Those numbers don't tell us how many YOUNG academy lads were playing instead?



So how long do with give the likes of Wakey "time to sort their sh*t out?". They had several seasons and entered this season poorly prepared. Do we keep the old system until Wakey sort themselves out? How long do we give them? 12 years, 15, 20? You make sound like franchising only went on for a year or two....it didn't and clubs only have themselves to blame if they didn't make the most of several seasons of security.

So the fact they now have more overseas players than they did under franchising, and are shipping in new players from overseas as we speak, is purely coincidence?

Go away and give your head a shake.

Without P&R London in all it's incarnations has produced a number of players now plying their trade in SL, off the top of my head - Sarginson, Clubb, LMS, McMeekin - & others who moved there to futher their careers, e.g Luke Gale.
Can you see that continuing to the same extent in the future under the current arrangements?
I can't.
& that is just one club.
The issue re Wakey & the Hull clubs is that there are too many clubs in the same locality.
But parochialism will ensure that unless a club is relegated & goes the (likely) way of London, Workington, Halifax that will never change.
Maurice Lindsay whether we like it or not when he called for mergers, but it won't happen in a controlled fashion if at all.

A licensing period was only 3 years. Nowhere near enough. But even then the fact that a club like Wakefield didn't get themselves sorted in 6 years isn't exactly surprising considering their position. Whatever system they were under they'd have struggled. The point is which system gave them the best chance of sorting themselves.

If they are still being mismanaged and they aren't up to SL standard then there is a mechanism to chuck them out.

The problem with licensing wasnt that it didn't work, it's that it wasn't implemented well enough by the RFL.
Licensing should have been at least a 5 year period (I'd favour a 10 year period), with in-depth investigations to analyse all the operations of each club and then provide targets for different aspects of each club (marketing, attendances, finances, on-field etc), reviewed half way through the licence period with then any club seriously under performing put on warning they could be chucked out at the end of the period.
Similarly, any Championship club wanting to be in SL can be put under the same spotlight with targets they have to reach to be considered for entry into SL.

That is the most ridiculous thing about the defences of P+R using for instance Wakefield or Bradford as examples. During franchising neither finished in a relegation position, and this year there is a very good chance that Wakefield could stumble back in to SL and do the whole shebang again next year in the same way

10 years? Might as well walk up to the owners of the Championship clubs and slap them in the face. Would giving Wakey 10 years help them and see them be forward thinking and plan straight away to improve things consistently.....or would they just do things per usual and scramble to make criteria at the last minute when threatened with the drop?

Widnes had a safety net of 3 years and they've done a good job of improving year upon year upon their return to SL whilst Wakey have just scrambled about as usual like a spotty teenage virgin trying to unhook a bra. Widnes will probably still find themselves in the bottom 4 but you don't see them scrambling about for quick fix players because they'll be confident they'll be successful in the Middle 8's. That any club could have had two periods of safety from licensing and still find themselves in such a mess come the first year of the new P/R is only really a story of their shoddines.

Leigh might have their questionable conduct on the pitch but in terms of being positive as a club and looking to the future and continually moving forward then they're miles ahead of Wakefield's 'just enough to get by' attitude......and I doubt Leigh would be like that of you told them "sorry lads, you've got to wait 10 years because Wakey MIGHT sort themselves out."

This hope/belief that if we kept giving them several more years that they'll come good is just wishful thinking that's not actually based on anything real. Reality is, pretty much every SL club is recruiting/promoting youth squad-wise pretty much the same way it did during franchising.

