No, not the club.
With so much controversy surrounding the franchise decisions every three years, would the RFL be more credible if it recognised the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)? Any club who genuinely think they have been unfairly treated have the opportunity to challenge the decision. More to the point, recognising CAS would give the RFL more credibility when a decision is made as they could not be accused of unfair bias or favouritism unless proven by CAS.

They already do.

Really, I could find no mention of RFL on the CAS website.
If the RFL recognise CAS, it opens the door for any club who feels they are unfairly treated in terms of franchising to challenge the RFL's decision.

The ban they gave to David Allen was challenged by UK sport and taken to CAS
No, it doesnt.

Not been funny (and you obviously know more than I do) but can you explain why this is the case? CAS as an organisation deal with disputes.
An example of one decision was when CAS ruled that Gibralter had valid grounds to join UEFA, forcing the organisation to give them membership.

Two reasons, 1, the club wouldnt have any kind of case. They applied to go through a process, went through it. CAS wont arbitrate on the basis they dont agree with it. 2, There is nothing to force the RFL to agree to arbitration.
Gibraltar are not members of UEFA.

Also there is an operational rule that stipulates that no member of SL can sue the RFL over such decisions. All clubs agree to it when they enter SL. So in theory, just plucking a random club out of thin air, Wakefield could challenge the licence decision at CAS and if they win they would be given a licence but immediately have it revoked due to breaching operational rules.

On second thought that would actually be quite funny to watch.

Its not actually their membership of SL but their membership of the RFL which they would lose. They would no longer actually be recognised as a Rugby League club.

Maurice Watkins, RFL board member is the former president, chairman and current director of the British Association for Sport and Law and a member of the FA Premier League Legal Advisory Group. Im pretty sure they know what they are doing.

No you can't say that around here! The RFL are the reason for everything that's wrong with the game you know! It's got nothing to do with clubs who can't add up, nope it's that there RFL ya know.

funny you mention CAS.....


about a hour ago,without seeing this, i posted on a aussie RL forum asking whether a player could sue his club for offering bonuses if they get picked for NSW and AUSTRALIA.......but not if they get selected for FIJI..claiming it as somekind of discrimination.....the case around auklia uate as it's a documented fact that he switched because he's get bonuses from newcastle for making the NSW/AUS teams.....which he would'nt get for playing for fiji


what you think?....it is 'discrimination' is'nt it?

Getting a bonus for being selected for Aus is effectively a bonus for playing well. Getting a bonus for being selected for Fiji would be getting a bonus for deciding you want to play for a poor rep team.

but they don't get bonuses for playing for fiji....thats the point

The RFL would never accept to it. They wouldn't want someone above them

There are already other bodies with a higher authority that the RFL, UKAD for example.