RFL needs to reform access to SL for Co-Op C. Clubs

[Pottsy]

Deja vu, mon ami

Thanks, I'll go and worm the dog.

[Maximus Decimus]

I thought the cap was

Edited September 8, 2010 by Maximus Decimus

[The Parksider]

Just to throw an alternative opinion out there, I think if an area has two clubs there is more chance of success. I don't think people realise the pulling power and attractiveness a local rivalry has on spectator interest.

Local rivalry encourages and facilitates the home fan to attend the away game because it's a bus ride away and everyone's talking the game up locally.

Getting a Trad RL fan to double up his support is a great way of extracting more money out of the same people.

Surely Hull White Star should be resurrected then they could extract double money from Hull and HKR whilst those two equally "double their money".

We could go for three clubs in Hull, and then have the local rivalry of Salford, Wire, Wigan, Saints and Widnes....

Add Leigh to that. Six local rivals, getting double money from the fans locally.

Bradford, Keighley, Hunslet, Leeds and Bramley could complete the Superleague of local rivalries.

Hey a Superleague of Leeds/Bradford...... Hull......... Central trad West Lancs.....

14 team Superleague played in three small geographical areas based on your "alternative" opinion.

You really were looking up your own bum there.

Hull needs to have one club that can win trophies, and needs to be playing clubs from all over the country.

RL should not be a "local game for local people"

[Lobbygobbler]

Would Lobby have raised this question had Leigh still been in the hunt?

Long term Leigh - like others- will benefit. If it wasn't for certain ground standards, Lobby maybe you wouldn't have had your new ground?

Yes I would have still raised the question if we were SL champs

I don't like the virtual closed shop we have now, where decisions are made behind Red Halls closed doors every blue moon

Regarding standards - we have to separate that from the argument of P&R as you can have both as in soccer. Its true that without standards we may not have had the new ground, but my gripe has been that until recently this has only applied to a prospective SL club rather than current SL clubs. The worst FTF time was in the late 1990's when several clubs were not allowed up. The year Dewsbury beat Leigh in the NL1 final, we knew as Leigh fans that there was a strong chance that Hilton Park would be rejected, despite e.g. Belle End being a worse stadium at the time

[RP London]

Yes I would have still raised the question if we were SL champs

I don't like the virtual closed shop we have now, where decisions are made behind Red Halls closed doors every blue moon

Regarding standards - we have to separate that from the argument of P&R as you can have both as in soccer. Its true that without standards we may not have had the new ground, but my gripe has been that until recently this has only applied to a prospective SL club rather than current SL clubs. The worst FTF time was in the late 1990's when several clubs were not allowed up. The year Dewsbury beat Leigh in the NL1 final, we knew as Leigh fans that there was a strong chance that Hilton Park would be rejected, despite e.g. Belle End being a worse stadium at the time

But that is the thing.. they were wrong to do that they were wrong to apply the rule to those looking for promotion they have changed that hence the mad dash for stadiums that is now happening in Super League.. so they are fixing this.. then after it will be a case of those outside needing to be up to the standards of those within..

Football cannot be compared in that way.. the money in the lower leagues is there to build new stadiums to update etc and so they do have the grounds.. you cannot have both without the money being much higher.. looks at some of the grounds in league 1 RU and such like.. they cannot do it and it is those sports that are also looking at lisencing..

[dallymessenger]

Just to throw an alternative opinion out there, I think if an area has two clubs there is more chance of success. I don't think people realise the pulling power and attractiveness a local rivalry has on spectator interest. Rather than diluting the supporter base, I think in fact it compliments it. Take a look at Hull FC's crowd increase since Hull KR joined the league. Take out the derby game and we still average more than 2,000 fans extra compared to when they were out the league.

On the flip side, I also think that two many clubs in an area can dwindle this interest, and every game just seems the same. West Yorkshire for example has too many clubs. Local derbies don't seem to generate too much interest because they happen nearly every other week. The interest (as well as support base) is diluted rather than complimented.