Might sound harsh but to move forward as a sport you often have to be ruthless and positive. Trying to be a continuous charity case for some of the continually failing bottom teams isn't going to help the sport long term, just help some of the poorer run teams get away with being run poorly for a little while longer.

oh yeah, the championship clubs with their history of doing thing the right way and building well. and yet, in 2 weeks time, Wakefield will be in exactly the same position as Widnes, on the same points and playing against the same teams. Seems scant reward for Widnes' efforts doesn't it.
In what way? Are Leigh hiding an academy somewhere? are there some secret young players they are saving? The difference between Leigh and Wakefield is Leigh play in a poorer quality league. Their attendances are terrible, they have next to no recent history of bringing players through and their squad is filled with players who were tried at SL level and found wanting. Are we really supposed to look at clubs as 'continually moving forward' because they discovered Michael Platt was a decent championship level player? Or because they were the last of Gareth Hocks last chance saloons?

except it demonstrably isn't.

What is positive about changing one failing team for another? In 21 games this year, Wakefield earned more points than Leigh did last time they were in SL. P+R keeps poor clubs poor, it stops them building and growing, it forces short-termism and it damages clubs.

You also made a pretty compelling argument against your own point here when you explained what Widnes have achieved. Widnes finished bottom their first year in SL. They wouldn't have been able to grow as YOU have said they had under P+R. Cas also finished bottom in franchising. And Les Catalans. All the good work there would have been destroyed. All that good long term work they have done which is paying off now wouldn't have happened.

Wakefield nor Bradford, nor London did though. P+R would not have gotten rid of them.

What reward did Leigh get for finishing top of their league last year and winning their GF?



Yeah I'm sure Leigh's attendances against Wigan and Leeds will be the same as when they played Batley and Hunslet. Didn't say Leigh had brought through a load of young players.....but then again neither have Wakefield (whose attendances are poor against bigger clubs than Hunslet and Batley). Don't get me wrong bringing through young players is important but being critical of a team not doing it when the likes of Wakey and HKR have failed to do so for several years also is daft. As for signing players tried and tested at SL level found wanting (along with the youth thing)........what Wakefield team have you been watching these last few years???



So which SL teams have altered their signing/youth philosophy in the last 12 months? Wakey have for a long time scrambled a team together, HKR have signed quite a few Southern Hemispheres players.....same as they're both doing now.



So you think the Leigh club is no different to the one that went down a decade ago? Another foolish argument thrown against them.



You do realise it's not automatic relegation for the team finishing 12th, so no P+R would not have gotten rid of them like you're trying to make it sound like a sure thing.

exactly the same as the winners of Super league, The NRL, the National Conference, the French Elite, the NZRL NC, The Queensland Cup, the NSW Cup and even the Auckland 9's. A Trophy and some prize money.

Wakefield's attendance's may be poor against bigger clubs than Hunslet and Batley, but they are still better than Leigh's. And Leigh's attendances last time were also poor.

again, what is the point in swapping one club which isn't good enough for another clubs which isn't good enough and giving neither the time and space to grow?

But less than they were. So much so that it actually necessitated an increase in the quota.
Not fundamentally I don't no. They are still a small side with limited supporter base, limited funds, no juniors, a small stadium, and a squad which isn't SL standard.
and you want to accuse other people of foolish arguments? I think moronic would kind to that one.

surely if nothing else leigh's ground is 1000 times better than wakeys?
also leigh have gone down and slowly rebuilt. perhaps wakefield need some respite and a chance to rebuild and get there finances in order

im not actually arguing Leigh aren't currently a better prospect for SL than Wakefield. They possibly are. In fact that was one of the problems i brought up. Wakefield could still be in SL next year and do the same thing.

But that's not the reward that they'd really wanted, they'd take promotion over a trophy any day.



But that's because they're playing better supported teams! Only when/if Leigh play in SL against that competition can you criticise their attendances compared to Wakefield.



Again it's a much different Leigh club to 10 years ago.



Leigh have been given time and space to grow.....in the Championship. They look much better prepared for SL than Wakefield right now as a club on the whole. Leigh (or another club) might not end up being good enough for SL, but f**king hell let's give them the chance to show it. Not tell them to come back in 5/10 years.



If you could say they were definitely taking the place of young academy prospects then I'd agree. But they aren't, the overseas signings are only stopping them from signing some failed English middle/old age player from another club....not some exciting junior.



Are you describing Wakefield here? Sounds like it.



