I am all for the inclusion of Toulouse - once they meet the criteria set out. Can't you read or comprehend what i put in my previous post about Toulouse? You're an idiot.

So location and a stadium are all that is relevant to you as far as expanding the game is concerned ?

the bit about P+R


So clubs in the championship do have more full time players,




so thats one less reason against having Toulouse in the championship in the first place isnt it


relative to what?

in General Championship clubs are poor compared to SL clubs but rich compared to Championship one clubs,




you mean contracts that could have been broken by a stipulation almost universally in SL contracts that they are cancelled on relegation?

or are we rewarding Salford for not being professional enough to prepare for this eventuality? as we would have done Leigh?


imagine your outcry if they didnt



how the f'ck is other clubs not being able to afford an away trip to Toulouse possibly one of Toulouse's failings











yeah, good argument

Absolute garbage is the only way to describe these posts , you ignore the points on some , pretend that one club having 1/2 extra full time players makes any sort of difference in another , suggest that clubs in one league are richer than other when all are not anywhere near being close to being described as ' Rich ' , in fact 2 clubs this year have gone bust in the higher league , total rubbish

Give up while you still can

not one of those clubs has started from nothing and built themselves through the leagues, as is bottom up expansion

in fact only one club in the last 90 years has come from amateur to semi-pro and they are still quite abit away from pro, and it woudl still be a huge jump whenever/if they ever make it

toulouse arent going to produce a team of SL players outside SL and les catalans arent going to produce two

ok we should put Toulouse in championship 1,

there would be huge advantages and benefits to everyone

But toulouse are already in the Championship, is the West Yorkshire smog addling your brain?

Personally, before they try and start a SL team in Paris, I'd prefer FFRX13 to recognise the French Wheelchair Rugby League.

They have actually adopted the murderball league in France, which is sponsored by the RFU over here, leaving a 12 team domestic league in strife, in the country that invented the sport.

What on earth has this got to do with the thread?

expansion clubs should be independant of the same criteria heartland clubs are judged on.

expecting a club that is in an expansion area to rank on the same measures as clubs with everything going for them is dumb

what happened to the italics?

there are enough heartland clubs in SL.

the only way the RFL should allow more heartland clubs in ie leigh, widnes, fax is at the cost of another heartland clubs

the RFL then has to do its utmost to create spots for expansion sides and then back them to the hilt

good point

I presume you support the same argument for the NRL and believe that the CC should only be in if an existing Sydeny NRL team relocates? No? Thought not!

Actually cas did it a bit more recentley than that but lets not split hairs.

Whether they should be or not is irrelevant at this point. The rules, as have been stated (if you believe the sources and statements of the RFL) say that TO will have to obey the same rules as everyone else, and would make a mockery of the system if a team that has met the required criteria would miss out (or a SL team be chucked out) if a team hasn't met these objectives.

I agree that clubs outside the North West and Yorkshire regions should be under different criteria due to the differing challenges these clubs face (attracting players, sponsors, fans, media attention, etc). But I am totally against changing rules in the middle of a stated period. If they want to change the rules, they have to do it after the next franchise period,

this would only be the case if you misunderstood the rules regarding franchises and criteria

not wanting to go through all this again, but franchising isnt a box ticking excercise, it never was and was never advertised as such

The game and it's systems have totally changed over 90 years, so it is pointless using the time frame to show why something today under the modern system with the advantages we have now couldn't work. Differing media systems, differing seasons, differing levels of professionalism, differing numbers of amateur clubs in areas, etc.
If you want to use that argument, then you have to look at the number of [isuccessful[/i clubs that have come from the top down system.

The way our leagues are do not reward or even help best develop clubs that want to work from bottom up, which is why its success rate has been very slow since the introduction of the RLC. There is no continuous path; rather a staggered and blocked path that makes progression difficult or near enough impossible. The Crusaders aren't an exact example of bottom up progression, but the amateur base was set before they started. It's probably the nearest you'll get under the current set up.

The rules and set up basically make bottom up expansion an almost impossible task. Saying that, the new rules make top-down expansion just as difficult. The RFL, in all their wisdom, have tried to make a system that is a bit of each and made it crap both ways if they want to encourage expansion. There needs to be a SERIOUS look into club development at the RFL to help clubs progress to a more professional set-up, and at the same time needs to be a clear criteria set to anyone wanting to make the plunge on a top-down set-up (i.e. capital up front, plans for progression, etc,) as they will cleary be on a different set of rules to everyone else.

It's daft to expect everyone to sing off the same hymm sheet when in reality these clubs aren't all going to be the same "religion" let alone go to the same church. I think the RFL know what they want, but just don't know how to go about setting it up fairly and without p*ssing off and confusing everyone!

In the case of actually being allowed to apply for SL in 2012, it pretty much was advertised as a "you have to get to a GF or win the NRC or you won't be able to apply" box ticking exercise.

And RL's main media output, Sky, seemed convinced it was all a box ticking exercise from day one. Not saying it is or it isn't here, but you'd have thought the RFL's press officer or media officer or whatever would have had a word or made a statement if a major media outlet was misinforming their supporters?

Well, we've been told by the RFL countless times that any prospective SL club has to tick the box of reaching a final.

they wont stop Paris from being in SL if they want too.

the meetings Richard Lewis is having with the backers of the club are clearly about a SL franchise, not an NL1 team. so clearly the rules dont apply.

if they dont apply to paris they shouldnt apply to toulose either

If they don't apply to Paris, why should they apply to any other club? And if they don't apply to any other club, what is the point in having rules?

I suppose if you could get the french tv to stump up the money. If you could guarentee that then it would be a good idea.

Toulouse, Paris, Barrow in. 1 West Yorkshire team out then

?

Why?

There's a world of difference between the two - just because they are in the same country doesn't mean they have to be treated the same. Each one should be judged on its merits.

Stade Francais have gone from being a club watched by a couple of hundred expat southerners, in a city with little rugby interest, to being the worlds richest rugby club. They should be the poster boy for expansion teams. They have extremely wealthy owners, some very high profile fans (Jacques Chirac for example) & lots of government connections. *If* they put in a *serious* bid, the RFL would be nuts to turn them away IMO, provided they get some guarantees about the longevity of the commitment. If a London premiership football club came to the RFL and said "£5 million a year isn't very much, we want a team", the same arguments would apply.

Obviously there's potential problems with enforcing the salary cap on them and issues with them hiring away a bunch of top players from the NRL. Maybe there's a case for making them join the championship for a year first, to sort out travel and other operational things, but it seems a bit pointless/unfair to have an operation with a playing budget (for RU) which is more than 10 times the salary cap in the NRL or SL competing with say Keighley or Batley?

Toulouse is (currently) a championship sized club, with championship sized revenues and a couple of previous failed SL bids. They finished in a relegation position this year and with fewer imports next year, it's hard to see how that is going to improve in 2010. Unless they can show that there'll be millions of euros extra funding available from local government if they go up, it's hard to make an on-field or financial argument for them to be treated as a special case.

Chances are, nothing will come of it, but it would be crazy just to reject it out of hand.