No, that wouldn't be a competition issue. The rules on the pitch state that you are allowed to select a maximum of 13 players and 4 interchange players. They are the laws of the game that make a sport a sport. How you select those 17 players isn't.

You're confusing yourself.

I think it's clear that only a select few who support certain clubs that are in danger or clubs that will never be good enough to make it think it's a joke as they are too concerned at their own self interest to see that the sport is trying its best to improve itself and its clubs business-wise so that the sport can expand.

Squad/team = same thing , so how you are allowed to select them is very relevant

And the reverse is also clear , would you not say ?

Maybe, it's certainly the likes of Cas and Wakefield fans who are (rightly) more concerned.
The question is - is the best way for the sport to improve itself to include a Crusaders club who cannot seem to run for a season without lurching from one problem to another? I am actually in favour of expansion (yes, really) but it has to be done properly and with a fairness to existing clubs.
And I'll also point out that if Cas don't get a franchise in 2011 there will be nobody to blame but the club themself.

B*llocks do you believe that. You've started a thread saying that the sport isn't credible because of this, that and the other, and now you're saying that if Cas don't get a license it's their own fault? Doesn't that make the system the sport is run in credible if there is no-one to blame? You can't make you're mind up.

The Crusaders, like a lot of things that have needed to happened in RL, need to be stuck with. They are a project. They are underpinning the development of rugby league in Wales, which in turn will not only help SL's profile but international RL's profile (so two different competitions).
Expansion will not happen if all clubs are treated the same. The expansion sides will never catch up. And that appears to be what some people want.

What would your reverse situation be, just to clarify?

this thread and many others like it just expose what pretty much each of us are - narrow minded bigots on completely opposite sides of the argument! I, as a flatcapper, do not trust the RFL one inch. I do not trust their strategy and I certainly do not trust their competence. None of the lot of them would survive in business as far as I can see. Others, as expansionistas, are prepared to swallow the whole lot hook, line and sinker. No matter how bad things get there will always be some semantics employed and some "clever" rhetoric to defend the indefensible.

To be honest, the right answer is somewhere in between, taking the blinkers off and judging each and every case on its merits. Some pragmatic decisions have to be taken that may be unpalatable and inconsistent but are for the good of the game in the long term. Some bad decisions are also made.

However it seems like we prefer to persist with the pantomime insults and catcalls so...as you were everybody!

Except they are surviving, they have taken a loss-making company and now turn a healthy profit. Nobody has 'swollowed the whole lot', if you had read the posts then you will see that people are more than willing to point out the faults with Crusaders etc. The difference is that it is done in a constructive way, rather than simply labelling the RFL as a bunch of cheats and constantly whinging about how unfair things are. The people who seem to identify as 'flat cappers' are almost always fans of clubs that feel they may be at risk if expansion takes place, and their opinions are almost always club-motivated. It's not a case of differing sides of an argument, because one side is not neutral. If you were neutral, you would see that the RFL are generally on the right track - the implementation may not always be the best in certain areas, but the right intention is there. Unfortunately, some of those who constantly criticise the RFL do not have the game's best interests at heart, only those of their clubs.

a lot of sense there but my only gripe with the RFL is it's inconsistency - it seems to treat the same situation differently depending on the club involved which then gives the idea of mistrust & shiftyness etc otherwise the bunch of old farts generally do the best for he sport IMO

quite right but the 'project' could just as easily have taken place in the Championship 1 as in the SL - wales,or certainly a lot of it are rugby daft so it's a great market to tap into and develop - another three years in the Championship would have allowed Cru to improve their infrastructure etc and make a realistic bid now IMO

So, your "point" is that the Origin games, the World Cup, Wigan v Saints, the Challenge Cup final, the Grand Final, the Championship final, the playoffs in both hemispheres, none of this is "credible sport", because a couple extra itinerant Aussies can play for a small fledgling expansion Welsh club, in a country with no unattached SL standard RL players.

Is THAT your point?

Just wow.

edited for broader context etc