The Crusaders are not ' bringing through ' anybody yet , they are converting players yes , not ' producing ' them , a subtle difference I grant you , but a difference

Leeds Rhinos
St. Helens
Bradford Bulls
Wigan Warriors
Hull FC
Catalans Dragons
Warrington Wolves
Crusaders (ground dependent)
Harlequins
Salford Reds(ground dependent)
Hull KR (ground dependent)
Huddersfield Giants
Toulouse Olympique
London Team
Cumbrian Team
Welsh/Scottish Team

A [idecent[/i second league. Sorted

[size=25Not contraversial in the slightest, but proabably important for progression[/size

Nontheless you cannot have it with an odd number of teams , which would mean it would have to be dropped

if you have nothing to fear from toulouse stop trolling a thread on them

if salford cant get a new ground then they are useless and you can forget about manchester.

rochdale cant support a SL club and oldhams finances are currently shot

So because I think Widnes should get a licence ahead of Toulouse I can't comment on this thread?

A decent league , why thank you sir i doff my flat cap to you

yep.

No we havent, we have also produced more sl players than salford, finished higher in the league than them, finished higher in the play offs, got further in the cup and have larger gates by several thousands.

2008

I'm not trying to single out any one team pyeman , I'm just pointing out that all clubs have an argument for and against

What is fairly certain , any club/s removed from SL will implode , it's one thing being relegated in the ' normal ' fashion , but a drop down for a guaranteed 3 , possibly 6/9 years will cause massive problems for whoever it happens to , even Cas

But you said that cas had finished bottom, when quite clearly they havent, likewise we have only finished ina relelgation position twice.

Or I could have put

Cas have finished bottom twice and in a relegation place twice in the last 6 years



Does that sound any better

Well your not lying this time at least

Maybe instead of Wakey, or Salford. In fact definitely ahead of Salford. But not Toulouse, im sure theyd have a much stronger franchise bid than Widnes in nearly every way. Its very easy to pick on the outsider club, but there is some pretty poorly performing clubs in SL in the north of England that Widnes could replace.

How about the south of England and Wales ?

I think that you are right that Widnes will be more closely compared to other northern English clubs. It was the same on the last round of licences, where many people were in uproar that Celtic got a licence ahead of Widnes, Leigh or Halifax - in reality though none of those clubs were ever competing against Celtic for the licence as they were already guaranteed a place, we were competing against Salford and possibly Wakey.

If we were to at least consider a Widnes v Toulouse licence battle though, in what way would Toulouse have a better bid? On the criteria that most people talk about, Widnes would win hands down. Shame there isn't actually a criteria that says you must be situated outside the RL heartlands and preferably have a large population - because that criteria seems to be what some people think is the most important.

Widnes play in a better quality stadia - the stadium Toulouse use is basically a dump.
Widnes have a better quality playing staff - as proved by league position and victories against Toulouse both home and away.
Widnes have a very wealthy backer with a proven business background
Widnes have a proven youth development programme and this year ran u16's, u18's and u21's as well as 1st team.
Widnes have better attendances.

Any more points? beacuse youth development, stadia, attendances etc is what we are told the RFL are looking at.

As I've said, on the licence criteria that people look to, Widnes have a strong case in every department. If Toulouse get a licence and if the game takes off in Toulouse then obviously there are certain advantages that you don't get if Widnes got a licence instead. What people don't like though is being told one thing (licence criteria) and then doing something completely the opposite. That happened last time round where we were told the 14 strongest applicants will get a licence based on the criteria. Then on licence decision day, Lewis talked about Celtic being the right choice "strategically" - I must have missed "Does your club fit with RFL strategy" in the list of criteria. If the RFL want Toulouse in for reasons A, B and C thats fine, just dont tell clubs to work towards set criteria and then turn round and make a decison based on something completley unrelated. The same thing appears to be happening regarding Toulouse - Championship clubs are all told that playing performance is vital to your application - Toulouse have one year to make it to the Championship GF - but even if they don't, will anyone be surprised if they get a licence next time round?

Widnes still gets my vote for 2012.

Not literally obviously because fan votes aren't taken into consideration AFAIK, but you get what I mean?

Damn I thought it was going to be like surviver where we put all the chairmen on an isalnd and vote off the the ones we dislike!

The toulouse bloke would win hands down! Have you seen the tasche on that!!!!

I don't think Widnes should get a SL licence because Widnesians / scousers constantly moan about how wonderful the club is, and how they 'deserve it'.

No mention of the clubs financial management in the past or poor league positions for many years.

I was surprised and disappointed that you didn't get a franchise, but the constant whinging and self-pity has led to any sympathy I had for your fans, to disappear.

Froma comment in todays League express I would say that Toulouse arent going to get in next time. It says something along the lines of a 2nd French team in Super League would have to be self financing and I doubt Toulouse are., The RFL simply cannot afford to finance 2 French teams.

You have hardly blown us away in league positions. Regardless, it does sound pathetic to state, we finished 8th and you only managed to finish 9th. Let's face it, you have not troubled the top 4 positions on many occasions recently.

We will be lucky to get a franchise in the next round, esepcially if we fail to sort out our new stadium.

You can hardly justify your place in SL by comparing yourselves to Salford. We are no benchmark. I personally feel that if SL want the game to grow in the way they want it to, we need to move away from small towns like Castleford. The potential for the club to grow is limited. We need clubs that become as big as the likes of Leeds. That's what we should be aiming at. Cas will fail to get even close.

Whilst in sl we have got to within 80 mins of both the ccf and the gf (whilst salford havent got far at all in the playoffs or cup), there have been only a couple of seasons where we have finished below salford, we get considerabley more people in through the gate (despire our smaller catchment area). Our academy has produced considerably more sl players and has has more success at producing england internationals.

I wasnt trying to justify our inclusion based on comparison to salford, i think our crowds, youth development, and league success in the sl era do that. Currentley we need to improve to major areas our stadia, which we are planning to do (and will result in better finances and crowds) and our finances, we arent in debt which is good but are still a way off spending full cap. With a new stadium and a bit of on field success i can see us averaging 10k within a few years.

Any basis for this doubt



But then, why should they have to. They don't finance the Catalans team. Or any other teams*.





*Apart from handing over their share of the TV rights, which isn't the RFL financing a team, and will apply to all the clubs in SL post 2012, whoever they are.

Im pretty sure the RFL heavily finance Catalans therefore why would Toulouse be any different?