Medway have a great set-up but they've only been running an open age side for one year. If a similar junior set-up was required for CC1 then there would be Medway in the league and nobody else. Their time will probably come but right now they have no chance.

As for the rest I agree 100%.

Who has said we should do that?

And a heartland team in the championships would never be filled with overseas players would it? We would never see a sustained and deliberate attempt to circumvent the cap from a heartland team would we?

Even someone as biased and blinkered as you has to accept that if an expansion side is going to be able to compete on an equal footing they need to be in competition for the same player pool, and whilst a player may be willing to accept playing part-time for the club at the end of his street for part-time wages, he probably wont be able to move to the other end of the country for a part-time wage.

So please give us your ' subjective ' scale of ' eveness ' to make sure all clubs compete on an even footing ?

How much extra salary cap money and quota excemptions makes something fair ?

£ 50 grand ? , 100 ? , 150 ?

4 players ? , 5 ? , 6 ? , 15 ?

How much extra RFL funding through development should they be given to spend on players ? £ 50 grand ? , !00 ? , 200 ?

Earlier in one thread or another it was stated that if existing CC1 teams are complaining about the amount of travelling they will have to do with the new teams coming in then they should drop down to a regional league.

I find it amusing that people now want a 'level playing field' regarding the salary cap for the new teams.
My answer to that would be if the expansion teams can not compete in this league with the same cap as everyone else then perhaps they should join a regional league.

Personally I would look at giving the 5 or 6 players who had SL experience and were at the upper end of the quality scale, players who could combine a playing position with coaching and community development roles.

Why? the salary cap is set at a level which is beneficial for the heartland Championship sides and they have the added advantage of having SL quality academies (funded by other clubs) on their doorstep. Im not sure why Leigh should receive and advantage purely on the basis they are near Wigan.

The SC doesnt level the playing field, it artificially stacks the deck in favour of some sides based purely on location. I thought you were against that?

Surely equality means that everyone is playing under the same rules. What you are suggesting to me seems to be going down the road so called 'positive discrimination' which is wrong and never works in any walk of life.
If i want to join a club then i would expect to abide by the rules of that club, i would not expect any special treatment or favours from the existing members.

You would need to be a real moron to equate it to 'positive discrimination'. Equality doesnt mean playing under the same rules, do you know why? Because for the reasons i have already set out, the rules dont affect everyone in the same way. If you are disproportionately affected by a rule then it doesnt apply equally does it.

Your p!$$ing in the wind with this one RB
Theres no such thing as a level playing field with this lot.
Its favouritism with plenty of f***ups all the way.
Oh and arguing just for the sake of it.

So what you are saying is that the rules should be changed but only for the new members of the club, but existing members of the club should stop moaning about the extra travelling, lower standards and poorer crowds etc or leave the club?

No, not at all. If the SC rules were rejigged to better benefit the heartland clubs i would be in favour of it. I have no affiliation to the current system, if it can be changed for something better then we should do it.

But I would think it very naive to think that expansion teams exist in the same space as heartland teams, they dont and there is no reason we shouldnt accept that.

Regardless of what the salary cap is clubs should only spend what they can afford.
However i don't see how we can have different rules for different teams. My club for example, Doncaster, is not in the heartlands or on the doorstep of a SL club, but also is not an expansion area. so where do we fit in?

Doncaster, whilst not a heartland side, is comfortably in commuting distance for a huge part of the heartland player pool. Northampton isnt.

It's no wonder RL fans in general are known as working class numpties.. RB it really isn't hard to understand; Starbug's lost it with old age don't follow him down the path of the deluded side.

At Doncaster players only get paid if they play. They are not selected if they do not fully commit to training.
Much of our training is at Lindholme which is not in central Doncaster.
I work in Leeds and a couple of my colleagues are from Cas/Wakey and have told me on more than one occasion of personal friends who were offered a deal with the Dons but turned them down because after their travelling expenses for training would be virtually playing for nothing.
We are not an expansion team though so it's ok.

Is it the salary cap which is preventing Doncaster paying any more in Wages? If so then its clear the SC is set at the wrong level. If not then your point isnt relevant.

Regardless of what the cap is we can only pay what we can afford in order to stay in the black. What i am saying is that although not in an expansion area we still struggle with attracting players from any distance.

But thats because you dont have any money. Im not advocating giving Northampton extra money, simply allowing them to spend a bit more, if they have it, to balance out the additional cost to players should they sign for Northampton above other, heartland clubs.

Do you really think that is fair?

I admit i do not know the details of what we are, or are not spending at Donny in relation to the cap, we only spend an affordable amount. But i know we are only allowed to spend the same as Rochdale or Oldham for example who have a bigger pool of players to pick from in their locality

Either what you are spending is limited by the SC, or it is limited by your own finances. Its one or the other.

So you agree that their failure was due to the owner and not any of the points raised in the OP.

I wasn't suggesting that it was exactly the same situation at Wakefield, my point was that the same would happen to any club if the backer pulled out. If Davy pulled out of Huddersfield, O'Connor pulled out of Widnes etc they would go the same way as the Crusaders did, virtually no clubs are self-sustainable and so to expect that Celtic Crusaders should have been before they were allowed entry isn't really fair. Maybe the RFL should have been more dilligent regarding Samuel, but there was no way they could have known that he would do what he did, at the time it appeared that he was completely committed to the club. And if he had remained committed, I'm pretty sure Celtic Crusaders would be a relatively strong SL club today. The same goes for the club when they were based in Wrexham.

So if they then finish in the top 2/3 , has your subjective ' allowance been fair ? , or if they finish in the bottom 2/3 , have you been unfair ?

So you are advocating the RFL funding players wages for selective clubs , as they did for the Celtic Crusaders

The advantage of having SL academies on their doorstep is balanced by having SL clubs take the pick of all the best young talent available , Expansion clubs dont have that problem , similarily to the Cumbrian clubs they get a bigger share of the talented juniors compared to clubs with SL neighbours

Are you blaming Championship clubs for the SL clubs signing overseas players instead of local talent ? , that they obviously have to then release , or would you rather they retain 30 juniors but not play them , if the SL clubs want all the talent , and they do , then that isn't the fault of non SL clubs

If you are disproportionately affected by a rule , it is up to you to change the way you operate so that you aren't , then it is fair , but attempting ' subjective ' balance is impossible , anybody who thinks it isn't is a moron

Why would they need re jigging , they are already there to benifit the sport , if you have a better idea , please tell us ?