A second side in France could greatly compliment the Catalans, London and Wales. And the game between the two clubs would create much more media interest than them playing any other club.

london cant handle one SL club let alone 2

a 2nd french sl club would help LC like Kr help FC.

no to a 2nd welsh club as well, lets give wrexham 5 years to see if they can survive

[dallymessenger]

Widnes were guaranteed the next spot as soon as they were told they would not get a license in the last round. Two reasons why:

1/ Sympathy vote for the omittance last time

2/ They have a multi-millionaire

So even if Leigh had won the NRC or got to a GF AND had a millionaire, we would have failed on the sympathy vote. All Co-Op champ fans know that - not just Leigh. The only slight uncertainty was them ticking the on-field box, which they did fairly early in

I think a shorter cycle needs trying next time

sorry but thats just garbage

widnes will get a SL spot purely because they are the best club outside SL currently

leigh need a sugar daddy and crowds of 3000 and then they will have a good chance at SL

potentially 5 years down the track replacing cas if they dont sort out their ground

the turnaround at widnes in the past 3 years is what franchising is supposed to achieve

clubs spending money on juniors, having a sugar daddy and being financially stable

and the halton stadium puts many SL grounds to shame

[thepimp007]

well how i see it, the simplest way is the team finishing bottom of super league is replaced by the team winning CC1, regardless of who finishes bottom. Im not bashing expansion clubs but why should another team be punished for someone elses failings. I do think liscensing is a good idea but if the team coming up qualify for a liscense replace the team finishing bottom with them. I understand every fans concern under super league and it gives teams outside super league effectively nothing to play for. I see fans from super league clubs saying its getting boring and tiresome but they would be the ones complaining if it was the other way round

[Viking Warrior]

and of course lobby would have started this thread if leigh had ticked all the boxes for a license....................................would he ######, they are only in the championship because gateshead went #### up!!!!

[Red Willow]

So leigh have failed to reach any of the last 3 GFs?

under the old rules they wouldn't have been promoted either.

widnes have also failed so under the old rules wouldn't be anywhere near.

I look at Widnes now and see the benefits of the franchise system. They speculated and lost large sums of money to chase the SL dream before franchises, now they appear to be a team with so much more going for them. The only thing I don't know is whether like some others (Solly and Huddesfield) they are too dependant on O'Connor.

[Lobbygobbler]

and of course lobby would have started this thread if leigh had ticked all the boxes for a license....................................would he ######, they are only in the championship because gateshead went #### up!!!!

and Widnes are also only in the championship because they went #### up!!!!

[Blind side johnny]

the rfl have got it spot on with entry into SL

other than widnes no other championship club is fit for SL.

down the track leigh and fax could be ready but not now

if championship clubs really want to get into SL its up to them to improve off the field.

...and the majority don't, but LG isn't prepared to accept that his opinion is in the minority.

[FaxMachine]

This is what I posted on the other forum which I thought was a good idea and hoped might promote discussion. No such luck but see what you guys think.

Right. Let's face the facts.

No-one can deny that the advent of franchising has torn the game apart. What used to be regarded as "The Rugby League Family" is now severely disfunctional, to put it mildly. There are now 2 families, pro franchise/P&R and anti franchise/P&R and there is ever increasing animosity between the 2 camps which is only going to get worse.

Whilst I can understand, to some degree, the RFL's original intentions I believe that it was, as usual, ill-conceived and all it's implications were not taken into consideration.

I can not speak for the Pro Camp as I openly admit to belonging to the Antis but I suspect that, if their club was under threat, their views may be different.

OK. From the Anti's point of view. The main criticism most of us have and the reason that there is so much antagonism and hatred aimed at the RFL hierarchy is because the rules are so ambiguous, are constantly changing and differ according to who your club is and where it is situated. This is causing fans at most Championship clubs to start to lose interest. Attendances have started to slide and attracting new fans is becoming more and more difficult.

