GUBRATS

So , Location ?

Location Harry , you know , I know it , even if it isn't actually written down , it will be an influence

He was the same age group as my son , didn't see a huge amount of him , but nothing stand out

Do you include ' Location ' ?

Toulouse ? , Toronto ? , Celtic Crusaders ?

Do you include a ' location ' score as we saw last time ?

And Saints Harry , still at Knowsley rd at that time

" Growth or ' target markets ' " So it will be location again

Remember the 2003 RFL cap for NL1 ( Championship ) of £250 K , something similar to that is the only way to have a truly competitive Championship , something that went out of the window when a certain Welsh club entered the lower tiers , how would our Canadian or French cousins cope with that ?

No it wasn't , but it was a significant part of it , will it be part of it again ? , Should it be ? , And if it is , will clubs again be given time to achieve it ? Which will undermine the whole thing

They did it last time Dave , by letting CAS,Wakey,Salford and Saints in with substandard stadia

Surely they should be compared to their own starting point , not other clubs , so if they don't improve their own performance , then they become at risk ,isn't that what constant improvement and assessment means ?

I don't think anybody has any issues with clubs being ' invested 'in to be in the top tier , it's where we see location becoming an issue , as in " wouldn't it be great for York , Toulouse , Toronto ,Newcastle ,London " or anywhere else fashionable is fine for SL , despite these places having relatively little interest in RL , but " Leigh ,Fev,Fax,Batley are too close to X number of other clubs " to be in SL That's when it becomes a problem

A shot yes , but no chance whatsoever of staying in SL , and that's with P and R , start grading and it's not even worth bothering

So if it constant improvement , if Saints don't ' constantly improve ' they will lose their licence ?