The minimum standards and the potential ' licence ' situation for the Championship in 2012

I do hope you are wrong , introducing licensing to the competition will ruin what little credibility we have left

The minimum standards refer to the stadia requirements and the proposed introduction of P&R as it initially was between SL and the then NFP/NL1. Whereby a team tops Champ 1 and if they meet the required standards they will be promoted to the Championship replacing the bottom placed club in the Championship. That information can be found in the RFL statement on their website and also in League Express.

The 'licencing' is not licencing, the RFL statement outlines P&R between the two divisions so that is the plan. The application scenario is my own theory as to what will happen between March and September this year based on recent history of the restructuring of a division (SL) based on set criteria and some of the wording in the RFL statement - "By September of this year we hope to be in a position to announce the names of the clubs who will compete in the Championships in 2012".

I see it as logical that the RFL will want to ensure that they start with the best clubs possible in the higher of the two divisions rather than leave it to P&R to decide (just as they did with SL after 200icon_cool.gif. Why would they need to announce the teams competing in "the Championships" and not just those new entrants to Championship 1 if they were not looking to reconfigure the divisions and constituent clubs based on their minimum standards.

I don't know and haven't seen anything not in the public domain. I am just expressing my opinion.

What clubs should do (as Widnes have done) is ensure that you can meet the non critical criteria, "Qualify" for the chosen league and then play rubbish with minimum cost for players until you are "moved".

Seems a fine plan to me.

I think it's great that the game on the field is now seen as a periphery to the Rugby League system..

can we play for the old championship trophy please wigan??

Short term pain long term gain for the clubs?

Basically it's a "spend all your money on the playing side and stay average/mediocre forever" or "invest your money, be rubbish for a bit, then come strong once everything has fallen into place" choice for some clubs.

It's more like a choice of "spend up to the £300K salary cap, same as most of the other teams in the division" or "break the rules, have a strong team and hope no-one finds out". The former is AFAIK, what all of the SL wannabees are doing.

It's nice to see that you (wiganermike) have put forward a thought through argument, unlike some of the "keyboard warriors".



You say that Oldham dominated CH1 last season - were they promoted? Did they deserve promotion. Will they deserve promotion this year, or next year? Do they deserve promotion "on Paper"? Clubs in the championship fluctuate dramatically. Those who are strong one year are not always strong the next. The point is that if Hunslet have a bad season they may really suffer next year and no longer be the dominant side that you suggest.

I would suggest that all of the clubs currently in Ch1 could put forward a reasoned argument for inclusion into the higher division - some stronger than others. Some of the clubs in both divisions are pumping all their funds toward 1st team performance, others are investing in youth and community. IMO there are definately at least 4 clubs strong enough to dislodge Hunslet and I am not intending to insult Hunslet, it's just how it is.

.

Unless a majority of Turkeys are given a good enough reason to .

Gateshead have already "merged" as have Sheffield.

London Skolars could merge with ?

York and ??????

If there HAVE to be mergers (and SL should take the lead to show how it should be done) then to save a club a shed load of money why not Saints & Wigan?

Or dont spend much on the 1 st team , be crap , have a ' marketing bloke/woman ' on 35 K , a full time CEO [ even if you dont need him/her ] on 40 K , run a scholarship and academy [ just to have a SL club nick anybody decent in exchange for a pre season match against their u 18 ;'s that nobody is interested in ] , nice shiny offices for everybody , but lose all your fans and go bust

By the time everything has fallen into place , everybody is watching something/body else

well no wonder you are confusing everyone if you are simply using words because other people used them and not because their meaning is what you want to put across.

But you are forgetting that sport is not an ' exact ' science , and somebody has to come bottom every year

I wasn't even considering the double funded merge option , because that quite simply isn't going to happen

The increase in funding ? , do you know how much it is ? , it will cover 60/70 grand to have a Scholoarship and academy ?

It isn't about not wanting to make a contribution , its about survival

no, i dont, because it is a consultation paper, put out to discuss that type of thing. If you read and understood the release i wouldnt have to tell you that every 5 pages.


[i would still probably shrug off the loss of a club which had no youth development, no community aspect, and was really, only, a pit stop on the weekends drinks for 500 northern blokes. Id rather it didnt happen, but we cant build our game around keeping this type of club alive, we will never move forward.

And the amount available will depend on a) the number of clubs in each division and b) the size of the next TV deal.

The RFL dont do ' consultation ' , they just do

Fair enough , it is only business after all , when we have people queing up to start new clubs in citys all over the country , with 10s of 1,000s of fans just champing at the bit to pay to watch the sport in these citys

Away you go