What I would propose is something along these lines:

After the next set of licenses is announced for 2012-2014 the RFL invites any Championship/1 clubs who are interested in a license for the following period (2015-2017) to declare it's interest. I suspect that this may involve only 5 or 6 clubs at the most. These clubs could then have their infrastructure and facilities examined by the RFL to see if they are elligible or close to it and advised of any improvements which must be made and a deadline set for the end of 2013 at which time they should be re-examined and, provided the recommendations had been met, given the nod that they have met the off-field requirements.

Alongside this a 3 year league table of these qualifying clubs would be kept where they would be awarded points for final league placings each year (maybe 10 for 1st, 6 for 2nd, 4 for 3rd etc.) Further points would be gained for progress in NRC and Playoffs on a similar scale.

I believe that this could restore interest in the Championship and build momentum over a 3 year period but ONLY if the eventual winner was GUARANTEED a SL place not just given the right to apply. All we ask is that the rules are set in stone from the outset.

Can you imagine the buildup of intensity over 3 years with a fixed prize at the end of it?

Perhaps a similar table could be kept at the bottom of SL to keep underachieving clubs on their toes.

Just my thoughts and I'm sure someone will pick holes in them but, believe me, something needs to be done and fairly quickly.

[StevieM13]

So leigh have failed to reach any of the last 3 GFs?

under the old rules they wouldn't have been promoted either.

widnes have also failed so under the old rules wouldn't be anywhere near.

I look at Widnes now and see the benefits of the franchise system. They speculated and lost large sums of money to chase the SL dream before franchises, now they appear to be a team with so much more going for them. The only thing I don't know is whether like some others (Solly and Huddesfield) they are too dependant on O'Connor.

In what way are Widnes different to Cas and Salford who were both relegated, stayed full time, and spent huge money to get back into SL? How can you criticise other clubs for doing exactly what yours did? Cas and Salford must have huge historical debts, but are inside the elite group. How has the licence system benefitted anyone other than those in SL? Steve O'Connor came in at Widnes before the licences were handed out. How has licensing benefitted Widnes or changed the way Steve O'Connor operates the club relative to how he did before Widnes were denied a licence? The funding gap between SL and the Championship is massive, and any club that drops down now will be stripped bare of any assets. Under the old promotion and relegation system, a club's fate was decided by how it performed on the pitch. Now it's down to the subjective opinions of a few unknown officials. Llooking at crowds, historical debt levels, on field performance, player development and facilities I would much rather be a Wakefield of Cas fan than a Salford one at licence decision time

[Ackropj]

Lobby does have some points when he talks about the troubles that Championship clubs face. I do think he has a point when he talks about Championship fans lack of interest.

However he doesn't have the answers, not even close. Promotion and relegation in it's last form was just as bad as this. People forget but it had been a shambles for almost 10 years.

1999 - Hunslet (no promotion)

2000 - Dewsbury (no promotion)

2001 - Widnes. Performed well year after and replaced Huddersfield.

2002 - Huddersfield, went year undefeated. Replaced Salford.

2003 - Salford, promoted comfortably. Halifax relegated after financial difficulty.

2004 - Leigh, replaced Castleford.

2005 - Castleford promoted, replaced Leigh after first season shambles. Widnes relegated to make way for Catalans.

2006 - Hull KR promoted, replaced Castleford.

2007 - Castleford replaced Salford.

2008 - Salford promoted through licensing but win Grand Final anyway.

So in 7 attempts where relegation occured, the relegated team came straight back up in 5 of the years. They usually had almost no competition.

My memory of this period was that it was usually 2 clubs fighting it out way ahead of everybody else, with 1 usually quite comfortably better than the other. Nowadays it is much closer.

