Several clubs failed in the short period that we had a licensed league,twist and squirm all you want,thats whats happened.

If bradford & Wakefield had been relegated out of the licensed league when they went into"what should have been"unacceptable financial meltdown,we would still have licensing now.

Instead we now have the same clubs being given 400k from the 2017 tv deal just to prop them up some more

Neither Bradford nor Wakefield have finished in a relegation place

Ah I thought this had all been put to bed months ago.

I see it was just a matter of the protesters bidding their time.

I know why don't we let the SL chairmen vote on it!!!!!

Oh they did?

Well lets dump the democratic idea and have one overlord to make all the decisions, what they had that too years ago and dumped that idea.

I dunno, people wanting to make up their own minds, it will never work.

So what

So P+R would have neither solved nor addressed the situations at Bradford or Wakefield, The system we have in place is irrelevant to their failure which was solely down to bad management.

It worked for my club. It allowed us to spend money on our ground and our jnr system rather than spending it all on first team for fear of relegation.

Why you talking to me about P&R.
I said two clubs bradford and wakefield should have been relegated out of the licensed league when they went into administration
Its irrelavent to me whether clubs replaced them or not

Im saying that whatever system we have, the issues at Bradford and Wakefield would be apparent, and they wouldnt have been solved by simply relegating them.

What makes me laugh is how certain fans of SL teams on here keep contradicting themselves. They claim the licensing system was good because teams could come up and build steady without having to worry about relegation.

Yet say its wrong that championship team in the new structure if promoted shouldn't just look to build gradually and build a team int he first season capable of remaining int he top four of the 8 after the split.

There's no difference to me other than the team getting promoted has actually already got a team capable of competing with the bottom half of SL because they have just proved it. rather than a team with a rich backer and nice rented ground getting promoted from sixth place.

its not that said team shouldnt build gradually, its more that they cant. Its also that it means that the money the promoted team receives has to go straight in to the first team, every thing else, for ever more takes a clear 2nd place.

Featherstone have many hurdles to overcome before being anywhere near sustainable and competitive in SL. Their academy, their stadium, their fan base, the commercial and merchandising operation would all need massive improvements. It is infinitely more difficult for them to do that when the focus of the club is entirely on not finishing in the bottom 4.

of course they can. teams can theoretically go from 100k to 550k to 1.8m funding, seems more gradual than 100k to 1.2m as before. It's all up to the people running clubs, not the structure