Nice attempt to dodge the point.....you made out some teams would've been relegated. Under this system they probably would've stayed up even if it meant a trip to the middle 8's.

Why? Are Championship club owners not prepared to build solidly over a time period? As I said they can be subject to the same reviews and targets for their club as the SL teams. If they're up to standard they can either replace an under performing SL club or be an addition to SL. Why wouldn't Championship owners be prepared to wait 10 years? And that's assuming they don't get in to start with.
It took Leeds 8 or 9 years to go from bang average to a proper force in SL. I don't see 10 years as unreasonable to judge a club over.
I have no idea what Wakefield would do. I'd imagine they'd struggle. Because they've got no money, no assets and an expensive but very poor stadium. So whatever system they're in they're going to struggle.
The whole point about long term criteria is that it can't be reached in a last minute scramble. But if they meet the criteria then what's the problem?


Yes Wakefield and Widnes are different clubs in different situations. Widnes have the benefit of a rich owner and favourable terms in a decent stadium along with decent facilities. Wakefield don't have that. 6 years under any system doesn't mean Wakefield can suddenly produce a new stadium and a load of money.
You could also ask the question, how, with over a hundred years of P&R Wakefield managed to get into the position they're in?



Except that's a very simplistic viewpoint isn't it. There are probably only 4 or 5 clubs that you could describe as being "well run" in that simplistic context.
And if you want clubs to be judged on how well they are run then you need a multi year period to judge them over. Which means licensing. If you want to do it properly it takes time.

As it stands our Super8s will be:

Saints, Wigan, Wire & Cas at Home.
Hudds, Catalan & Hull/KR away.

And I can't see that changing.

Franchising was great idea poorly implemented. Structurally 14 teams was 4 too many. The best thing about the new structure is after the split we will the best teams playing each other every week.

The structure of the pro game needs to be addressed we need 10 elite clubs with affliations to the other clubs as feeders. These 10 clubs need a minimum 5 year franchise, a limit on non GB qualified players and possible restrictions to the positions they can recruit for. They have to demonstrate robust junior development and appropriate training and medical facilities. Stadiums need to be of an appropriate standard if Leigh can build a stadium then it shouldnt be out of reach of the likes of Cas and Bradford.

The idea the the likes of Featherstone or Sheffield could cope with a move to the top 12 and compete is lunacy. Leigh will struggle to win a game against any of the bottom 4 SL clubs - this isnt the CC this is survival!!

So much of building a new stadium these days is out of the reach of the clubs themselves. Very few SL clubs would have either the capital or the borrowing capacity to be able to go out and build a new stadium off their own back.

You need to have a local authority willing to work in partnership with you (and perhaps cover for some of the cost for a community facility). You need to have other commercial partners who can come on board and help make it a viable, year-round proposition (concert promoters, other sports clubs etc). You need to have a current site that you can sell so you're not lumbered with an asset you can't liquidate to provide funds for the new build.

Wakefield (and to an extent Cas) haven't been able to fulfill those criteria and as a result have struggled to get a new stadium built. Leigh, Doncaster, Salford etc haven't, although the latter should stand as an example to clubs looking to move of how not to do it having been bent over and taken roughly in the negotiations by all accounts.

It's a massive over-simplification to lay the "blame" for not getting a stadium built squarely at the door of the clubs concerned.

so what? they don't get to chose what you win. Its not a game show where you choose which of these fabulous prizes you want to take home

again, so what? there is nothing in there explaining why what they will do will be good. Being better than Wakefield isn't a good thing. Wakefield aren't good enough right now to be an SL club, dumping them out and replacing them with another club in the same position isn't a good thing.

you keep making these definitive statement, I keep asking you for details, you keep avoiding it.
then fine. Give them the chance to show it, but give them an actual f@cking chance and not set them up to fail by expecting them to be out of the bottom 4 in their 1st year or risk relegation.

They are definitely taking the place of a young academy prospect. You can definitely say that.