Widnes get a lot of criticism for finishing 5th and being favourites for promotion but this is largely because of a low salary cap. The result has been a far more competitive Championship that is better quality. The situation is that if we brought back straight P & R the current salary cap would be massively unfair on a team like Widnes and would enable somebody with a relatively small amount of money to buy their way into Super League. This is not good for the game either. With the cap at

[Lobbygobbler]

This is what I posted on the other forum which I thought was a good idea and hoped might promote discussion. No such luck but see what you guys think.

Right. Let's face the facts.

No-one can deny that the advent of franchising has torn the game apart. What used to be regarded as "The Rugby League Family" is now severely disfunctional, to put it mildly. There are now 2 families, pro franchise/P&R and anti franchise/P&R and there is ever increasing animosity between the 2 camps which is only going to get worse.

Whilst I can understand, to some degree, the RFL's original intentions I believe that it was, as usual, ill-conceived and all it's implications were not taken into consideration.

I can not speak for the Pro Camp as I openly admit to belonging to the Antis but I suspect that, if their club was under threat, their views may be different.

OK. From the Anti's point of view. The main criticism most of us have and the reason that there is so much antagonism and hatred aimed at the RFL hierarchy is because the rules are so ambiguous, are constantly changing and differ according to who your club is and where it is situated. This is causing fans at most Championship clubs to start to lose interest. Attendances have started to slide and attracting new fans is becoming more and more difficult.

What I would propose is something along these lines:

After the next set of licenses is announced for 2012-2014 the RFL invites any Championship/1 clubs who are interested in a license for the following period (2015-2017) to declare it's interest. I suspect that this may involve only 5 or 6 clubs at the most. These clubs could then have their infrastructure and facilities examined by the RFL to see if they are elligible or close to it and advised of any improvements which must be made and a deadline set for the end of 2013 at which time they should be re-examined and, provided the recommendations had been met, given the nod that they have met the off-field requirements.

Alongside this a 3 year league table of these qualifying clubs would be kept where they would be awarded points for final league placings each year (maybe 10 for 1st, 6 for 2nd, 4 for 3rd etc.) Further points would be gained for progress in NRC and Playoffs on a similar scale.

I believe that this could restore interest in the Championship and build momentum over a 3 year period but ONLY if the eventual winner was GUARANTEED a SL place not just given the right to apply. All we ask is that the rules are set in stone from the outset.

Can you imagine the buildup of intensity over 3 years with a fixed prize at the end of it?

Perhaps a similar table could be kept at the bottom of SL to keep underachieving clubs on their toes.

Just my thoughts and I'm sure someone will pick holes in them but, believe me, something needs to be done and fairly quickly.

IOts sounds good however my main gripe is the assessment period, plus the 2/3 of a year before that when the announcement is made (making it 4 years for losers)

I would advocate a 2-year cycle next time around, with the 2nd tier offset by SL to finish 2-3 months earlier (like in circa-2000). The promoted team would be known at the latest after the 2nd GF in two years, and could take its place in SL the following Feb. This will also get shut of the "wilderness year" (i.e. the one we'll have next year), in which a stupid behind the scenes decision is made.

In this scenario a relegated team could also return to SL within 2 years, which would lessen the impact of a relegation

At the end of the day it is time/waiting game that is the main problem for NL fans

[RP London]

This is what I posted on the other forum which I thought was a good idea and hoped might promote discussion. No such luck but see what you guys think.

Right. Let's face the facts.

No-one can deny that the advent of franchising has torn the game apart. What used to be regarded as "The Rugby League Family" is now severely disfunctional, to put it mildly. There are now 2 families, pro franchise/P&R and anti franchise/P&R and there is ever increasing animosity between the 2 camps which is only going to get worse.

i'll start if i may by denying that the game is being "torn apart".. there is a few murmerings of people not liking it but "torn apart" is a massive overstatement of this IMO so yes you can deny it.

