Diddums

Whether the RFL admit it or not, the main criteria they take into consideration is whether or not the team is already in super league or not.

Had Leigh, Widnes and Fax been in super league in 2007, would they have been dropped for Cas, Wakey and Crusaders?

Precisely. The 2009 licenses were based on a snapshot in time + 1 Welsh Club.

The 2012 licenses are simply based on a snapshot in time.

no i doubt it but seeing as there not then unfortunately they are behind the 8 ball , to replace a team a team must fail on more than 1 count just because Halifax beat Wakefield on 1 part of franchising does not mean they have all together a better package . who's to say in the end Wakefield's was the worse of the c grades .

its about time Halifax fans proportioned some blame at the Halifax board for failing to complete what was achievable . not Wakefield's fault , nor its fans , RLFans , mutley cats or south standers ect but the Halifax board .

mentioned many times today we have not seen the applications , maybe the Halifax one was baba.

I agree with a lot of this. Maybe Fax`s application wasnt good, but it was good enough to be deemed by the independant panel to meet ALL minimum criteria and therefore get judged alongside the rest of the SL teams. So really it cant have been that bad can it unless the RFL just used Halifax to make it look like a fair process. I refuse to blame the Halifax board for the result as it looks like working with income streams of less than 1.5M than the teams they were up against they didnt actually do a bad job to actually meet this criteria.

Why else would the Super league clubs be so happy for franchises to be introduced, shut the door! close the shop!