Maximus Decimus

Doubt it. They never got over 5k in Super League despite finishing 3rd one year I think.

That's what I'm saying, they cannot add it on unless they are bringing a club up otherwise they surely open themselves up to legal action. You can't give clubs criteria a month before they can do something about it. Out of interest Widnes' turnover last year was

Doesn't trolling get boring? The above is just a blatant lie.

I only hate it because I don't want to get too ahead of myself, but if I was an outsider I'd say it made Widnes look a shoe in. The fact that they have put attendances that only Widnes meet says everything. It is a bit odd though because what is to stop Halifax or Barrow letting people in for free for their remaining games just to try and get it above that figure?

I agree about Wakey and Castleford, they just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Which in essence sounds as ludicrous as it actually is. They perform better than 3 current Super League sides but one looks likely to lose it's place purely because of geography and 'potential.' Salford should count themselves extremely lucky, they have continually failed as a Super League club yet purely because of the promise of a new stadium in an RL struggling area they will lose out. Personally if it was up to me I would replace Salford and let them reapply when they actually have the new stadium if it such a certainty. I don't think Toulouse can apply. Reading that statement it suggests to me that anybody currently in the Championship can only apply if they meet the above criteria. To give the RFL credit they cleared that up earlier in the year, they wouldn't risk the furore of including Toulouse after that.

They could revoke a license if they wanted to. The fact that licenses are supposedly based on so many factors would make the idea that a club could move almost ludicrous. The point is that they do what they want regardless of any licensing system.

I hate to say it but that sounds like it's been tailored to Widnes. We are the only club averaging over 2,500 for a start. The

Like I said previously Mick, grow up. You're making a show of yourself now.

Nonsense. Just because we knew they would be included, I personally posted tens of times stating that they would definitely be included, doesn't make it somehow right. Why bother having a licensing system if there are certain things that trump everything?

For the system to be in any way credible then of course it should have been revoked. We ask clubs to put forward detailed applications that include projections based on their current location. In allowing the club to move they made a farce of this as almost none of their initial application is now based on their current situation. How can you morally exclude one club specifically criticising them for making predictions based on a previous administration at the same location, but justify another clubs continued inclusion that didn't even know it would be moving in 1 years. Now whether this is right for Rugby League or not is an entirely separate matter. If they were so concerned with this they shouldn't have set up the licensing process in the first place. If they are just going to include whoever they want regardless of what happens then why bother? All they are doing is infuriating genuine fans who see a massive double standard being applied. As for final point the licensing system was not set up in this way. Crusaders were the weakest application and were weaker than Widnes. This is of course why they were the target for disgruntled fans.

Hilarious and as per usual a pack of lies. Funnily enough not only Widnes fans noticed that Wrexham was 30 miles away from the heartlands. Not everybody is as ignorant as you. Derek Twigg wasn't simply moaning about fans and sponsors more the fact that the RFL had allowed a club to fail and them move to the other end of the country without having their license revoked. Especially when a team like Widnes had been left out due to financial arrears. It made a mockery of the licensing system and although most fans would be pretty happy with it now it doesn't change that fact.

Just because you use smiley faces doesn't stop this being one of those attacks on Widnes that other posters have spoke of. You're a man obsessed.

The likes of Wales, Scotland and Ireland have very rarely if ever got a 10,000 crowd for an international, especially against a domestic nation. If we weren't comparing ourselves to other sports we'd see that 5,000 for any game outside of France would be a superb crowd.

Salford if I remember correctly. Even if it does then it won't be announced as such.

Jealous and hopeful. In denigrating Widnes they are trying to justify why their own club should be picked. That's why they've latched on so heavily to our performance on the pitch this year. If they can find one reason why Widnes should not go up then it gives their own team a better shot. If Widnes went bust tomorrow you can guarantee that Halifax would be treated the exact same. Licensing is supposed to be about medium to long-term. About putting things in place that should enable prosperity long term, like youth development and stadia etc. To try and ensure a degree of competitiveness the RFL included on the field stipulations and to be honest it back fired a bit as the most likely team to come up met them at the first opportunity. This meant that all Widnes now had to do was put out a competitive side and meet the rest of the criteria. Widnes did put out a competitive squad this year but have not challenged. This is not surprising when you consider the loss of key personnel including a 2 of your main signings for much of the season, a captain and a Head Coach on compassionate leave for much of the season. It would defeat the object of licensing if the RFL simply took into account on the pitch this year and put in a club that are less viable in the long term.

The point is that form is temporary which is not the point of licensing. Let's not forget we haven't had a head coach for much of this season either.

This is an over-simplification I feel and does a diservice to the club to say we are reliant on a sugar daddy. Without him we still get the biggest crowds and have the joint best ground. We also made the best stab of Super League out of any of the current championship clubs. Let's not forget that we were one game away on two occasions from being a Super League club and had we won either of those we would be a shoe in for a continued SL license. This is all without Steve O'Connor. At the same time you have a club like Wakefield who have been one game away from relegation and probable permanent SL exclusion. That is how fine a line Widnes were from being a permanent member of SL, no other Championship clubs were in this situation. Therefore it's unfair to put all of Widnes' reasons for inclusion on a sugar daddy. Barrow are a different matter, their success is largely built on a sugar daddy, one who has made comments that don't make him seem reliable. Plus despite his money Barrow still haven't many other boxes ticked.

Triple post!

This is an over-simplification I feel and does a diservice to the club to say we are reliant on a sugar daddy. Without him we still get the biggest crowds and have the joint best ground. We also made the best stab of Super League out of any of the current championship clubs. Let's not forget that we were one game away on two occasions from being a Super League club and had we won either of those we would be a shoe in for a continued SL license. This is all without Steve O'Connor. At the same time you have a club like Wakefield who have been one game away from relegation and probable permanent SL exclusion. That is how fine a line Widnes were from being a permanent member of SL, no other Championship clubs were in this situation. Therefore it's unfair to put all of Widnes' reasons for inclusion on a sugar daddy. Barrow are a different matter, their success is largely built on a sugar daddy, one who has made comments that don't make him seem reliable. Plus despite his money Barrow still haven't many other boxes ticked.

Good point but it also says 'those who are eligible to play in the Academy,' there may be a fair few who are home grown but aren't. I don't want to focus too much on the playing side of things because it is not what licensing is about. The point is that it is too easy to point to a team doing well in the league and say that means they deserve to be in. There are many other factors under licensing. Aside from the fact that Widnes have had no coach for a large portion of this year and have had key players out, we have also been clearly trying to get more club trained players in the squad and playing in the team. This is what licensing is supposed to be about. No other club in the division has focussed on this in the same way and are only recently been trying to rectify it whereas Widnes have been doing it since the last round of franchising. If it wasn't about being awarded licenses then priorities would be different. As often happens the club with the biggest and best resources inevitably gets promoted over a short period of time. Why would Widnes bother spending big on going all out to win the Championship when it adds almost nothing to our bid. I don't think for a second we thought we'd miss the playoffs but we wanted to be in the mix and the squad we had should have enabled that. Widnes can't be blamed for playing the game the way the RFL asked, tick a box on the field and spend the rest getting off the field right. Many on here seem to think this is somehow Widnes fault or that we should be punished for not finishing high enough. Once again this is not what licensing is about, it might stink and it might be killing the Championship as a competition but that is not Widnes' fault.

Grow up Mick. You know full well that what Super League classes as a youth policy amounts to far more than what you're suggesting. How are Barrow doing in the U18's Super League Academy? Just because you dislike the truth doesn't change it.