Whilst I can understand, to some degree, the RFL's original intentions I believe that it was, as usual, ill-conceived and all it's implications were not taken into consideration.

i thikn all the implications were taken into account.. they were just looked at with the long term view and so the minor issues that are around at the moment were seen as "not relevant".. ie a disgruntled Leigh fan or two is irrelevant if by doing this huge swathes of the country can be opened up to the game and by losing the 2,000 diehards in Leigh we gain 200,000 supporters across the country (numbers used for dramatic illustration).

I can not speak for the Pro Camp as I openly admit to belonging to the Antis but I suspect that, if their club was under threat, their views may be different.

i'm a sheffield eagles fan.. i think franchising is fantastic.. and we have no chance.. yet if you took it away a few good results this season and we may have been edging towards promtion! then bankruptcy soon after

OK. From the Anti's point of view. The main criticism most of us have and the reason that there is so much antagonism and hatred aimed at the RFL hierarchy is because the rules are so ambiguous, are constantly changing and differ according to who your club is and where it is situated. This is causing fans at most Championship clubs to start to lose interest. Attendances have started to slide and attracting new fans is becoming more and more difficult.

bar the idea of who can apply... which was changed from having to win the NRC or the GF to that and having a turnover and crowd average.. and the ability to be invited to apply if outside the divisions.. i dont see much changing.. once you are able to apply the criteria is the same IIRC..

the clubs that are no longer able to apply for a liscnece due to the change are Batley (who IIRC werent going to) and Barrow (who are not likely to get through the criteria anyway).. at the moment.

i dont see huge changes to this that would have made clubs go.. ###### it we should have done something else.

What I would propose is something along these lines:

After the next set of licenses is announced for 2012-2014 the RFL invites any Championship/1 clubs who are interested in a license for the following period (2015-2017) to declare it's interest. I suspect that this may involve only 5 or 6 clubs at the most. These clubs could then have their infrastructure and facilities examined by the RFL to see if they are elligible or close to it and advised of any improvements which must be made and a deadline set for the end of 2013 at which time they should be re-examined and, provided the recommendations had been met, given the nod that they have met the off-field requirements.

Your ground has to be of a "premier standard" this IIRC is a set standard which you can judge the ground by.. they know what they are and those rules are there to check yourself against.. capacity is stipulated as well in the criteria so this all exists.. it doesnt need 5 or 6 to stick their hands up and have the RFL inspect them.. the rules are there and they can check against them and even get an outside surveyor to look at it if they want.

Alongside this a 3 year league table of these qualifying clubs would be kept where they would be awarded points for final league placings each year (maybe 10 for 1st, 6 for 2nd, 4 for 3rd etc.) Further points would be gained for progress in NRC and Playoffs on a similar scale.

wouldnt necessarily disagree with that.. it would be interesting to see as they do have a "adding to the compeition" guide in the criteria.

I believe that this could restore interest in the Championship and build momentum over a 3 year period but ONLY if the eventual winner was GUARANTEED a SL place not just given the right to apply. All we ask is that the rules are set in stone from the outset.

the rules are set.. guarenteeing teams at the moment is dangerous as expansion of the number of teams may not be possible.. next time around the best CC club could be someone who meets all the criteria but only just and the worst super league club is still 10 times the club they are.. at that point it would defeat the object if they went up..

it also seriously limits teh ability to bring in say a french club that has come through the Elite leagues but adds a huge amoutn to the comp etc..

yes they should try to do it but a guarentee is very very dangerous until the level od the clubs is right.. and at that pojnt they should be looking at opening P&R up or conferencing the division anyway.

Can you imagine the buildup of intensity over 3 years with a fixed prize at the end of it?

but you will always get clubs believeuing they are in a better position than they are as some of the crietria are down to finances etc which are not always crystal clear so you'll have similar arguemnts on here and other places.

Perhaps a similar table could be kept at the bottom of SL to keep underachieving clubs on their toes.

again would be an interesting addition

Just my thoughts and I'm sure someone will pick holes in them but, believe me, something needs to be done and fairly quickly.

i hope i havent disapointed on the picking holes bit

i do disagree that something needs to be done as well.. i think it is working pretty well at the moment.

