Widnes were the best supported club in British RL for much of the 1970s and looking in my old Rothmans, annuals, were in the top two or three for most of the 1980s, with an average gate of just short of 9000 the year that Jonathan Davies signed. The game as a whole has grown significantly since then; don't see any reason why a well run Widnes club couldn't achieve 10k average crowds in SL.

You really do talk clap-trap.

The point is (and don't get me wrong here) the game has moved on and a fair amount of the Widnes fans from the 70's will have too (RIP). It has taken a good few years for those clubs in SL that get acceptable crowds to get to that stage and the same will happen to widnes when they come up in 2012. The trick will be year 1 and game, 1, 2 and 3 at home that season. Get the place as full as possible, if you give cheap/free tickets, get data in return and immediately mail these people. Results will play a big part, but if you get lucky with the fixtures and get a couple of home wins in, you will pick up 1,000 or so floating fans on top of your hard core.

hey in 2 years time you could well be enjoying NL1 / championship / etc

unless the RFL believes your new "stadium proposal"

The Willows is not dreadful. Old, yes. In an area that's not the most salubrious (look it up), yes.

Crowds are poor because people are fed up with watching dull rugby and others are staying away because they feel the club has lied to them and is stringing along (I'll come back to this point later). We can pull in 6,000+ crowds, we've done it not so long ago, we can do it again. Crowds have improved this year. If we were challenging for the play offs and playing well, we could increase them further. Friday night games don't help, either, but they attract more corporate sponsorship that Sunday games, so that will come before the general wish of normal supporters. And £17 on the door, £15 in advance is too expensive as well. We know that, the club don't seem to take any notice.

On field results are poor? We've beaten St. Helens, Leeds, Bradford, Warrington and Hull. Those are good wins to my mind. OK, so we've struggled in other games we should have done better in, but that's all down to improvement. We've got another two years to improve, yes?

Telling blatant lies? (And this goes for the rest of you nuggest banging on about Salford's "lies".) Give over. Our new ground has undergone so many unforseen setbacks it's no wonder we've not had any real progress so far. Are you telling me Salford knew the recession was going to kick in? That Red City Developments would go bust? That Salford College would get screwed over in terms of funding? Did they buggery.

Peel Holdings will own the stadium. The stadium has to be built before they can progress with their other plans for the Barton area. They usually get what they want, one way or another. And until they, or Salford, turn around and say "no, sorry, everything's gone wrong, the stadium's not happening" then it's to be presumed that it will happen.

People have said franchising is about improving clubs and the game. We have made improvements this year, albeit small ones. Yet people have still decided to judge and condemn us before the first year of three is done. I don't know what you all expected within 12 months, miracles?

If we hadn't have been virtually relegated with a few games left we would have got 7k. Wakey are currently at 5500 and they're in 5th. I think we would be a good 1000 above Wakey to be honest.

I'm fairly sure we would get a 7k average if we were back in Super League. We get better crowds in the championship now than we did prior to being in Super League in 2002.

you conned the RFL last time so dont start sooking now.

you dont deserve your SL spot.

there were much better clubs that missed out.

that simple.

if you cant get a new ground leave a spot for a better club.

thats what franchising is about.

you will have had 3 years to sort out the ground. if not, goodbye and good riddance really.

its whats good for the game of RL. perform or get out

excuses, excuses, excuses.

no stadium and i cant see you in SL either.

SL needs clubs that can grow and challenge the strong clubs

a good example is Hull KR.

not clubs which can make the playoffs once in 10 years and spend the rest of the time near the bottom of the table.

Fortunately for us, the vast majority of people - including the ones that count (i.e. not you, whoever you are) - disagree with your point, whoever you are to have a point.



Fortunately for us, the vast majority of people - including the ones that count (i.e. not you, whoever you are) - disagree with your point, whoever you are to have a point.



Much like yourself



We'll wait until people who matter (i.e. not you) make that decision, that's if we don't get a new ground, which we are working on



Indeed, that's the same franchising we're a third of the way through



We're doing alright, thanks for your concern, whoever you are.

How did we con them? Our plans are advancing. Our new stadium plans are closer to reality.


Hmm, on field performances, a good academy, good financial management, good fanbase, would suggest we do. All is missing is the stadium.


Barring Widnes, no there weren't.


You're simple.


Like who? Again, bar Widnes.


Franchising about selecting the BEST clubs across a number of different areas. Not just stadia.



Which we have as our current plans show. You have no clue. Talk about something you do have a clue about.

I didn't copy. Honest.

Well since they didnt get bigger crowds than cas when we were both in sl, and they didnt get bigger crowds when we were in the nls together, i fail to see how you come to that conclusion that widnes would get bigger crowds never mind easily so.

I sick of hearing daft ockers talk about the sporting culture of another country when they clearly dont have a clue.


Oh and x factor, i'm sick of that too.

Celtic Crusaders have beaten Wigan and Bradford so what? The Willows is a dump, the facilities are abyssmal and to say the surrounding arean is not salubrious is an understatement, Beirut is more atttractive. How do you explain that a Champioship 1 side (York) had a higher gate than you did against Huddersfield? You must very naive, the claptrap served up by your club about this so called new ground has been regurgiated constantly for at leas 10 years now, and still no concrete evidence.

so having teams that lie and cant perform is part of your sporting culture is it?

how many weeks after the franchising decisions were handed down did wakey council say they werent financing it?

i know salfords was around 2 weeks after, yours not that long after.

and how many proposed stadiums are you up to now?

3, 4 ...

it looks like the RFL is sick of BS. at last.

Who has lied? evidence please.

Our what was just after?

Who's lied? Have you any verifiable proof that all three clubs have failed to deliver what they have said? No.

There are TWO years left on the licences for things to change. Dear me. It's like talking to a wall.

the RFL have sent a letter to your club so clearly its an issue

just put your head in the sand.

no ground, bye bye SL.

seriously 5500 for a heartland club is simply pathetic.

when you consider the advantage of significant away support and local derbies which CC and london wont have, wakeys crowds are awful.

quite a few lower division clubs could get this crowd average

and wakey are doing well in SL as well ...

im talking about wakefield and salford.

if you want to jump in, bad luck for you

Once again you show you have ZILCH knowledge of the Super League.

Wakefield - Thornes Park plans fell through due to lack of finances from the Council.

Castleford - Have ALWAYS been funding theirs privately. Have never asked the council for money, but assistance has been given to ensure it builds quicker.

This is our only proposed stadium you dimwit. Jesus, your lack of RL knowledge is crap.