkd worryingly had no plan B at the time.

No they didnt.