What you are also missing is that the clubs no longer need to bother trying to produce youngsters. there is very little point in them doing so. Scouting and training youngsters is hard, blooding them is risky. When your whole season is predicated on just being better than the championship sides, you can fill your squad with overseas players and forget about youth development. That's what happened last time, its whats happening now.

You criticise clubs for signing failed English middle/old age players from another club, then demand a route to SL for Leigh. Have you seen their squad? are you desperate to see Bob Beswick in SL again? Oli Wilkes? Michael Platt? Martin Aspinwall?

Maybe. But you have yet to make an argument, never mind a convincing one, that swapping one club struggling to be an SL club for another is a worthwhile thing to do.

But they wouldn't have improved how they have with the prospect of relegation hanging over them. They would have made panic signings and ignored the young players who learned from those years

Andy these are businesses and as such should have appropriate facilities to conduct their business. Are you saying that a stadium like Leigh or even Warrington is beyond the 10 elite clubs in SL?

If that is the case the whole competition needs a rethink. Leeds could build a Warrington type ground down at Kirkstall for what it is going to cost redevelop the north stand.

If you want to project an elite image it is much easier if the sport is played in elite facilities rather than holes like Headingley or Wheldan rd.

To build on their own and solely occupy? Yes, I am saying that's beyond them. These are multi-million pound infrastructure projects, even on the level of the HJ or LSV. Who were the last top flight club in any sport in this country to fund and build a whole new stadium themselves without external input from a commercial partner or a rich owner?

To make building a new stadium financially viable, you need to ensure that you are going to increase revenue to cover the costs. If Wakefield, or Castleford for example went out and borrowed a stack of cash to build a new stadium, they would have to be absolutely sure their revenue streams would increase to be able to pay it back. Otherwise, what's the point of doing it? You end up in the same mess that Salford are in, with higher overheads but no increase in gate/commercial revenue to pay for it.

The point of doing it is like any business if you stand still the competition will pass you by - so its the opportunity cost of doing nothing. Do you think Castleford's corporate revenue is growing or not from remaining at Wheldon rd?

David - if you don't have the money, and it's not economically viable to borrow the money, what are you supposed to do? Go ahead and build it anyway like Kevin Costner in Field of Dreams, and pray the magic pixies in the sky will make it work?

It's alright throwing terms like "opportunity cost" around, but this is the real world with people's livelihoods, not some strategy meeting somewhere. It is not economically viable for Cas to go seven figures into the red to build themselves a new stadium. Ditto Wakefield. Ditto just about every other club in SL.

If Leeds wanted to build a new stadium, or Wigan, they would be reliant on either a sugar daddy funding it or having to borrow substantial sums to do so. RL is not a cash rich sport in the same way that Premier League football is, particularly not in the lower reaches of SL where clubs are just about turning over enough to keep their heads above water let alone invest in major infrastructure projects.

Can make light of it but you can't sit and bemoan Widnes getting the same "reward" for finishing 9th as Wakey will for 12th and then downplay a team not being rewarded promotion.



So because YOU personally don't think Leigh are any better than Wakey they shouldn't have a clearer path to getting promoted?



Me definitive statements? You keep telling us that Leigh are the exact same as Wakey like its fact when it's only your opinion. I asked for details of who were these youngsters the likes of Wakey played under franchising.....not hearing any names mentioned.



No they wouldn't be out of the bottom 4, doesn't mean they won't be well set to successfully navigate the middle 8's. Again you make it sound like finishing bottom 4 is certain relegation. The smartest odds would on the 4 SL clubs returning up.



It's what happened during franchising for the usual suspects even with no threat of relegation. If you can list me those many Wakey and HKR youngsters given runs in the team? Shouldn't they have a chunk of academy prospects in their first team from the last several years of non relegation comfort? Reality is the best youngsters will come from the usual suspects and I see the likes of Stevie Ward, Greenwood, George Williams and Bateman playing week in week out pushing for England call ups.



But you're comparing a team trying to make a splash to gain promotion against a side who apparently should've filled their team with academy lads by now.