[RP London]

In what way are Widnes different to Cas and Salford who were both relegated, stayed full time, and spent huge money to get back into SL? How can you criticise other clubs for doing exactly what yours did? Cas and Salford must have huge historical debts, but are inside the elite group. How has the licence system benefitted anyone other than those in SL? Steve O'Connor came in at Widnes before the licences were handed out. How has licensing benefitted Widnes or changed the way Steve O'Connor operates the club relative to how he did before Widnes were denied a licence? The funding gap between SL and the Championship is massive, and any club that drops down now will be stripped bare of any assets. Under the old promotion and relegation system, a club's fate was decided by how it performed on the pitch. Now it's down to the subjective opinions of a few unknown officials. Llooking at crowds, historical debt levels, on field performance, player development and facilities I would much rather be a Wakefield of Cas fan than a Salford one at licence decision time

bit in bold

all depends how you are looking at it..

with pure p&r it was about on the pitch.. so you do all in your power to get the team right.. spenidng through your ###### to the top of the cap which still sends you bankrupt when one player gets injured and you dont make it, or one fluke result etc.. so how many clubs have been saved from themselves by the liscnecs?

how many clubs have been forced to sort out their academy, their ground etc becuase they know without it there will be no liscnence chance.. as such they are stronger clubs for it, Widnes IMO are a prime example, they are a much stronger club now than if they had won the grandfinal in the first year of liscneces and gone up without the structure that has been built underneath.

Barrow arguably.. would have gone up last year.. would they have survived, would have devepended on how much they had spent.. would they have been able to stay solvent with all that spending.. its arguable.. they could well have done a workington and gone belly up and soon as the super league "bubble" burst.. fans get one year then no club whatsover or 1 year then 20 in the doldrums becuase that 1 year nigh on killed the club..

There are many ways clubs have benefited..

[Stevo]

i do disagree that something needs to be done as well.. i think it is working pretty well at the moment.

You're a business man I believe. You know when your business is doing well by I guess some pretty well-worn measures. Profit, sales, staff turnover, feedback from your punters, etc. etc. etc.

If franchising is working pretty well, I'd be interested to know what measures you are applying to arrive at that conclusion.

[The Parksider]

This is what I posted on the other forum which I thought was a good idea and hoped might promote discussion. No such luck but see what you guys think.

After the next set of licenses is announced for 2012-2014 the RFL invites any Championship/1 clubs who are interested in a license for the following period (2015-2017) to declare it's interest. I suspect that this may involve only 5 or 6 clubs at the most. These clubs could then have their infrastructure and facilities examined by the RFL to see if they are elligible or close to it and advised of any improvements which must be made and a deadline set for the end of 2013 at which time they should be re-examined and, provided the recommendations had been met, given the nod that they have met the off-field requirements.

Just my thoughts and I'm sure someone will pick holes in them but, believe me, something needs to be done and fairly quickly.

Taking Widnes and Toulouse out of the equation I too suspect there may be 5 or 6 with an interest. Those who have the ground include Halifax, Leigh, Sheffield and Doncaster. Those who don't include Featherstone and Barrow.

That's six clubs. They have got to actually want to be in SL to go into your system and not just make PR noises to their fans about it. The key is they will have to have the finances or business plan to compete in SL and I suspect they all won't have this - even if they have the ground.

We're constantly told clubs should "improve" in NL until they are "ready" for Superleague. Whilst you can drop lucky with a shared local soccer stadium or a "community stadium" and have half a leg in Superleague, you need money and operating in the NL's simply doesn't generate it.

So does franchising shut out clubs? In the main it doesn't but money probably does........

[RP London]

You're a business man I believe. You know when your business is doing well by I guess some pretty well-worn measures. Profit, sales, staff turnover, feedback from your punters, etc. etc. etc.

