What galls me is that a club can enter a form of insolvency, and thereby escape paying monies due to HMRC, and then be allowed to continue as if nothing had happened - when other clubs are expected to settle what they owe to HMRC. It is totally unfair on those clubs that conduct their affairs responsibly.

Most especially if the monies owed are monies that were never the club's in the first place, like PAYE and NIC deducted from employees and VAT collected from customers. Using such monies to finance your business, and then not being able to pay them over, is and always has been theft in my book.

We might as well be honest and say that "SL shall consist of such clubs as the RFL and the existing SL clubs shall determine is in what they see as the games/their best interests"

Its only narrow now due to my views on the way the game is run, its as simple as that. SL is now a closed shop and in effect a different sport. The RFL have alienated two thirds of its own member clubs. The structure for the passing of votes makes it pointless for Championship clubs to vote, having said that it appears that the RFL ignore the results of any votes taken and plough on regardless. Just because my opinion is different to yours does'nt make it any less important. Or have the RFL taken up the maxim, if you don't like it feck off. Due to the cock up with the last awards of franchising they thought they would be clever and introduce criteria that fitted only one club (Widnes) AND the with the most comical coverup of all time, a month before a SL clubs goes into Admin, they get the SL clubs to vote to remove the criteria of refusing a licence to any club that has been in/ or is in administration from the licensing process.

No matter how you put it it is Corruption of the most obvious kind.

Its simply 'their best interest' and b***ocks to the game

That isnt the bad part, SL chose to change the rules, not the RFL.

The bad part is a group of representatives of the SL clubs themselves arent confident that more than one club will enter administration because of the image rights issue (apparently)

well yes, i cant see the logic behind doing anything else.

I wouldn't go that far. It's more incompetence than anything else. Can you imagine the facepalming going on at the RFL when it's SL member clubs stumble from one feck up to another. They had to issue warnings about stadiums and lo and behold - still a load of drawings and dirty mounds of earth. They changed the rules on admitting a club from The Championsip to an "open invite" in the hope that Toulouse might somehow be ready in time. That backfired. Their Welsh experiment enters administration twice - more facepalming and now, the removal of a pretty important safeguard regarding SL clubs entering administration being allowed to put in a franchise bid.

It's not corruption - it's incompetence. My only sympathy for the RFL lies in the probable fact that they're having to do all this to prevent BskyB from walking away. In the end their actions - no matter how "carry on -esque" they may appear to be will probably keep this funding in place for a few more years yet.

well exactly, you will only attend in a narrow set of circumstances, those circumstances are likely to alienate someone else.

they have done no such thing, they have alienated at most, 22 clubs, there are 131 other clubs in RFL competitions. Why should championships clubs affect how SL is run? what contribution does it make to it? what else do you want them to do? If they run it your way they alienate someone, if they run it another way they alienate someone else. If you dont like it, but plenty do, what do you want them to do other than say tough? no they didnt, SL club chairmen chose to do that, not the RFL but the SL representatives.

i wouldn't worry to much adeybull because your clubs right up there making the rules,and it always will be,as long as you dont fall out with leeds again

That's just about what this says:-

a. Extent to which each club helps meet the SLE Strategy and the strategic aims and objectives of the Licensing process;
b. Historical activity of the clubs under consideration; and
c. RFL’s reasonable opinion as to future performance of the clubs under consideration.

confusing isn't it?.
is it any wonder nobody knows whats going on?

I wonder how many of the posters that are up in arms today were up in arms when a struggling expansion club was dumped on from a great height to help a heartland get out of the god awful mess they had got themselves into?
This is in no way a dig at the said heartland club BTW i'm just making the point that the RFL havent always favoured expansion over heartland and also the double standards of some posters.

Which expansion + heartland clubs was it?