... and bakrupted themselves trying to avoid relegation ...

A rupted bak is very painful

It's not any 2 from 4. That's a very silly statement from someone with a username like yours.
The argument of Hull FC or Rovers is stupid.

The point about P&R is not that it's never worked or shouldn't in the future, it's that it doesn't work at the moment because there is such a big gap between the 2 leagues. As I think tb mentioned, it's P&R between a full time league and a semi-pro league. That won't work until there are 6 or 7 strong, healthy, well attended Championship clubs.

Hull is quite capable of supporting two SL clubs, Rovers are around the 8th best supported out of 14 with multi million pound ground improvements ongoing and had it not been for reduction in capacity to allow improvements our attendances would be up at the previous few years averages of 8k+. Do you think if we are booted out we would all move to the KC and boost FC's crowds to 22k (the number who watch the game in Hull even when we play at home at the same time). Also, we are developing a good crop of kids through our excellent academy which is recognised as one of the best in SL which will reduce the money we pay out to bring players in, making us financially stable in the future.

I am keen to see a return to P&R as its the only FAIR way to run any sport, look at this season, the bottom 4 have nothing to play for and ganen't for some time and the clubs in the championship have had nothing to play for all season.

But they're bankrupting themselves now just trying to stay in SL. What's the difference now apart from loseing a Big payday?

We didn't go bankrupt numbnuts. We didn't cover ourselves in financial glory either - but we didn't go bankrupt. Bradford have. Crusaders have. Wakefield have.

As Smokey says though - that's all irrelevant.

P and R doesnt work because of the gap , and yet franchising is increasing the gap, we wont get 6 or 7 strong, healthy , well attended/sponsored Championship Clubs with licencing

A bit catch 22 here , wouldnt you say

Not strictly true. When we had one league, within it were the Lancashire and Yorkshire Leagues. In order to attract better inter county club fixtures it was necessary to attain a higher position within the league - a form of P&R. Plus of course there were the cup comps - Floodlit Trophy, Yorks/Lancs Cup, Players No. 6 Cup, Challenge Cup and the end of season play offs. So there were plenty of prizes for clubs to aim at and keep the speccies happy. Unlike today. And of course under promotion and relegation we've come pretty close to beating them in a series on several occasions. The most notorious being the Meninga obstruction at Old Trafford in 1990. If the ref gives that we win the series - that's how close we came. Who knows what the outcome for RL would have been in the UK had that admitedly 50/50 decision gone the other way.

Massive massive catch 22. unless fev "and i really hope they do" get there ground sorted there are only two clubs that can enter sl and thats leigh and fax so why should sl and the rfl really give whats going on outside the bubble

Trinity were juggling debt and poorly run long before franchise's came about.

Not really because I think P&R increases the gap further than licensing does, and with a better licensing system, additional support for Championship clubs, and Championship clubs doing their part I think the gap would close.

You think wrong

As a rule yer not not a bad poster on hear but occationally you come with a real stupid post and this is one of them occasions.

the problem with the RL and P&R is if London are last in the league there will not go down. if the club to go up does not have the ground standard will there go up?

London arnt the problem the whole sport is the problem