He’s a mascot. HKR have a Robin as a mascot but they are called HKR. Some teams mascots match the clubs name some don’t, ours doesn’t it’s not rocket science.

Can someone please dig up the pre season prediction thread where I said Wakefield would finish in the bottom half and I was met with loads of abuse for it from the wildcats fans

Cheers

You could have let him down gently.

Sorry to disappoint you ruuBron108 but I've just had a look for you, and I'm afraid you were still posting as leBron James

Im still waiting for you to leave RLFANS forever. Your word clearly means nothing.

Hopefully Wakefield 'we are now an established top five club' Trinity will lose their remaining games and take the dreaded drop. They should've been relegated years ago when licencing was brought in. How they got one with that shambles of a 'ground' is anyones guess.

After yet another of your incisive posts I've come to the conclusion you are Bill Murray, & I claim my £5.

You forgot the "blaming the Ref" stuff b.t.w.

Wasn't it the last minute collapse of the crusaders that ultimately saved their bacon. Not that I'm looking to engage in Trinity bashing I hasten to add!

Know this for sure pumpety or was it just hearsay, I doubt Crusaders problems emerged at the last minute, you bulls fans should really let it go.

He's correct, is this yet another poster you intend to stalk and make snide comments towards because they post things you don't like? You're really sad at times.

I'm unsure why being a Bradford fan would be of relevance to the final round of Superleague franchising. What element of that franchising do I need to "let go"?

Anyway, it was a relatively widespread understanding at the time that Wakefield were to lose their superleague licence, but late in the day the Crusaders meltdown meant that they had a reprieve. If I'm mistaken about that then that's fine, I have no agenda against Wakefield.

My money a few weeks ago would have been on London to go down.

Hull kr though seem to be closer to the mix, which was a surprise a few weeks after their win over Leeds.

That was the script taken by fans of other clubs and the media line building up to the decision but was rumour and suggestion rather than fact. After the franchises were announced someone at the RFL (I forget whom) said in an interview that Wakefield's bid was not the weakest. The media and fans of other clubs tend to ignore this and like to peddle the line that Wakefield only survived due to Crusader's demise (which conveniently suits their agenda).

HTH.

wildcats

With regards to licensing Wakey were adwarded the same as Cas, Hull KR and Salford.

You do know the mascot is called Daddycool not Wildcat

In that case, I apologise if I'm mistaken. As I say, I have no agenda. I've deleted the other off-topic angst posts so we can all start afresh as best mates.....

And does not look particularly wild either.

For what it's worth, I think Huddersfield are in the biggest mess. Two very big games coming up and a very young squad, although the Rovers and Broncos game will be a compelling watch.

For those who like maths, if Rovers and London lose their next games (Catalan away and Leeds at home respectively), Wakey are safe unless they get cricket scores against them, as the loser of the game the week after (Hull KR v London) will be still on 18 points, with one game to go and with a points difference that is even more horrendous than it is now, following two losses.

Easy mistake to make - iirc, Sky had camera crews at BV on the day of franchise announcements, in the full expectation that we'd miss out; when Crusaders went pop, it was almost immediately reported in the way you've described, so quickly became received wisdom. The RFL corrected it some time later, but as is the way of these things, the truth was less palatable than the opinion, so the story stuck.

Back on topic - I can't help thinking that London will pull the required win out of the bag somewhere; I predict that Shudds will go down.

It certainly was due to the Crusaders. I was in the coach house (Cats Bar or whatever it is called now) after the match when the news came through.

Glover and his pals were pished up jumping around shouting "We are Superleague"

They also inflated the crowd figures (7k for Catalans home match for example) to help the franchise bid. All came crashing down when the tax man turned up wanting his cut of these high crowd numbers.

Daddy Cool doesn't seem as "Cool" as he used to be either, I think he may have bad knees these days or summat.

No it wasn't, as previous poster have already stated RFL come out publicly and said Wakefields was not the weakest bid of the current SL teams at the time.

You are not making a good argument Charlie. Lots of flaws in what you say including the fact the franchises were announced on a week day not a match day so how can you say "after the match when the news came through"? A few of us on here have corrected the perceived wisdom to the facts. The RFL in an interview said that Wakefield was not the weakest bid. It may well be Crusaders was the weakest and Wakefield was second weakest, those of us outside the RFL will probably never know. However the fact Crusaders pulled out is fact and convenient as it avoided the RFL having to make a judgement and state who they viewed was the weakest franchise. No evidence exists that the RFL (as opposed to the media) saw Wakefield's as the weakest franchise.

That didn't happen. The licensing was announced on a Tuesday morning if I remember right, not after a game. I had a walk down to Belle Vue that day to see if there was anything happening, and there were a few journos conducting interviews with similar rubberneckers like myself.

I know Wikipedia is proof of nothing, but Trin fans may wish to amend the wiki page concerning the SL licencing round we are talking about. Not only does it say they only got a licence due to the demise of the Crusaders, but that they've been into administration: "Crusaders announced that they had withdrawn their application for a licence, believing that they were not financially able to sustain themselves in Super League in the near future. The club had gone into administration after the 2010 season, This decision provided a reprieve for Wakefield Trinity, who had been expected to be denied a licence after also going into administration in the 2010–11 close season. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012%E2%8 ... e_licences

I know Wikipedia is proof of nothing, but Trin fans may wish to amend the wiki page concerning the SL licencing round we are talking about. Not only does it say they only got a licence due to the demise of the Crusaders, but that they've been into administration: "Crusaders announced that they had withdrawn their application for a licence, believing that they were not financially able to sustain themselves in Super League in the near future. The club had gone into administration after the 2010 season, This decision provided a reprieve for Wakefield Trinity, who had been expected to be denied a licence after also going into administration in the 2010–11 close season. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012%E2%8 ... e_licences