Its actually the RFL board who decides on licences, expulsions etc.

Not really.


Both Cas and Wakey have new grounds in the pipeline. Wakey have made some improvements to their existing ground. London's crowds are poor, granted, but crowds are only one aspect of SL criteria. They'll need to improve drastically in the very near future or cease to exist anyway.


Cool. You reckon you can replace all these clubs with better ones from the Championship I guess? Care to list the candidates? And while you're at it you'de better start lobbying the SL club chairmen to change the rules of [itheir[/i league to allow clubs to be summarily dismissed on a whim. Let me know how that goes for you.


Because we never had clubs go broke under P&R. No siree bob...

The RFL board issue licences based on rules decided by the clubs. They can also only expel a club if the rules - again voted on by the clubs - allow it. The clubs actually have the final say on admission to SL as they own the league pure and simple. There have already been discussions between them on the possible admission of a Bradford newco. Opinions are divided.

The RFL were give those "rights" (under the then created set of rules) when the franching system was first set-up :-
"A licence will INITIALLY be for three years however, the independent RFL Board will have the right to revoke a club’s membership if need be at any stage.
Although the reasons for this are still to be finalised it is likely to include insolvency, contractual breach, persistent under performance and possibly persistent rule breaking.
Any ‘failing’ club who has its membership removed could be replaced by a ‘successful’ club from outside engage Super League."

(Taken directly from the RFL on the formation of the licencing system.)

Clubs need to give their agreement to changes to the SuperLeague structure (eg:- adding more team, reducing numbers etc). If the RFL board pull Bulls licence, the RFL board can replace them. I agree that they would seek to do it with the agreement of the clubs, but the rules allow them to do it unilaterally.

I think you are both right.

The admission of a newco would be dependent on a vote by the SL club chairmen, the RFL have been given the right of veto.

I fully expect the clubs to vote against the re-admission for Bradford to make their displeasure clear, but full in the knowledge, and as willing participants, the RFL to wield that veto and continue the sterling job they do as a lightening rod for the conspiracy theorists, assorted yokels, and peddlers of nonsense.

What we'll find out by this process is if all clubs are treated equally, if Bradford come out of admin like Wakefield did and rebuild in that way, 4 point deduction seems fair

If they go into liquidation, I don't know what other option but relegation. If this was Widnes (my team), Castleford, Salford, Wakefield, London there'd be no debate and people would expect it, and there'd be no arguments. Just because Bradford were one of the "big four" does not give them the right to circumvent the consequences of bad management that led to liquidation

But that's not what we're talking about, is it? We're talking about what happens if the current Bulls club is liquidated and a newco applies to join in their place. In that situation the power to say yes or no lies ONLY with the club chairmen - just as when the newco London club was admitted.

If they go into liquidation, there's no club left to relegate and all bets are off.

The RFL don't have a veto. They do have a vote. If 8 clubs vote against a newco then they aren't coming in. If the vote is tied I believe that the RFL can then make an additional deciding vote one way or the other.

Quote: Kosh "The RFL don't have a veto. They do have a vote. If 8 clubs vote against a newco then they aren't coming in. If the vote is tied I believe that the RFL can then make an additional deciding vote one way or the other.'" I think the RFL not only have the deciding vote, but also Les Catalans vote in these matters, Though i will try and find a more respectable source [iFive clubs are prepared to vote against them entering the competition as a new company. Two more are needed to reject the proposal — although the RFL have the power of veto and can admit the club.[/i www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sp ... -axed.html

Quote: Kosh "The RFL don't have a veto. They do have a vote. If 8 clubs vote against a newco then they aren't coming in. If the vote is tied I believe that the RFL can then make an additional deciding vote one way or the other.'" I think the RFL not only have the deciding vote, but also Les Catalans vote in these matters, Though i will try and find a more respectable source [iFive clubs are prepared to vote against them entering the competition as a new company. Two more are needed to reject the proposal — although the RFL have the power of veto and can admit the club.[/i www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sp ... -axed.html

Semantics. If the Bulls get liquidated then SL becomes a 13 team league, so any newco will need the vote of the club chairmen to be admitted.

If the Bulls survive administration then the clubs don't get a vote at all.

Semantics......NO IT DOESN'T. SuperLeague will still be a 14 team league but with one space on the rosta. As there is no change to the structure/rules it will be the RFL that decides. The RFL will of course talk to the clubs as it will be far easier for them to make a decision knowing what support they have from the other clubs.

Dont have strong feelings either way. Bulls voted to kick us out (broncos) and their crowds are falsely inflated by v cheap tickets so not as big a club as some think. But Bradford is the 8th biggest city in England and that gives them huge potential compared to the likes of Fev or Leigh.