Cas have also made 4 play off appearances (soon to be 5...touch wood) and consistenly get higher crowds.

Not going down the tit-for-tat road as it's been done a million times before, neither am i arrogant enough to say Cas are a bigger club but, if you're going to compare, at least be fair.

Wakefield AND Crusaders, if you've been in admin during the course of a franchise period you should NOT be allowed in Super League for the following 3 years.

i voted wire because of fans like you.
two can play at that game flower.

I don't recall Catalan winning a Grand Final or the Northern Rail Cup either. I don't think you can compare applications until we know what the criteria is, and with the RFL I don't think we will ever know the exact criteria. The rules change to suit them. It's not a sport anymore.

The criteria outlined in 2008 were for 2012 werent they? plus after the decisions they publish statements explaining their verdicts and what they will require for next time

Of course they do , last time you were allowed pretty pictures of stadiums but not nearly finished ones , next time any SL club wishing to remain in SL must have gone into administration at least twice if they are in Wales

"Are Castleford a bigger club? They have been relegated from Super League twice in recent years whilst Wakefield have never been relegated from Super League" - A good example of how the franchise system works then.


"As for our ground, it's of the same standard as Castleford's" - Now that is Hilarious.

He's not wrong is he ?

I said Wakefield. It will be a shame to see them go but in my opinion they are the worst team in the comp.

Poor ground, poor attendance and a poor playing team in general.

I hope to see them in SL again soon though

2 people have voted for saints....

So that's saddened and FearTheVee accounted for.

Sam Tomkins.

Crusaders and Fax would miss out for me, and a return to semi-automatic P + R for 2014

Do you walk around with your eyes closed? We might not have the best ground, but it's as good as Castleford's at least. Besides, we also have the option of playing at a Premier League standard stadium in Oakwell. As far attendances, we average more than Crusaders and Harlequins. Oh, and we're above Crusaders and won more than Harlequins as well. Another who has jumped on the band wagon without actually thinking before he writes.

Voted Wire they are a nice little club but lets face it they are no Wigan

I voted for Crusaders and Quinns because when i find out they are part of a TV game it makes me want to run outside and stamp on as many ants as i can find.

I've voted for Wanky because they're a nice little club but they're no Wigan are they. And for all the years they were complete sh[iite[/i in SL and all of a sudden after a decent run in the league this year they think they are the cream of RL.



They can all go and take they're shirts off after a hard day of being y now.

I wanted to vote for Widnes but it isn't an option

or any team that continually gets fined for the behaviour of there fans, or turns up for a televised game with the wrong kit

its easy to find criteria to suit your arguments

Continually and twice are of course the exact same thing, I mean there were no double standards when one of your fans attacked a referee the other week right? Where's the fine there?

Yes, because they're the same as being in administration and leaving countless others out of pocket because of mismanagement...Crofton community centre could have done with that 20 grand for example...

It's easy to find criteria to suit your arguments when you make valid points instead of slinging mud.

Enjoy the championship

its breaking operational rules. we have both done it in diferrent ways.

and thank you i intend to.

EPIC FAIL

Are you sure it was 20k, I seem to remember the figure in the admin report being 7k, and Glover has paid off a number of those owed money voluntarily, how do you know Crofton Community Centre weren't one of them?

Anyway, I agree with you its not right to leave people out of pocket because you can't run a business properly , so next Tuesday when your celebrating, spare a thought for some of the hard working staff down at Wakey who will be out of a job on Wednesday because the RFL haven't stuck to their original statement that the best 14 applications will receive a new licence.

God knows who your all gonna bitch about when we go out of SL

Harlequins - average 3000 crowds in a city of millions.

Wakefield - poor crowds, poor players , poor ground.

I wouldn't mind seeing Catalans gone too. No away fans and a £400 bill per person to watch your team play them. + how much on flights for the clubs every week. An expensive pointless experiment.

I will bite on this one :

Crowds - over double the average of Crusaders and Harlequins and better than Salfords by a distance despite them having a better playing squad and a virtual guarantee of SL next season. Our crowds would almost certainly improve further with another SL licence in the bag and ability to further strengthen the club both on and off the field.

Poor Players - As an overall squad I would agree it is poor, but we do have some good players in there otherwise why would a number of them be lined up to sign contracts with other SL clubs (and not just Widnes) when we go down. You also have to factor in the Admin left us unable to strengthen the squad as has the uncertainity re a new licence. Clearly if by some miracle we received a new licence, then with another 3 years of guaranteed SL rugby, we would be able to recruit a much better squad. Final point on this - if our squad is poor what does it say for Crusaders who are currently 4 points worse off with on paper a lot better squad and Harlequins who despite having a 4 point head start still haven't won as many games as us.

Poor Ground - Agreed. However, the club has been making some general low level improvements throughout the season and have submitted plans to upgrade BV or play out of Oakwell (although the RFL dissuaded us from the latter option) if we stay in SL until a decision on Newmarket is reached early next year, therefore the facilities would no longer be poor.

So to summarise your first point is plain wrong and the other 2 only apply to our current situation rather than if we had a new SL licence.