They wanted to play elsewhere for a while, until their grounds were brought upto spec. Wakey voted against it!!!!

Roth you keep on telling us Wakey voted against this, that and the other but do you have proof of this. I'm not disputing whether we voted yes or no but I would imagine all votes were cast in confidence so I'd be very interested to know where you get your knowledge from. Perhaps the powers that be stated ALL SL Clubs voted yay or nay In which case it's obvious but I would imagine the correct wording would have been SL Clubs have voted unanimously in favour of / against blah blah blah

i remember the vote being public at the time and is a matter of public record! Without searching I can't reference it right now -it was 10 years ago, but it is there should you want validation of my post!



Additional:- I've jsut spent the last half hour trawling the net to reference the post. All Wikipedia says is that they were turned down by the RFL - tho they don't offer any references either.
Dews wanted to play at Sheffield til their ground was brought upto spec - it was turned down and I remember the way the vote was reported per each SL club! - but can I find it?? Can I hell! Well not yet anyway and as it's a saturday I've stuff to do.

So UptonCat, I maybe able to offer proof when I can be @rsed to find it in the anals of reportage from 10 years ago, but as yet I haven't so you may treat the post with derision should you wish!

I'm beginning to wonder if being in the so-called Super league is the utopia the madarins at Red Hall think it is. It appears to have nothing to do with sport in general and Rugby League in particular. Success seems to depend on how far away from the M62 you are, how nice your seats are in the stands and how many foreign players you can cram into your team. Not succeeding on the field of play, not promoting home grown talent ( lip service is given to this, but how many good academy players are tried in the first teams for an extended run. ) and not having the end of season excitement of promotion and relegation. I am not certain who I will watch next year , but it will be pay at the gate, as I will not be re-newing my season ticket.

Aw wrencat, if you don't get a season ticket, wakey's crowds could dip as low as 1122 then where will you be??

Hang on a mo.....................................









now that's another laughable argument!

I don't know what laughable about crowd size ? But if perfomace on the field isn't the main concern in any sport , I fail to see the reason to go to any match. Fev are doing well this season , but even they are not unbeatable, as last week proved. but this is what sport is all about. I appauld the achivements of Fev and other teams in your league. It might be a more enjoyable league to be in ?

I agree entirely with your post wren cat.
The laughable thing about "that" crowd size, 1122, is that's the amount of people watching Crusaders v London!!! Will they be hoofed out of SL???? Will they Hell!!!

Our league is a cracking league. Honestly, striaght up. The Game v Sheff was a belter. 2300+ watched it which was twice the amount of Crusaders! Yet the league is some 'after thought', some irritation to the RFL that would be better if it wasn't there!
The game is on it's @rse. The direction it is going in has cut me adrift from more or less everything but our league.
The future, hopes, aspirations and faith of those who run and follow club rugby is decided upon by a small group of people in whom I have absolutely no faith!

I heard that the Sheffield game was worth watching as both my daughters, (who are Wakey season ticket holders) decided to take advantage of the ladies free day. They both said the level of commitment on the field was intense.

I also seem to remember when Wigan were getting shirty when there was rumbles that they would get hammered back into the NL's over the Dobson/Fielden situation that any club who takes on the governing body can have their membership withdrawn.
Im otherwords try and take it to court and you will be struck off the RFL membership.
Not 100% sure on that but I think that was how it went.

SKY own all sport the large sports in this country Tennis aside.
Dont kid yourself otherwise please mate.

TBH mate all teeth gnashing aside that is probably exactly what the RFL would want/expect.
By 2014 if we (HKR) haven't got our ground sorted (East stand extension and a new north/away stand) I think we will be in the brown smelly stuff you seem to be in.
You all say that the stadium is being paid for by retail units? surely this means it would get built anyway if so then give the RFL no choice in 2014 just like widnes have done and it could be us you replace if we dont do the works I have said.
Losing out in 2012 does in now way mean you wont be in SL ever again..

That's true - at least, I'm sure it's true in the case of Dewsbury, as we then went 180° and offered them a groundshare until they could get their ground up to scratch. It wasn't our finest hour, and I remember being "disappointed" with our decision at the time. I can understand your sentiments.

There is 1 simple answer to all this and that is 2 divisions with P+R, fund the 2nd division more than the measly 100k the teams get at present. By all means keep the standards (grounds etc) i can guarantee all the bitterness will go and it will bring some intensity to all the games. Ryan Mcgoldrick stated the other week the tension in the Wakey Cas decider the other year was unreal, but surely that is the type of situation the players need if we are ever going to match the Aussies. They play to that level every week, there are now too many games with nothing at stake and all the players just going through the motions. Plus 2 divisions would give the RFL plenty more scope to bring in teams from expansion areas as well as keep all the so called heartland teams happy, it really is a no brainer

And thats why the clowns at Red Hall will not implement it , they dont have a functioning brain between them and are slowly killing the game

we now play to the tune of Sky,i dont like it,but thats the reality.

Dont see where im kidding myself,ive stated as such above.

I read it to be you saying RL was alone in this issue.
If that isnt the case then im sorry.

The RFL has just said (john Ledger) that the weakest club in super league will be demoted from the division IF all the clubs meet the criteria, how do you define weakest when all the clubs meet criteria....

John Kear seemed very confident regarding the stadium

I'd be very surprised if he was negative. He has to be confident - I'm confident that Wakey will get it but it's just a question of when rather than if.

When will do for me

Which does rather question the validity of the criteria system - if all clubs meet the criteria, one will still be judged to have failed.......

So who has annoyed the RFL the most....... Us because of our ground, Cas because of their ground and a selection of idiots making discriminatory chants and racing the ref down the tunnel, Harlequins for consistently having poor crowds and negligible travelling support, or Crusaders for having worse crowds than Harlequins and smuggling shaven headed Australians onto our shores to play rugby without work permits...........

Makes sense to me, it's minimum standards rather than targets.

I like the use of the word demotion!!

isnt that like the opposite of promotion and very similar to the word relegation??

heres an idea , lets say the team with the minimum standards on the playing field is demoted and replaced by the team with the maximum standard in the lower leagues?

no climb down needed redhall just pick the right words!

Contribution to Superleague is 1 of the criteia KK. So our final league position this year is important. ie:- 5th last year = tick, 10th (or whatever) this year = cross.

Its good to see finally that some fans of a SL club are finally realising how undemocratic (unlawful?) the licensing system is. It has never been about the 14 best clubs. If the application of the team 'demoted' is better than that of the team 'invited' into SL how is that fair and representative of a system with that supposedly uses criteria to decide on the best 14