What are the voting requirements? Would all the clubs have to agree? And if so, are we (or Cas) going to agree?

No doubt it will be a stitch up with the majority who know they are safe agreeing and maybe even Salford being tipped the wink they are safe and should vote for it.

The really annoying thing is you can see the RFL's thinking here - keep the Crusaders in and the other SL clubs will be very angry, especially anyone who gets kicked out. Someone who gets kicked out could possibly mount a legal challenge to the RFL. But get all of the clubs to agree and there's no basis for a legal challenge - you can't complain about getting kicked out if you agreed to let them stay in, and it'd still be difficult if every other club agreed to it. But if you don't agree to keep them in, what's to stop the RFL looking at your franchise application unfavourably? I'm sure that would be enough to make us, Salford and Cas agree to it.

Good point - its another stitch up

See my post on the cas forum

Sorry, not sure I understand the point you are trying to make,

The problem with all of is that the RFL are entirely to blame.

When the franchises were announced, a lot of league fans seemed to be of the view that it was too early for the Crusaders. The Crusaders fans did not seem the greatest of fans of Leighton Samuels, and posted stuff along those lines. A lot of people were of the view that the RFL should not have given in to the Samuels line that it's either now or never.

Here we are, two years down the line. Samuels has jumped ship and seemingly left the club in a right mess. It seems that most people could see it coming except the RFL, and it showed their weakness, that rather than growing a club it is expansion at whatever cost. And who knows, perhaps in twenty years time, they will have matched London's failure to grow.

I want the Welsh thing to work, I've always wanted that, and I suppose the RFL should do what they can to make it work, but the other clubs, and I include the aspiring Championship clubs, are entitled to feel that they will be treated equally, and they are not.

If Newmarket comes off, the Crusaders thing might be an irrelevance for us, but it would just not be right. If they have failed financially, drop down, build again.

bigalf on the Cas forum said that the clubs are being asked to ignore the financial failings of the Crusaders and allow the franchising thing to be considered as normal, with a financially viable club making way for one that it isn't.

I understand all of that, but my question was to TRB (who didn't appear to be referring to this).

You replied to a post that said 15 clubs, i gather TRB thinks it will be 14 clubs.

1 club will go down to save CC

Of course, was reading it completely differently! Excuse my daftness.

Surely though, if it is a "vote" you have to assume these selfish Chairmen will not vote to get rid of basically either us or Cas when we (and Cas probably more so) have a reasonable away following and pump a fair few £k into their respective club coffers rather than the single figure away following of Celtic? Thats of course a big IF over the vote. Now more than ever its about £s&d - so the point still stands, all be it a bit watered down.

It's all in the planning!

Company Name =#FF4040W CRUSADERS LIMITED Company Number 07413385
Company Status Active - Newly Incorporated
Appointment Date 20/10/10=#FF0040 Company Incorporation Date 20/10/10 Turnover - Net Worth -
CCJ Volume 0 CCJ Value -
Credit Rating 51 Credit Limit £1,000
Gearing Ratio 0.00 %

Seems the HMRC winding up order was all a big mistake, and the money owed had already been paid. They're still not debt free, but that's another matter.

Drama over. As you were.

All these problems conveniently vanish after a meeting with the RFL! Just like with the Quins earlier this year!

We could be the only sport in the world where the competitors are treated differently based upon who the ruling body wants to succeed.

I heard the North Korean Football League are very interested in forging links with Red Hall.

Fairly typical of the RFL. Just looking at the web site of www.superleague.co.uk/headlines. ... =Wakefield there is plenty of promotion of Cas and Saints new playing shirts yet none of ours when we made an announcement with picture this week. Also, little if any mention of Crusaders difficulties coming to a conclusion. Oh hum.

Fairly typical of the RFL. Just looking at the web site of www.superleague.co.uk/headlines. ... =Wakefield there is plenty of promotion of Cas and Saints new playing shirts yet none of ours when we made an announcement with picture this week. Also, little if any mention of Crusaders difficulties coming to a conclusion. Oh hum.

