Spot on, but if they want to risk it, it is up to them, as you pointed out on another thread a couple of weeks ago, this new structure does give clubs a remit to build themselves in financial terms with regards income streams, and not all clubs will skin the cat the same way

Dont forget the Championship Clubs by their very nature are probably better organised than some SL clubs because they have had to be to survive

Headhunter, they clearly weren't a well run club, especially after the RFL got involved.

All those people you disingenuously called flat cappers so it coming! Most if those flat cappers wanted licensing to work fairly and saw this coming - Celtic were the thin end if the wedge.

Parachuting a club into SL when unprepared doesn't work, you are correct, so why the hell bang on about creating new "franchises"?

Surely the answer is to invest in and improve what we have instead of strangling them? Give a sporting goal to aim to raise enthusiasm at a club?

Just keep digging from here

Again Headhunter, where are the other options?

Fev are building a stronger club, that should be applauded and encouraged, they are already probably a better run club than some in SL, because they have to be

Headhunter. Which club do you go and watch, week in week out? Are you embarrassed to say that you don't actually watch live games and aren't a fan? Don't be, we're all friends on here.

They clearly weren't a well run club, they were terribly run which is why they failed, although to be fair at the time I don't remember anyone questioning the running of the club, just the fact that they were 'Welsh'. I'm also pretty sure I've never personally called anyone a 'flat capper'. Again I'm not sure what this has to do with this debate. I haven't ever once talked about 'creating new franchises' so I'm not sure what you are talking about there, what I'm opposed to is a system that sees Super League limiting itself and holding itself back so that clubs with little potential can compete. The system of P&R that you seemingly advocate is designed for exactly what you're just talked about, parachuting unprepared clubs into Super League at short notice.

And Starbug, I've already answered your question. Super League should be comprised of the strongest 12 (or 14) teams. If Featherstone or any other clubs are part of that then they should be in, that's what the licensing system is. The problem comes when, in order to allow the likes of Featherstone to be included, people want to implement a system that means Super League is not necessarily made up of the strongest 12 teams. If Featherstone need to rely on an on-field lottery as the only means of winning promotion, are they really one of the strongest 12 clubs? Changing the system seems be an admission that they aren't, and what I can't understand is what is so special about clubs like Featherstone that the rest need to be held back for their sake.

Looks like he's ignoring said question ... again!

You obviously didnt read my posts on the subject at the time then , I was clear without any anti Welsh or new club content, and unfortunatly the RFL started licencing in such a blatantly biased way it was doomed to fail, and it has failed only 1 or 2 clubs are actually operating susstainably, the rest are completely ' unprepared ' as it is

Team or club? , make your mind up? , and at what point do you decide who is the strongest club ? , how much debt is acceptable? , at this current moment probably half of SL clubs have more debt than Fev or even Fax,Leigh,Sheffield, probably the whole of the Championships

The only way licencing would have worked would have been for it to be completely fair ( any financial issues resulting in relegation ) and for the RFL to have made genuine attempts to improve the Championships to put pressure on the SL clubs

Instead we had a ' Gentlemans Club ' arrangement, it has done considerable damage to the sport

Poor implementation doesn't mean the system itself is wrong. If you thought removing promotion and relegation would instantly mean all SL clubs were turning a profit then obviously that's an unrealistic expectation. The fact is that, in principle, the licensing system allows for far more sustainability and growth than automatic P&R. And I don't see how anyone can dispute that.

It does ' allow for it ' , but it also needs the fans to be willing to accept that it could take 20 years before they play a truly meaningful match again, and that they wont do, and the club owners know that

That was the point of the licensing criteria, it wasn't really transparent and apparently you think that it was somehow 'unfair', but in reality it would be impossible to have a system that pleased everyone. That's still better than relying on one factor alone and completely ignoring everything else which is what automatic P&R does.That's nonsense, relegating clubs for arbitrary reasons would be stupid especially if there were no better alternatives. A club in debt may still be a better option than one in the lower leagues without debt, if they are able to compete on the field then at the end of the day that's the most important thing. And yet again, what it comes down to is that you're asking the RFL to do the work of Championship clubs for them. Apart from being completely ridiculous and unfair, I don't know why you would expect them to do this when the majority of Championship clubs have little potential for growth, it would just be a waste of money and time. The RFL couldn't magically make clubs like Leigh and Featherstone compete with Leeds and Wigan even if they wanted to, it just isn't going to happen without standards at the top being reduced.
It hasn't 'damaged' anyone, the national team is as strong as it has ever been and the on-field product is as good as I can remember.

So selecting the licences doesnt need to be fair, you then contradict yourself in the same thread, then you say Championship clubs cannot ' magically ' match Leeds and Wigan, well neither can the rest of SL, it has damaged the sport by opening up a bigger gap between SL and the rest and resulting in alienating a sizeable amount of Championship fans from attending neutral events and Internationals

It depends on your definition of a meaningful match. I don't go to matches to look at the league table on the off-chance that one of the clubs may end up being promoted to Super League at some unspecified point in the future. Amateur teams up and down the country play what would by your definition be 'meaningless matches' every week. TBH I would class pretty much all of Leigh's SL season as meaningless matches since they would turn up and inevitably get beaten by 60 or 70 points every week.

The problem British RL has is that there aren't enough strong clubs outside Super League. Ideally we'd have 4 or 5 strong teams challenging for promotion and that would be fine, but when the only real alternatives are clubs like Featherstone and Leigh, teams based in very small towns that are dwarfed by massive local competition, then the system doesn't really work.

But this season's SL is one of the most even in history? Leeds have finished 5th the last two years. Obviously not all the clubs are as big as them, but London aside at least they are all competitive. If Championship fans want to spite themselves by not attending neutral events then TBH that's stupid and their loss.

Which is what we have been telling you for bloody years you muppet, so ALL you can do is improve everybody, and hope some improve enough to create genuine competition for SL places