Im not sure it is weakness, its just the RFL avoiding responsibility for something which, to be honest, isnt their responsibility. The tax man isnt helping to govern RL, im not sure the RFL need to be helping recover tax.
It isnt down to licensing that either Wakefield or Bradford went pop. Both were down to bad management. Whatever system we put in place, we cant legislate against idiocy. Franchising isnt about stopping idiots being idiots. Yes it should make it easier for us to recognise them earlier, and deal with them earlier, and it that respect it hasnt been a benefit, but thats not the only reason we have it. We have it so clubs can build, so that clubs arent demolished after 1 bad season. So that clubs like Wakefield can build, can grow, can look to the top rather than the bottom.


There wasnt a need. It was a matter of months between Wakefield coming out of admin and the full franchising round.

That isn't my problem - I've never until this point been passionately anti-licensing. But I'm now confronted with a situation that makes no sense. Your system, while it has drawbacks (as they all do), is at least honest about what it is. But it differs from how licensing was represented.
The situation we have were the assessment is made to a very large extent on the business, but the licence is effectively awarded to a seperate ongoing entity, the club, is bizarre in these circumstances.
In some ways we're both satisfied with [ifranchising[/i - it's your preferred system and for me at least everyone knows where they stand, though they may be understandably unhappy about in some cases.




Good point.

I have lived my life thinking you cannot polish a turd - Smokey your efforts to prove me wrong are outstanding.

Whatever happened to Saddams PR man?

He paid 30k for the club I believe and if I remember correctly he mentioned on the Supporters evening that alot of the creditors he'd paid off because we were still using many of the companies that were previously owed money by the club..

When is the verdict in s league or out s league, its got to be told soon now would be a good time if its out, it will give the team to replace them some chance

Does that count for HKR as well? On shakey ground along with Salford and Cas by all accounts...

I posted the financials from SL clubs some time back, 80% of the SL clubs are on very shakey ground! Most are operating on losses of 250-500k a year.

Broncos losses are considerably more than that

The story in yesterday's T&A confirming that the new owners have been given RFL membership said that the decision on the Bulls SL future will happen before the end of the week.

Who cares about the Bulls saga now that there's a new rag doll to throw about.

So, Hulll KR's directors want out. What's all that about then

Quote: Roofaldo "The story in yesterday's T&A confirming that the new owners have been given RFL membership said that the decision on the Bulls SL future will happen before the end of the week.'" It doesn't say that. www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... _takeover/

Quote: Roofaldo "The story in yesterday's T&A confirming that the new owners have been given RFL membership said that the decision on the Bulls SL future will happen before the end of the week.'" It doesn't say that. www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... _takeover/

Further prevarication and pi55ing about then. Great for all concerned. Well done.

still doesnt say there will be a decision by the end of the week.



Only talks about announcing how they will make decision until end of week. nothing stopping them announcing the process immediately followed by decision I suppose, But the story doesnt say that.