Someone is going to be kicked out and the obvious favourites seem to be Wakey, if they don't go then its going to be us, Cas or Salford. Barring a total collapse in Wales, they are safe and Quins will be safe no matter what happens. Salford have clearly made strives to get a stadium built and we have done a lot to ours and should have the new stand started when the July deadline arrives. Cas would need to have at least shown 100% proof of funding for a new ground to have 'assurances' accepted, so barring some underhand dealings at RFLHQ (which would not suprise me), if wakey manage to swing survival, I would guess Cas would be for the drop.

There could be another twist as its not beyond possibilities that Fax could get a spot with TWO current clubs being binned.

I think Cas should be given the boot because they clearly don't have a spare £12,000,000 to pull out of their towards a new stadium.

When confirmed we can all point and s at Cas knowing we're safe for another 3 years in the knowledge our clubs don't even own so much as a lighbulb at the facilities we call our home grounds.

Let's here it for the generous support of local authorities, benefactors, football and rugby union clubs who allow SL clubs to exist

Maybe if Wakey had kept there previous promises they wouldn't be bricking it now. But that's been said.

Over a decade in SL and still a shambles. Time to go Wakey.

What do you mean? Wakefield is awash with SL quality stadia. The one at Thornes Park, the one attached to the YCC Ground at Durkar. The newest one at Newmarket.

Transpose Wakey with SLE/RFL and that would be the truth as well

Why do some people find pleasure out of sicking the boot in? As supporters we know we are at risk this time due to the lack of a shiny new stadium in Wakefield but Cas are in the same boat too as well as others. Wakefield seem to be fair game to some when plenty of other clubs have had their fair share of money worries/ lack of new stadia/ rubbish playing standards/ low attendance as well. I just dont get why people take pleasure out of Wakefield possibly getting chucked out, but will defend other weaker francises to the hilt.

You will have to help me here.

Which SL clubs:

- have had 2 CVAs
- faced more than 2 widing up orders with HMRC
- constantly had around 9/10 'oveseas players' for a decade
- 'promised' moves to 2 new stadia but have so far delivered nothing
- had a chairman go into an IVA in the last licence period
- have an appaling ground that is an insult to supporters


I could add more.

Wakefield have a dreadful record and much of ithas occured during the last license period.

as it stands you are favourites to go down - surely no surprise. the good news is that if Glover sticks wil it you will have a decent crack at getting back in 2015 - probaby along with Fax, Leigh and a French bid.

What iam saying is lots of other teams have had the same problems as Wakefield have had, but it is ok to be antagonistic and stick the boot in to us. Other teams dont get the same level of rubbish thrown at them with very similar problems a us. I agree that Hudds have got their poop sorted now, but please show more humility as over the last 30 years your club has had highs and lows just like Wakefield. It might be you again one day. By the way post 06 Kear changed the Wakey squad round and we had loads of British lads in our ranks including many who now reside at Huddersfield. He also gave lads a chance who were in the lower leagues who went on to be successful. Blaymire, Golden, Moore, Grix, Fox et al were all in NL1 until JK gave them a go. I remember certain Hudds supporters at the time saying very few of those names would kick on. Look at them now.

Quote ="Richard1"What iam saying is lots of other teams have had the same problems as Wakefield have had, but it is ok to be antagonistic and stick the boot in to us. [And I am saying wakey have had many more than other SL clubs. It is a dreadful record. Trying to claim others are in the same boat is simply a denial of the facts Other teams dont get the same level of rubbish thrown at them with very similar problems a us. ecause other teams have not so consistently been so badly managed in so many ways I agree that Hudds have got their poop sorted now, but please show more humility as over the last 30 years your club has had highs and lows just like Wakefield. It might be you again one day. By the way post 06 Kear changed the Wakey squad round and we had loads of British lads in our ranks including many who now reside at Huddersfield. [If you are saying this change by Kear meant fewer non UK fed trained players since 06 then once again you are in la la land. Only last year you had 10 /17 non Uk trained players vs the Giants: www.slstats.org/2010/3/6/Wakefie ... iants.html Ten after a decade in SL FFS He also gave lads a chance who were in the lower leagues who went on to be successful. Blaymire, Golden, Moore, Grix, Fox et al were all in NL1 until JK gave them a go. I remember certain Hudds supporters at the time saying very few of those names would kick on. Look at them now. [Blaymire, Golden, Moore have kicked on to what exactly? Grix has certainly made big improvements over the last couple of years '" It is not the mainstream supporters faut nor Mr Glover. However the club has been an utter shambles for far to long.

Quote ="Richard1"What iam saying is lots of other teams have had the same problems as Wakefield have had, but it is ok to be antagonistic and stick the boot in to us. [And I am saying wakey have had many more than other SL clubs. It is a dreadful record. Trying to claim others are in the same boat is simply a denial of the facts Other teams dont get the same level of rubbish thrown at them with very similar problems a us. ecause other teams have not so consistently been so badly managed in so many ways I agree that Hudds have got their poop sorted now, but please show more humility as over the last 30 years your club has had highs and lows just like Wakefield. It might be you again one day. By the way post 06 Kear changed the Wakey squad round and we had loads of British lads in our ranks including many who now reside at Huddersfield. [If you are saying this change by Kear meant fewer non UK fed trained players since 06 then once again you are in la la land. Only last year you had 10 /17 non Uk trained players vs the Giants: www.slstats.org/2010/3/6/Wakefie ... iants.html Ten after a decade in SL FFS He also gave lads a chance who were in the lower leagues who went on to be successful. Blaymire, Golden, Moore, Grix, Fox et al were all in NL1 until JK gave them a go. I remember certain Hudds supporters at the time saying very few of those names would kick on. Look at them now. [Blaymire, Golden, Moore have kicked on to what exactly? Grix has certainly made big improvements over the last couple of years '" It is not the mainstream supporters faut nor Mr Glover. However the club has been an utter shambles for far to long.

as is the majority of RL and your point is?

