You likely will be anyway.

Those clubs with a rich owner, or who have got to where they now are by having a rich owner.

You think only a few would walk away? Bigger blinkers than the RFL I'd say. CC Finals, Internationals, SL games are the ones I have currently walked away from, I will however attempt to do what I can to keep the club I support in business

I think you're right, spot on in fact. It is simply absurd to complain about how the game and clubs are run when in fact it is the responsibility (duty even) of the people who run these businesses to return the best financial results they can and the best sporting results they can.

Which is why I can't understand how some people can bang on and on about how many non British nationals any given club may choose to employ. It's not as if there's any duty of the clubs (businesses) to do anything other than "do what they see fit to make it work....and become MORE PROFITABLE"

They're all crackers aren't they GF?

Well there is not much, as a sport we can do to keep you as a fan is there.

Whatever the RFL do they will end up alienating someone, it seems common sense to get rid of those who will only attend and support the game in a very narrow set of circumstances.

Can't argue with that to be honest but the latest change in operational rules to counteract an impending administration is quite frankly desperate. They would be much better scrapping the whole licensing fiasco and communicating a new edict - "membership by committe invitation". At least then they won't have to keep changing a silly set of rules in order to shoe horn in their own choice of clubs - they can do it behind closed doors - which is pretty much what they're doing now; only they're making a right cow's bollox of it.

Okay, so what proof is there that Crusaders is NOT a doomed project? They've had nothing but problems since been in SL.

Hull KR are doing great thanks - progressing each year as good, real clubs do.

They should have done it to start with, the reason they didnt was the outcry over the 'closed shop' SL from those outside, So to try and appease them we got this halfway house which in the end has only caused more problems and limited the benefits of franchising.

The system should be, as you say, membership by invitation, any club, at any time can bid for a place, if they can make a good contribution to the league, or have the potential to do so, they are in. If a club is failling it is put on notice and if it doesnt improve it is dropped.

The problems and the main divisions dont seem to come from franchising itself, but the 'competitive' aspect of pitting clubs against each other, something many insisted was integral to the game but seems to have brought 0 benefits and lots of division.

Where is your proof that the real owner of Hull KR is NOT an invisible chocolate button control a puppet Neil Hudgell?

I'm off for a lie down

Just heard a solid rumour that one of the two serious parties interested in taking over Crusaders RL is the Bridgend based business consortium that offered to take them over originally.
Could we be looking at the rebirth of the Celtic Crusaders back in the club's home town?
There'd be no Samuel or Turner this time around, so no reason it couldn't work.

I imagine that the other is the current owners in some other slightly different configuration.

A North vs South tug o' war on the cards?

Grendel get on your bike you hideous troll. The voice inside your head is not an inside source you clown.

Looks like the rules have already been changed to accomodate Crusaders. From Sporting Lifechange the rules that had previously disqualified any club entering administration from any subsequent application, a fate which befell Widnes in 2008."

Our sport will never, ever be taken seriously until teams are treated equally and rules are not changed in favour of certain clubs.
Not only are Crusaders given an on-field advantage with a different restriction on overseas players, they seem to have the luxury of being able to break a rule and simply then get them re-written.
I don't know why we don't just change the rules of the game to suit them - make the defending team withdraw 15 metres instead of 10, only give the opposition three tackles before the turn-over and allow them to play with 15 players?
I know it sounds stupid, but the RFL have crossed a line in re-writing rules to accomodate a failing team, who knows what will be next?

That's EXACTLY what they've done, albeit not put them in the first team totally, probably also having been given the nod from the RFL some time ago.