I cant see how anythings changed we still need a ground to survive in Superleague.
if it is between us and Cas then judging by their signings they seem to be a bit more confident than us i.e Mathers three year contract! us trying to sign HKR's second team prop.
Still cant help thinking selling Brough was a terrible decision it would really have helped to be in a strong position on the field at this moment in time.

I'd imagine those clubs at risk will put clauses in the contracts that in the eventuality that they aren't given a franchise the contract will be null and void or something along those lines.

Exactly, Salford never mentioned.

Wow, shock horror!

This was always going to be the scenario, all this bleating on about, the Coach, the team, arrivals, departures – all irrelevant, no new ground – no franchise.

1. Harlequins – improve your crowds or else. Have they / will they ever improve, I don’t think so, does it matter, obviously not at Red Hall.

2. Salford – Sort a new ground – or else. Somehow in this age of austerity their Council are funding the damn thing

3. Crusaders – Sort a new ground – or else. Yep, we can do that Sir, we’ll just move the club, fill it full of Aussies and probably go bust in a year or two.

4 & 5 Wakefield & Castleford – Sort out a new ground – or else. As we all know the saga continues.


Of all the above clubs, Wakefield have performed the best where you’d think it mattered, on the field. Over the last three years we will have averaged the highest finish, we also had the young’uns winning their comp. last season. But it was never about this. As long as you play out of the M62 corridor or sit on a fairly new plastic seat, then, you’re ok.

I knew it, a lot of you knew it, Red Hall knew it, and most importantly Wakefield Trinity RLFC knew it. The ball has always been in their court – No Richard Lewis pun intended.

Licenses are decided next year not now so Brough would've been out of the equation regardless of what happened earlier on this season.

Just think its a shame that clubs with 100 yrs plus of history should be hoofed out before shabby excuses of teams like Harlequins(or whatever they are called this season) and crusaders(or whatever they are called this season). they have had a SL franchise up to now but have in reality gone to the wall(both teams) and set up elsewhere under different names and being propped up by SL numptys because they havent got the bottle to say theyve failed trying to nick support from Union land. When will they wake up and smell the coffee that they are just chucking money into bottomless pits!!!!

lets see how many supporters turn up on Friday for Crusaders vs Harlequins!!!! MMMMMM!!

Yes- but if he'd still been at the club & we'd come 5th or 6th this year ( easily achievable with the start we had) , what a better position we would of been in anyway next year

I went to crusaders this year and there would be no more than 1000 in the ground and I think the published gate was above 2000. I have been to Quins many times and the published gate is well over what is actually in the ground. Crowd figures are a game and clubs just publish what they like.

Not on paper its not but we'll see.

We can hardly blame anyone else if we go, time and time again we've stumbled and stuttered, the clocks ticking for the final time.

While i'm not ready to chuck the towel in just yet i fear the worst.

The RFL see the opportunity to be situated in such a close proximity to the BBC as a potentially fantastic opportunity to raise the profile of the game. Its a case of politics going against Wakefield and Cas on this occasion, but also as others have mentioned the Salford ground is actually under way which is another major boost for them.

No doubt they see it as a fantastic opportunity, but it's hardly a factor that should decide upon which clubs retain their SL license. What if both Trinity's and Castleford's stadium are also being constructed by the time the licenses are handed out? If thats the case Salford are by far and away the weakest club.

Is it really going to be that much of an impact if Ted can no longer be a Director. He'd still have his shareholding & would no doubt be allowed to continue to represent the club in whatever capacity the club wish. He just wouldn't be allowed to attend board meetings.

Simples.

I have posted similar on your forum last week there is speculation/ rumours call them what you want that the RFL will force Wakey & Cas to merge to allow way for Widnes, i applaud your stance wanting your own ground and identity but i believe if you don't play ball with the RFL i think you will be in trouble . It's a shame for you and Cas when the RFL throw money at the Bronco's / Quins it's a joke . Good Luck from a Hull KR fan.

I have posted similar on your forum last week there is speculation/ rumours call them what you want that the RFL will force Wakey & Cas to merge to allow way for Widnes, i applaud your stance wanting your own ground and identity but i believe if you don't play ball with the RFL i think you will be in trouble . It's a shame for you and Cas when the RFL throw money at the Bronco's / Quins it's a joke . Good Luck from a Hull KR fan.

On what basis do you think you should be kept in super league indefinitely and forever and keep out teams knocking on the door? You have to give clubs their chance. There are a few outside SL who think they could do better than the lesser SL teams, my club is obviously one of them as is Fax, Leigh and Barrow and although it is very difficult from this league to match a super league teams credentials we can at least prove that we work as a club and have the potential to do better, and if you were in this league right now can you honestly say the crowds you'd get and your stadium etc would make you stand out from those teams in any particular way?

You've had the good fortune to be taken on your word re. the stadium build and let into super league for the first round of licenses. You've had three years to get it right, and a few clubs have not really gone forwards so it's time to give someone else their shot.

We've had three years have we????
Think you need to get your facts right fella.

i personally don't know if this rumour is true or not,but it's doing the rounds
apparently glenn morrison has had his 2 year deal cut back to a 1 year deal and he's not very happy?
could be just vicious rumours though?
has anyone else heard this?

actually the facts are worse than that.

Thought he just signed a one year extension not two.

yes but we haven't had three years under the franchise system yet.
Plus most of the problems we've had especially with the stadium is not necessarally our fault. Most have been from our inept, useless, cas loving council.

Would we still be in the same position if thornes park would have gone through?????

Can't argue with that, tried but it did not work