Some "senior" clubs have been on the edge in fact I think only a couple of clubs in the RFL , as it stands, have never been over the edge but have teetered on the edge and only had a last minute lifeline.

The games governance has always been by the clubs, not an independant organisation.

It tells you a lot about the game in this country and why it is where it is.

But, unless I'm mistaken, none of these points (except one) have any bearing at all on the current franchise application. So what's your point?
As far as the ground is concerned - the plans to upgrade will bring it very close to SL requirements. Whether or not it's enough remains to be seen but I think your obvious value judgement betrays the fact that no sensible consideration of the facts as they currently stand will sway you from your view that Trinity are favourites to go down in spite of the fact that they may well, now, have a stronger bid than some other "weaker franchises".

Which was precisely Richard1's point.

You are wrong, they will all count. They wont be ignored.

Being close to SL minimum requirements wont affect the fact it is only very close to being at the minimum level. It isnt pass/fail judgement. Meeting the very minimum requirements doesnt have the same value as being vastly better than the minimum requirements.

Having a squad filled with overseas players will be looked upon worse than having a squad with a couple overseas players than they should, having a history of financial difficulties will be looked upon worse than having a single example of them, having broken numerous promises regarding facilities will be judged worse than having broken one.

There are other teams in SL that have not come through with new stadia, hang very delicately by a thread financially, have a shed load of overseas (which wakefield have improved on post 06), poor attendance and poor league position (which totally get forgotten about now), etc etc. Some have a combination of the above. But that gets glossed over on the VT. But it is ok to stick the boot into Wakefield. We are far from perfect. But plenty others are in the same boat.

plenty of teams are struggling, not many are struggling so much and in so many areas as Wakefield.

had Salford not got their stadium sorted they would probably be in as much trouble as Wakefield, but the fact is, they have.

No other club are as bad, in as many areas as Wakefield are. That is undeniably a bad thing for everybody, but still undeniably true.

And some of the struggling clubs don't have Wakefields strengths

Like?

and lets be honest, areas where Wakefield are strong. Not simply areas where they arent struggling.

Community Department and youth development.

community department they are strong. But who really is struggling there? Is there a sports club in the world which isnt trying to build links with its local community?

Youth development they arent even close. This is a team with a heavy reliance on overseas players, though improvements have been made. You cant realistically compare the youth development of Wakefield to the traditionally strong developers of young players at Leeds, Wigan, Sts, Hull, and the recent massive improvements going on at Warrington and Huddersfield, nor Bradford even though they havent hit their best in the last couple of years, they have a much much much stronger history of developing young players than Wakefield.

Though im sure it will cause a debate, Castleford's youth development currently looks stronger, there is some real talent coming through there right now.

which if we ignore the three expansion sides (one of whom is in its 3rd year of SL and 6th year of existance, another totally incomparable because of the way the french system of bringing players in SL works, whilst the others have made some massive strides including two full international players in the last couple of years) leaves us with only Salford who are probably at a similar level and HKR who have struggled in this area.

Whilst it isnt 'terrible' Wakefields youth development struggles to be 'good' never mind strong. Being

Wakey have developed plenty of very talented youngsters the problem is they have had to sell the majority of them on. The new regime are putting plans and structures in place to stop this from continuing to happen. I believe that our community department is seen as one of the best by the rfl.

Like who? Lets see the evidence that Wakefield are comparable to the other clubs.

You clearly are talking Bol[ ocks now!
Three of the 1st choice England side came through Wakefields Academy and many SL clubs boast Wakefield Academy players

Danny Brough managed to play for 4 different clubs before he played for Wakefield, He has never played an England international yet is somehow a first choice international developed by Wakefield. Interestingly strange standard you have.

Brough, Ellis, Westwood from the current England squad. Youngsters such as Morton, Davey, Wildie, Murphy, Griffin playing regular SL rugby. Ferguson just signed for Hudds I'm sure there are many more out there but those are the ones off the top of my head.

He came through the Wakey academy and was moved on for off the field issues. I think it was pretty much a given that he was going to start the Exiles game before he got injured.

is that a comparable to list in any way to Smith, Scruton, Bailey, Mcguire, Burrow, Diskin, Calderwood, Carvell, Hall, ablett and youngsters now playing regular SL rugby like BJB, Watkins, McShane, Clarkson, Burgess

or Tomkins, Oloughlin, Goulding, Brown, Robinson, Wild, Tomkins, and youngsters playing regular SL rugby like Farrell, Mossop, Tuson, Marsh, Charnley?

If not, then it isnt 'strong' is it. In a relative comparison it looks pretty 'weak'