do you? thats interesting considering you asking me what i meant by lower. Strangely it seems to be a pretty similar definition. Makes me wonder why you bothered to ask for clarification then answer your own question.

to anyone who wasnt a silly old troll it would look as if i was suggesting that we shouldnt build our competition around not being the crappest, but building around being the best. Everything else you have made up in your sweet little head. a good job we dont have one then isnt it.

cannot win the play offs and the GF ?

not without winning more than they lose, not realistically no.

Could it happen ?

"Faxhali" You obviously have a very short memory. Its not that long ago that Halifax were in deep trouble and asked fans of all SL clubs to attend a game to provide them with enough money to keep them afloat. I was one of the fans that supported your club on that occasion. Is that how you repay us?

Exactly. Myself included.

What an idiot.

yes, there is a very small possibility,

there is also a very small possibility that every game could end in a draw bar 5, where one club loses 3 games and wins 2 and as such finishes top of the table having lost more than they won.

But these inconsequentially small possibilities only seem to matter to you.

Not a lot to play for then have they ?

, make your mind up , they either have something to play for that is worthwhile , or they dont , and no matter how remote that possibility , it is a farce that a club can lose more games than it wins and win the sporting competition it is in

How can a club lose 3 games , win 2 games , draw the rest and finish above a club that draws all of them ?

trolly mctroll-troll confuses two plainly different things. any league table allows a small possibility of that happening.

simple mathematics.

Enlighten us oh wise one ?

27 game SL season.

Draw 27 = 27 points.

Draw 22, win 2 and lose 3 = 26 points.

Team that draws them all does better.

Orrr , why did you have to do that



I really wanted to see how he'ed worm his way out of this one

ahh i did add that up wrong. Using football scoring!

Tis possible in the championships though

, Haleluah

There are various reasons why Sheffield Wednesday are in their current position, like you said it was mainly down to buying poor players and paying them premiership wages, this continued for around 6 years following their relegation from the Premier League. Obviously Newcastle were able to do this easily because they had a good coach and players who were decent enough for premier league standard. Anyway my football clubs triumphs and tribulations are not really the point I was trying to make.

In some ways it's hard to compare clubs like Wakey and SWFC, in fact almost impossible (for obvious reasons) but the fact that even through our relegations and almost going into admin earlier this season, with a new chairman, and a restructure of the BOD, a bit of extra investment, the club is in a much healthier condition, and finally have the chance to build properly. Of course you only have to look at clubs like Fulham, Bolton, Manchester City and Blackpool to see what can be achieved for a football club and to rise from the ashes, so to speak.

I doubt that lesser RL clubs have such opportunities and is the sole reason why I have become so fed up with the sport.

A few years ago, they'd have talked about Leeds United, not Sheffield Wednesday... We're not famous anymore

For me, the game has always been about excitement, not money. I want to watch a sport that gives all teams the chance to be recognised for a sucessful season by getting to play in the league above. You obviously would prefer clubs to be wrongly (imo) given the right to the top division based purely on their locality and stadium and allow them to stay there despite years of poor results. I just don't think that's fair.
I also think you are trolling in this thread, so that's me done here now. Nighty night.

I suppose franchising a mix of the two. All the current super league clubs got there on playing merit, as the first franchises just gave licences to the top twelve plus the grand finalists. To get up there from the championship, you have to play your way there by winning something. It's the thought of going down when you are mid-table that is galling (although I doubt that will be our issue this year!).

Slugger , you weren't having to compete with a club that was plainly out of it's depth but being allowed to sign player that were ineligible to other clubs and paying them ' privately ' , it really galled at the time , I do however have a huge amount of sympathy for your plight , it is something we all pointed out when licensing was first mentioned

That's a fair point. I suppose what I mean is if everyone had played by the rules

All teams? Or just those in the semipro ranks? Where's the demand that the team finishing bottom of Championship 1 be relegated to the amateur ranks to make way for the winner of the RLCN?

Don't think London or Catalans originally qualified in any way other than location.

Where is the demand for clubs in the RLCN to be promoted to the Championships ?

If there was a demand for it , then I dont think you'd have many saying it shouldn't happen , given that we dont have enough clubs in the Championships as it is , maybe if the RFL stopped tipping 100's of 1,000's into trying to manufacture SL clubs that are totally out of their depth we would have some clubs moving up , and possibly moving down as well