yipyee

Catalan also tick your boxes

Might limit their matchday income however thats offset as they don't have maintenance costs etc.. Wigan must sell well more merchandise than say Leigh

Leigh must be spending a SL salary cap with current squad.

Kids will go to Saints and Wigan because they promote youth from within. Leigh never have and used the academy to tick a box whilst buying in journeymen. If Leigh promoted youth from within then more kids would see it as a viable option and not as a plan b

Interesting view. I would start out low and increase criteria, this is a good point, but I am sure if there are things that prevent a cat A said clubs would sort this out in lease renewals.

It would only need a B status

Maybe but I doubt it. If a club are strong off field but have a bad season on field there's no way they would replace. It would take a few bad seasons for me. Hull KR prime example, finished bottom but seem to have it together off field. Year after 80 mins from OT and lots of youngsters playing first grade

Yep its odd that they name target areas if its supposed to be fair and transparent. It also explains though why Newcastle have dropped FT as they knew they are up against it.

I think they are doing this to keep everyone happy so this will happen. Somehow at the end of every season the winner of the championship will be reviewed to see if they can go up. They also said they will expand the top tier if necessary so a hybrid of what you are saying.

They said London, France and womens games are target areas for them. Toulouse happy to play a year in championship and should finish high up enough to be Cat B at worst just in time for grading ahead of 2024. They also make a point that there is a 2 team limit, again suggesting this is for top level. It would appear then also that the international window mid season will be vs France also (educated guess). I don't see why they would mention London at all if they didn't want to shoe horn them in and all previous reshuffles seem to target a London reprieve. London also got promoted to SL gave a good showing and historically have produced SL level players

Yeah sorry missed that off

Thats obviously the plan, A grade exempt, B gradeat risk if onfield is poor

Their words not mine

Covid years don't count. Its the 3 after that will. The coach has been changed so should bring about an improvement on field which will increase attendances and revenue

I read this to be Some clubs will be exempt from relegation if finish bottom Lowest B grade will be relegated and swopped with highest B grade of championship 'upon review' so if Catalan are bottom they survive, if wakey are second bottom they could swop with say Leigh. This will go on until there are 12 grade A but maybe then expand to 14 with some grade Bs Also in the detail France and London appear to be getting special protection as 'target expansions' so London and both French clubs could be shoe horned in. Would explain why Toulouse are happy to go again in champ and why London are settling in Wimbledon. So looks like category A Saints Wigan Warrington Leeds Huddersfield Hull Hull KR Catalan Toulouse London Plus 2 grade B clubs

Wrong it can be part of a A licence then judged on performance. Underperforming can loose and become a B

My club have a new state of the art stadium, but still gets negative comments screwfix stadium etc.. I can accept that criticism though but am also glad the stadium was built without debt, is fully owned by the club and was built within the clubs means. It also won away fans best stadium award. (Leeds have no chance at that award)

The point is to win, not to avoid bottom place. No one gets relegated from horse races or tennis comps etc.. Yet the next tournament everyone re-enters to get as deep into the contest as possible.

Licensing back yessssssssssssss We can finally put the P&R failed project behind us along with the middle 8s nonsense. Interestingly this is an approach I commented on here with a while ago. Although mine was to give A a 3 year licence, B a 2 year and C 1 year so each club could build / be reviewed appropriately. What one would expect now is Cat A levels would be increased each time we have several clubs over achieving. I would guess these would be similar to the past as in: Attendance Ground commercial activity / success Player pathway (academy) On field performance

This is all true, however until this stand is redeveloped it cannot claim to be the best ground in Rugby. Everything you say is correct , but when the Leeds fans claim to have the best ground it is infact incorrect.

Build a smaller stand then?!

Yes its right that Leeds are proud of their developed stadium. Just a couple of things, Its more expensive as its a development, this always costs more than a total re-build. Some of the 40 mill was to build the cricket facing stand as well. Only 3/4 of the stadium has been re-built so whilst its great for the people in 3/4 of the ground its still the pits for the people in the west stand. And just on the whole criticism thing, Leeds fans criticise clubs that have done a total re-build as flat pack, no atmosphere etc.. This does come across as jealousy. I personally think Leeds is a great upgrade on their old facilities but until it modernises the full stadium it can't be up there with the best rugby stadiums in the country.

Watson is doing ok at his second club after making 2 finals with the perennial unfancied Salford. Tony Smith did great work at Huddersfield, Leeds, Warrington and Hull KR. Mcdermott overachieved at London before getting the Leeds gig. Hasn't the old Catalan coach won a GF in the NRL ? Nobby, success at Bradford, did well at Crusaders (play off wins) and Toronto. Beat Aus in Aus with GB.

3/4 is ok Other clubs have 4/4 Therefore Leeds are 1/4 from ever having 'the best' facilities

I think the point is that its not the best rugby stadium, 3 stands are good, one side resembles a war zone