It seems that there are several SL clubs that can't function as SL clubs.

Anyone remember what happened to Blue Sox creditors when they exited administration? Were they paid 100% of what they were owed?

Which year would you happen to be talking about?

Halifax didn't go into admin.

Hopefully next year we'll overspend, forget to bring our kit and knock our new stand down.

Will that help fit into the "club"?

I thought they did in 1990 after spending too much in the David Brook era. If not they certainly came close before Gartland took over. I also remember throwing a few quid into a bucket for the "save Fax" fund a few years back as well.

My apologies - that's correct. I was refering the previous poster to the Blue Sox club as was. So yes, Halifax have let down creditors in the past.

Potter back in. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/18706139

Potter back in. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/18706139

from fans of any super league club, do you think the bulls should stay in super league?

Name of your club you support:
Answer: Yes/No
Why:

would be interesting to hear every fans thought on the matter.

Yes they should stay in super league. I support wigan and I think they should stay in the super league because there is not one championship club who could realistically take their place.

I'm in favour for a return to promotion and relegation though and I hope we scrap the franchising system.

I don't want to lose a strong Bradford from the SL, but the number of teams in the top division has to be reduced and this is an opportunity to do it. I'd implement a two-tier SL and put Bradford in the bottom one, with promotion and relegation between these two divisions only. Can't see it, the RFL will stick with 14 teams and we'll be having this discussion about another club within 12 months.

Yes if they do not liquidate. No if they do.

I've mulled over this and I'm edging towards no.

For a club like Cas, the income we get from a game like the Bulls on matchday is significant compared to the likes of say, Huddersfield.

But there is a moral decision. If it was administration and exit through CVA then no. But if the club go bust and are liquidated then they should be relegated. The clubs in the divisions below should get to have their day in the sun too and so I think it's only right if Bradford are not given back their licence.

Equally, not having Bradford in Super League - purely for selfish reasons - means that we have a realistically higher chance of finishing higher up the table, winning more games and also looking at better players, which in turn can drive up our own income.

Additionally, for sporting and rugby league reasons, having Bradford down in the lower leagues for a couple of seasons will add massive value to any television contract down in the Championships, sponsorships and also attendances. The profile of having such a team in those divisions could help strengthen the game in some respects. Having stronger lower divisions is significant if we're ever going to grow the game and have more competitive leagues and teams.

Anyone can play in super league ,widnes have proved it this year

They finished mid table in the championship and still won matches this season imagine if they had promoted one of the good ones?

You keep the poop that is the bulls we don't want them cluttering up our league

So you don't think there is a club strong enough to replace Bradford but would bring back P&R and guarantee one of these clubs that 'can't realistically take their place' a place in SL every season?

to answer the OP, I would like to see Bradford survive, ideally in SL and rebuild back to their glory days, I can't see this being acheived with P&R due to cost of over-reaching to avoid relegation!