Leigh aren't struggling to become a SL club, the system has denied them the chance. And again Leigh being a "struggling" club isn't fact, just your opinion.



If I said that we should never have had liscensing then you'd have a point. I actually agreed with liscensing and thought it was exactly what we needed. But that was then. For me it was never a permanent solution....just one we needed for a period of time. The sport has suffered because of it, you can't ignore the threads on this site with people becoming bored of the regular season. Should we let that continue just so we can carry on holding Wakefield's hand?

Opportunity cost is the real world - because all that is happening is a race to extinction. Look at Bradford they have a stadium that is eating up all their money. When do say this uneconomic to repair. Monies spent on repairing a relic that is no longer suitable for purpose and have no long term future could be invested much more wisely on a new infrastructure. That is the real not some fantasy boardroom game - businesses make these choices every day. Money is very cheap now plus the tax breaks are in place via capital allowances for SME's. The RL needs to get involved and find ways of accessing suitable funding for these projects.

This isn't just about revenue stream this is about having business premises that are fit for purpose.

RL doesn't generate the money it should because it is run by amateurs with a complete lack of vision for the sport. If it is so difficult to build a new - so impossible how come new stadium have been built at Warrington, Leigh, St Helens and Doncaster. Are you seriously suggesting Leeds would be incapable of sorting out a slightly bigger version of any of those grounds? They are owned by a builder for goodness sake.

One of the reasons that RL doesn't generate the revenue it does is because of the shabby way it presents itself. Yes it may be a chicken an egg but if something doesn't change and an appropriate vision adopted and implemented then the sport will cease to exist as we know it.

Will Widnes not get more home fixtures for finishing higher and home fixtures against their nearest rivals in terms of strength? I bet you weren't complaining when Leeds coasted through two seasons finishing fifth and still won the GF?

P+R didn't work in terms of developing the strength of junior development - more quality players young players have come through since franchising than did before.

You will always get the usual suspects bringing through the greater volume of young talent. They have access to a greater pool of talent to begin with. Law of averages suggests they have greater chances of developing talent in to first team players. You are a young kid you have a choice Wigan or Leigh? or Leeds or Wakefield?

One of the issues of franchising was the need to restrict the numbers of overseas players - forcing clubs to play home grown players - whilst ever there is a get out clubs will use it. Leeds have too many overseas players 6 of the forwards are overseas - Leeds could field a pack of overseas players. 7 overseas is to many for a side that prides itself on developing youth.

I can because 'reward' wasn't my argument. It was yours. It is your dissonance you are highlighting. Not mine.

No, I think if Leigh are better than Wakefield, they SHOULD be promoted and given a chance to actually make a good stab at it.

Again, another strawman. Im not holding up Wakefield as a club who did well under franchising but as one who has previously and is again struggling under P+R. Like many other clubs. Clubs who have done what was necessary under franchising, like Castleford, Les Catalans, Widnes, who finished bottom, who blooded players instead of panic buying have a long list of players who were given a shot. Not least last years man of steel.

Because they aren't going to take the risk. Because they aren't going to risk blooding players and giving them a shot, and going in to that season without experienced back up. That's why those sides have more overseas players and why the number as a whole has grown.

Do your own research. The number of overseas players at both clubs has gone up since the return to P+R
Yes, and this team team trying to get promoted are still lesser than a team which FAILING. What Wakefield have isn't good enough but it is better than where Leigh are right now. It will take time for Leigh to get where Wakefield are and even more time to overtake them. They don't have that time and their priority wont be to get there. That's why we will see them bring in players like Dayne Weston.

No, its fact. They don't have an academy. They don't have big crowds, they don't even have a big stadium, they have a side filled with players who have already failed at SL level.

Again, another straw man argument, Im not arguing Wakefield need to stay in, but if Wakefield or any other side want to grow in SL they need stability. Leigh will not become a true SL club under this system. Neither will any other club and we are losing some of the improvements made by clubs who were moving towards it.