Quote ="wildshot"Fairly typical of the RFL. Just looking at the web site of www.superleague.co.uk/headlines. ... =Wakefield there is plenty of promotion of Cas and Saints new playing shirts yet none of ours when we made an announcement with picture this week.'" That could be down to nobody sending the super league website any PR guff, especially as there's no one at the club to do that job any more.

Quote ="wildshot"Fairly typical of the RFL. Just looking at the web site of www.superleague.co.uk/headlines. ... =Wakefield there is plenty of promotion of Cas and Saints new playing shirts yet none of ours when we made an announcement with picture this week.'" That could be down to nobody sending the super league website any PR guff, especially as there's no one at the club to do that job any more.

I've only seen pictures of the museum shirt, not the actual shirt.

Quote ="wildshot"Fairly typical of the RFL. Just looking at the web site of www.superleague.co.uk/headlines. ... =Wakefield there is plenty of promotion of Cas and Saints new playing shirts yet none of ours when we made an announcement with picture this week. Also, little if any mention of Crusaders difficulties coming to a conclusion. Oh hum.'" They will when the actual shirt comes out. We do have people who do this job - we just don't have a John Huxley no more!

Quote ="wildshot"Fairly typical of the RFL. Just looking at the web site of www.superleague.co.uk/headlines. ... =Wakefield there is plenty of promotion of Cas and Saints new playing shirts yet none of ours when we made an announcement with picture this week. Also, little if any mention of Crusaders difficulties coming to a conclusion. Oh hum.'" They will when the actual shirt comes out. We do have people who do this job - we just don't have a John Huxley no more!

Look I know that the RFL can be sneaky bastar*** but i'm sorry there is no way the HMRC are in a habit of stating that they have 'made a mistake' due to pressure from a small sports governing body being put on them.
If you think that you are deluded.

Latest forum rumour or truth?

Word on the street is that with Lewis and Wood in Aus,Rimmer is in charge. Rumour is that Rimmer contacted all 13 shareholders of our SL ( ie all the clubs except Crusaders ) and informed them that Crusaders would be going into adminstration, but that a new company was set up to carry on the franchise in Wales, debt free. ( gets rid of the image rights tax bill that all other clubs will have to pay sooner or later ). Rimmer asked for feed back 11 clubs responded in a negative manner ( Leeds and Hull , the two Hetheringtons are guests of RL in Aus ). Rimmer apparently ignored the feed back and is forcing it through. The 11 clubs wanted an EGM, Rimmer apparently refused this request.

I am also told that expansion clubs do not have to re apply for a SL licence so there is no way that Quins, Catalans or Crusaders : in what ever guise, will be refused a licence.

The peasants ( heartland clubs ) are in the mood for revolt.

Am also told that Widnes have attended all SL meetings this year, suggests they have been given the nod.

Wouldn't surprise me, the pressures on for us and you!

Don't know if there is any truth in this but it would not surprise me.

If true surely it opens up the chance of a legal challenge if am existing club loses its licence. I thought if any club went into administration they could not apply for a licence. In this case they are not but I wonder if a brand new club can legally just replace an existinfg club without the consensus of the exising clubs and if this rumour is true they appear to be doing that.

If true it absolutely discraceful. London/Harlequins have done this and now (if true) Crucaders. I know what the outcome would be if either Castleford, Salford or us went into administration.

And this is the idiocy of franchising. Or at least the way the RFL run it, because the more you make rules, the more you have to break them yourself.

Announce that the 14 best applicants get a licence, and then a breath later announce that a Championship club is coming up; ie, the 13 best applicants plus the best from the lower league.

Announce that financial stability is important, and then when one of the pet favourites becomes unstable, say that it doesn't matter anymore.

And the reason why the RFL are stupid is because they just store up trouble for themselves. Let's say Cas doesn't get a franchise. But what if they are financially stable and get a top eight finish? It would be a nonsense. And then what do they do for the rest of the season after the franchise announcements? If I was Cas, I would spend the entire rest of the season making as much trouble as I could for the RFL. Or it could be us. Or Salford.