There are some rather thought-lacking replies in this thread, mainly by those wanting to see the end of licensing clutching at whatever excuse they can to support their view.

Anyone who is saying that the RFL have already decided who will go down and who will go up is a paranoid idiot. All that has been said is that a club WILL go down. Why? Most likely because the RFL have decided that it is not financially viable (or in the interests of the attractiveness and competitiveness of the competition) to expand the competition in 2012. So in order for "at least one club" to come up from the Championship (as was stated), then a club WILL go down.

How anyone can read into that that the RFL have decided the clubs already is beyond me.

I am neither for or against P&R or licensing. We have tried one, and are in the middle of another so might as well give it a shot and see how it goes before judging it. And any club that struggles during that period cannot instantly be the result of licensing like most P&R supporters like to claim, as clubs were struggling before.

Some people just need to get a grip.

Could it be that the RFL know the financial viability of a particular SL club is much worse than any of us think?

If you finish bottom for the next 2 year which i think you will you deserve to in the other divison.

A any specific reasoning for this wisdom that you've shared with us?

Indeed, I said it for ages , If we at Hull had a team like Saints and played there style of rugby , We'd pull in a crowd of 20k +. Why Saints dont get these crowds is baffling.

At least this announcement will end all the people on the other recent threads stating " it doesn't mean a club dropping out , they might expand the comp "

No doubt there will be a few twitching bums out there and a few phone calls in the morning to various interested parties [ councils and developers

Being a resident of England I know the residents of England think your musings on this subject are hilarious.

Surely saying that one club will be relegated from SL and one Championship club will be given a SL licence, they are pre-judging licence applications 2 years early?

No , What they are saying is that the current SL clubs applications will be judged against each other and the clubs applying from outside will be judged against each other , but not all together

Harlequins - what is the point ????????
Hardly ever get crowds above 3,000.

But that's madness!

You could end up with a Championship club being moved up to SL that isn't as good as the SL club it replaced, because they were not competing against each other?

Surely this cannot be right?

which if you go back to before the first franchise you will see a fair few people in their explanation of the franchise process explained this would be exactly the case

I dont really see any other conclusion

Leigh, whats the point, an area we already have a strong SL team and they even had to have the RFL bail them out on Champ one...

You mean like promotion and relegation?!

Nope, that seems pretty straight forward by comparison. At least the relegated club would have a chance to get back up the following season and, if the promoted club can't cut it, they're out pretty sharpish.

Three years is a long time to wait, and a club may never fully recover from it.

That's not the impression Steve O'Connor was under when interviewed as a guest on radio manchester in may last year.He wasn't expecting any special treatment but when asked would he be surprised if Widnes were not granted a licence he replied that he would be 'amazed'.

oh well, they should definately have got one if it would 'amaze' steve o'connor

This is a discussion about SL , why bring Leigh into it ?

He shouldn't have been "amazed". He should have recognised the political fall out within the game that would have occurred had a club who recently came out of administration been granted a licence - it would have sent out the wrong message. I certainly would be amazed if they don't get one in 2012.

Exactly. It really amazes me how Widnes fans think that being in administration only a few months before is irrelevant.

It's not the impression of a chairman though,who has been told quite clearly that previous financial problems would put his clubs bid at a dis- advantage,would you not agree?

Then why didn't the RFL make this absolutely clear to SOC before hand?

Instead they led him to believe that, as long as the business plan was good, the recent admin wouldn't be a problem. The business was not criticized in the subsequent report. Only the administration was given as the reason for rejection, and a dig at the youth development, which they hitherto deemed to be "World Class".

If we don't have the new stadium sorted by franchise time then I and most Trinity fans would agree we don't deserve a new franchise . If the new community stadium is sorted by then and theres alot of postive comments from people in the know that this will happen then we shouldn't have any problem getting a franchise.
There are only 3 big clubs in Rugby League Leeds , Wigan and Hull FC and a well run Trinity with decent facilities would be in a group of 6 or 7 behind them.
The City of Wakefield is big enough to support a SL side both crowd wise and business support, we're the biggest City in England without a pro football team. Wakefield is a Rugby League City. Last seasons attendances were down but thats down to a combination of factors that effected us last season and Belle Vue holds us back. Once we get out of there the better.
On the playing side CC semi final & 5th place finish in the last 2 seasons.
Youth development Academy grand final winner and league leaders last season.
Community Our award winning community team do a great job in the school in the area and been for a number of years.
What holds us back is the stadium and has done for years and thats getting sorted, If every club that has been advised to sort ther stadium out do improve or move to new stadiums then the RFL decision would be interesting.