If franchising is working pretty well, I'd be interested to know what measures you are applying to arrive at that conclusion.

i have posted this before but here we go again..

franchising is there to direct clubs in what they need to do.. that is to build a sustainable club etc one that has a good ground a good youth team etc.. that then provides a much more stable club which wil then provide for a much more stable league. The other aspect is that the divisions needs to get that bit closer and that is on the business front as well as on th playing field.

At the moment what i see after just 2 years (and so it is hard to say that it has succeeded or failed, i just think it is going well at the moment) is this:

Clubs scrambling to get grounds sorted out.... this hasnt happened for years, with the advent of the liscnecing system and the 2nd round now coming up grounds are being built at clubs that were never really that bothered before hand.. in 2012 the only grounds that wont be relativly new are Headingly (seems ok to be honest and modernisation in the pipeline by the sounds of it), Odsal (need to do something) and Craven Park (dont know it well enough but AFAIK needs a bit of work on it). Would any of this have happened without liscences.. arguably no.

Academies are having more importnace put on them than perhaps they did before.

Along with the new grounds comes a whole knew business approach.. with a turnover of

Edited September 9, 2010 by RP London

[The Parksider]

You're a business man I believe. You know when your business is doing well by I guess some pretty well-worn measures. Profit, sales, staff turnover, feedback from your punters, etc. etc. etc.

If franchising is working pretty well, I'd be interested to know what measures you are applying to arrive at that conclusion.

I'm not sure franchising can be measured as working well or working badly until you work out what exactly franchising is for.

I think it is for ensuring expansion club projects can be placed straight into SL (Les Cats, Crusaders) and be prevented from being relegated (Quins) If that's the case Franchising is heavily benefitting expansion clubs.

I think it's for ensuring that the RFL can choose who they want in SL without leaving that to chance. Mr. O'Connor has a big fat cheque book the RFL want to see waved around SL, so the RFL can choose them and not risk Featherstone spoiling the RFL's plans. I think the RFL will want to get rid of any club who can't hack SL financially - that could be Wakey so franchising allows the RFL to boot them out.

So that's my take on how well franchising is working, and I suspect it's working brilliantly for the RFL whom it seems it is mainly designed for.

[Red Willow]

In what way are Widnes different to Cas and Salford who were both relegated, stayed full time, and spent huge money to get back into SL? How can you criticise other clubs for doing exactly what yours did? Cas and Salford must have huge historical debts, but are inside the elite group. How has the licence system benefitted anyone other than those in SL? Steve O'Connor came in at Widnes before the licences were handed out. How has licensing benefitted Widnes or changed the way Steve O'Connor operates the club relative to how he did before Widnes were denied a licence? The funding gap between SL and the Championship is massive, and any club that drops down now will be stripped bare of any assets. Under the old promotion and relegation system, a club's fate was decided by how it performed on the pitch. Now it's down to the subjective opinions of a few unknown officials. Llooking at crowds, historical debt levels, on field performance, player development and facilities I would much rather be a Wakefield of Cas fan than a Salford one at licence decision time

salford and Cas both remained solvent, they didn't leave creditors waiting to be paid. It is called living within your means.

Steve O'connor came in too late. He has had 3 years to prove he is there and so is the money. Widnes are a better club on and off field because of him, at the time of the frnchise he was just another guy makingpromises, ask Wakefield about that sort of bloke. He has now delivered.

Under the old system you had a year to get back or change everything and be asset stripped. If you go down now, you know it is for 3 years and there is no panic or reckless spending.

If Salford lose out it will be disappointing but rather than buy old aussies we have 3 years to develop some you players.

it isn't a perfect system but neither was P&R

[The Parksider]

Along with the new grounds comes a whole knew business approach.. with a turnover of

[The Parksider]

Steve O'connor came in too late. He has had 3 years to prove he is there and so is the money. Widnes are a better club on and off field because of HIS MONEY, at the time of the franchise he was just another guy making promises, ask Wakefield about that sort of bloke. He has now delivered HIS MONEY.

Couple of typos.