It's dictated by which competition you're playing in. The A license means that we'll be playing in SL for 9 years, hence securing that portion of our turnover.

Shiite is shiite, no matter how much you try and polish it

Some of it is playing for Souths.

Judging by our relative league position from last year I 'm not sure how we could be deemed to be going backwards. Not brilliant obviously - but backwards ? Nah.

Why don't you respond to my genuine answer to your genuine question instead of piggy backing to get your post count up?

Trust me - he could care less about his post count.

I thought the license was for 3 years.......

And are we no all in Super League, one competition? Or are we playing in the "stupid people with no passion running the club" league?

Exactly how I see it

I'd guess we scored a point for each of the following
Capacity of 12,000 +
Premier competition standard ground
Average crowd of 10,000 +
Operating at 40 per cent full
Turn over £4million
Solvent
Junior development
No salary cap breaches
Contribution to competition

But not this one:
No club within 20 miles

So 9 points. On the basis of current criteria, we'd get 8 (losing a point on the contribution to competition point due to our league position last year). Realistically we're OK on the crowd numbers and turnover, even if they fall from current levels slightly, and from a solvency perspective we have reduced levels of debt.

As you say, there is a risk of a significant fall in attendances if we don't start performing to our potential. I do think that we're better placed than most clubs to benefit from the quota and homegrown regulations in 2011. We'll probably have 16 British players out of 17 tomorrow (admittedly not by choice) which puts us in a strong position when the quota drops to 5 and the homegrown requirement increases to 8. We need some inspirational quota recruitment, though.

Reviewed every 3 years, but can only drop 1 grade per review.

Although our league postion does show we are above last season standing the direction of the club including the standard of rugby and the sub standard players we sign it would appear to me we are going backwards rather than forwards imo

We haven't lost 66-6 yet this season have we?

There's 6 points we could loose in a year!

Are you being deliberately obtuse?



We can only drop one grade per review, and we have to drop to a C grade before we can have our licence revoked. That gives us a minimum of 9 years (three reviews) in SL.

There are other leagues we would be playing in if we lost our licence - ones without Sky funding. So having an A licence has secured the Sky funding for 9 years because it guarantees that we'll be in SL for 9 years.

Is that any clearer?

Results don't always tell the full story

possibly, but the article I read definatly stated that a club could only drop down 1 grade a year.

We could lose all of them and still only drop one grade.

Finished your post off for you.

Then the system is floored

To summarise a response to your answer I agree in particular our home form must improve in order to maintain the massive crowd and merchandise gains we have enjoyed even during a serious economic downturn (albeit your claim that we will get < 10K crowds any time soon is pure speculation and nothing else). The way the club will do that is to improve its recruitment and retention decision making from that it has delivered in the previous few years. That is the single most important on field strategy we need to get right in the next two years. We are not badly placed in terms of non quota players - far better than some - but we need top quality in key areas to augment this.

That being said your claim that we are "shiite" is not backed by fact - we've won more than we have lost this season and are better than we were last year despite another particularly severe ongoing injury list handicap and outside isa influences. We are not playing particularly well but the league is close and facts are facts - we were 4 points from the top of the league going into this weekend.

So you make some reasonable points but a look at the table suggests that you are overstating our demise when infact we have improved over the previous season's efforts as our position in the table shows. That is fact whereas you simply claim the opposite of fact.

Your answer to my question contained some entirely fair points. Alas your quote above shows once again you lack consistency in terms of offering sensible debate, instead resorting to more petty garbage similar in standard to some of your previous efforts such as:

"you are a copper"
"go to bed"
"blinkered"
"idiot"
"fool" etc. etc.

so you'd be as happy with that (and a real chance of dropping out the league at the next review before we get a chance to turn things round) as you would be with what we have?

Is it?



Maybe "the brother" could carpet it for them.

If you are saying we need to improve recruitment and retention decisions regarding the playing staff I totally agree. FWIW I think Agar has already shown good signs in that respect notwithstanding visa issues beyond the club's control.

Quite possibly. That, however, is not our problem.

If he has any chance of success he needs a massive shake up of the squad during the off season with no inteference from the board as to who they would like

And why not, we all have opinions.