Maximus Decimus

If a Cumbrian club could guarantee 7,000 in a decent stadium then I'd say have them in. At the moment they can't so they aren't viable.

Nonsense. We made a profit in Super League. We went bust trying to get back into Super League after we'd been relegated, we took a gamble that being in Super League would be more beneficial to gaining a Super League license than not being in Super League. This was of course true. The top point is irrelevant. I like Salford and I hope they get their new stadium, I really do. They are the last RL bastion of that area and it would be terrible for the game if they were lost to the Championship forever. However... When it comes to licensing they are the weakest heartland club by some distance. They were awarded a license last time based purely on this new stadium and it won't have been delivered until the next round of licensing. I'm no expert on the process but I have heard enough guarantees that have fallen through that I think any club should need the stadium in place before they can use it in their applications. Salford look set to get a license (again) purely on the potential of a new stadium and I think this is wrong. Castleford have better crowds than any of those clubs being touted to go down or come up and have done for some time. Wakefield used to be an atrocious club, yet they sorted out their playing side of things, their youth and managed to double their crowds at the worst stadium in Super League. In comparison to this Salford have done nothing. Their crowds are still as poor as they were 10 years ago, their team has done nothing in the last 2 years, I never hear anything from their youth but as somebody involved in youth RL in the area, they have few if any amateur clubs at that level. It will of course be very hard (though not impossible) for the RFL to leave Salford out if they do have the stadium half built. However if they don't then they should spend some time in the Championship. If the stadium is so certain to be built they can build it there and then reapply when they have it. Without a new stadium for any of the 3 clubs being touted, Salford are by far the worst candidate.

We actually finished higher than 5th last year. Just to get the actual figures regarding Barrow and their surge for glory, Barrow 2010 average: 1,805 (2,280) Down 20.8% Widnes 2010 average: 3,061 (3,808) Down 19.7% So from a much higher base Widnes' crowds have actually fallen less than Barrow's. So Mick's incessant insistence that Widnes' are on a downward spiral compared to Barrow's upwards curve is incorrect. Just because Barrow are in Cumbria means nothing. I remember they were in Cumbria the last few times they were in the top flight and I don't recall anything special then. Also Workington were the only club in Cumbria when they were in Super League and they only got crowds around 2,000. Granted they were a poor side but it doesn't change this fact. Certain posters are trying to play the geography card simply because they have nothing else. We heard it all last time with Celtic Crusaders about how they had a massive geographical area from which to draw support. We have licensing for a reason, Barrow should spend the next 3 years getting themselves in a place where they can justify their inclusion through concrete things not some useless rhetoric.

We didn't actually do this. Don't forget the cap went down to 300k this year. It's easy to look at our league position and think this is the case but we had probably as competitive a side this year as last. We've had major issues this year such as losing a head coach for much of it and losing key players like a captain and your two starting props. Despite this we still haven't had what you would call a beating. People seem to be making the mistake of thinking that we aimed to finish where we have this year.

What Mick fails to point out is that despite winning the league Barrows crowds have fallen percentage wise around the same if not more than Widnes'. Doesn't quite fit with the 'Barrow are on the up and Widnes are on a spiral' story that he tries to portray here.

For the record I meant averages. Talking about individual crowds is useless, heck I'm sure even Salford or Quins could drag a big crowd out from somewhere in the distant past.

Why does your opinion deserve it's own thread?

You must be blind then. How about better crowds, better stadium and better youth development for a start.

Yes they should have been, they were announced way way in advance.

Saints 26 Leeds 14 Attendance: 14100.

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.