Expansion is one thing, growth is quite another. I'd rather have meaningful growth, in whatever form and whatever area, than meaningless expansion as a 'sticking flags on a map' exercise.

Despite all of this much vaunted 'expansion', according to Sport England the RL participation figures are falling. So, we're apparently 'expanding' while having less people playing the game. Wonderful.

I’m neither surprised nor bothered about how many points the Crusaders get. I just think it’s about time that the RFL dropped the pretence that they are treating everyone the same. I don’t hate the Crusaders, and never have, I welcome them. It looks certain that an extra two places were added to Super League because of their inclusion. Without them, it would probably have remained at 12 and, ironically, that would have given us one less heartland club in Super league.

I think where the problem lies, is in the RFL pretending that they were one of the best 14 clubs, when they couldn’t possibly have been. If they RFL had just been honest, and explained that the extra two places had been negotiated with Sky, in order to accommodate one heartland club and one expansion club and that the Celtic Crusaders were going to be fighting it out with other expansion clubs for that spot, there wouldn’t be so much animosity towards them.

At the end of the day, it’s not the fault of the Celtic Crusaders or their fans. It is the ham-fisted, incompetent and dishonest way the RFL operate – they just can’t be honest. That is where the blame should lie.




Widnes were not in a worse situation than the Crusaders. Unlike the Crusaders, Widnes did not plan a month ahead, with the connivance of the RFL, to go into administration. They did not have the benefit of being able to set up another trading company with the blessing of the RFL and have there players kept on contract and paid for by the RFL.

Widnes did not go into liquidation, this is an outright lie spread about these boards by tb. Once a sporting club enters administration, their playing staff contracts are no longer valid. The players have the option to either stay or leave. Some stayed and some left. Unlike the Crusaders, there was no new trading name and no RFL money to pay the players, while they went through the administration process.

Or maybe the Championship penalties are different from SL penalties, Crusaders couldnt have got a -9 penalty

Now if you had argued why they didnt get the maximum -6 then thats a different ball game

In the context of a league with no relegation 4 points cannot be regarded as a hefty fine. It does not in my opinion reflect the seriousness of going into administration when financial stability is supposed to be one of the cornerstones of the franchise system and hardly acts as a deterrent to financial mismanagement by other clubs in the future. At this stage in the proceedings the apparent disparity between the penalties for going bust owing £1.25million (lose 4 points next season) and not having a shiny new stadium but otherwise being a stable, even profitable club (exclusion from SL for at least 3 years with the consequent loss of support, income etc) are too great.
Its going to be very hard for the RFL to justify any club other than Crusaders losing its franchise next year and unless they simply admit that the expansion clubs are subject to different rules than the heartland clubs I think the only way they will get out of the mess they are creating is to change their minds yet again and have a 15 or 16 team league in 2012.

Pretty much sum's up the whole Crusaders fiasco in my mind. When put into SL the RFL said they were amongs the best 14 CLUBS (i.e. set ups etc) in the European game, that's why they got in, not just as expansion because they were the best suited.

However since then we get talk of a new club, forming foundations, needing to be excempt from the O/S quota, needing assistance, passing the buck on debt elsewhere. Moving location and set for 3rd name in 3 seasons... does that sound like one of the best 14 clubs in Europe? No didn't think so and there in lies the problem.

RFL should just grow a backbone and say look we are giving full support to clubs X, Y & Z due to expansion and that's that. Make them fully excempt from farnchises as let's face it they are anyway and yes we'd all kick off about it initially but at least in the future we'd know were we stand. And if they want to eventually put Toulouse in SL just do it! Don't mess about creating and changing criteria to put them in, making other sides jump through hoops for no apparent reason.

Well said .... you smelly viking

No. They got in because they were one of the best 14 BIDS.



We do? No. It's the same club.



?

Again no. Different quota rules has always been in place for expansion clubs, for a set and defined period. It's definitely not something that's happened 'since then'




Thank god no established heartland clubs have ever gone into administration.



and?



In your opinion, an opinion based in large on misunderstandings and untruths.




You seem to be mistaking this for the 'should the RFL be more transparent' or 'Crusaders in administration' threads. These discussions are being done to death there … this one's about the points deduction.


On which:

On the face of it, I'd have gone for a six point deduction myself … I'd like to see the reasoning for the four point deduction before I form a judgement on it. Unfortunately, the story on the RFL website gives no reasoning or quote from the RFL, simply comments from the club.

Fair enough if they weren't in liquidation, I think it's still difficult to argue that they weren't in a worse state than Crusaders though. Crusaders entered adminsitration and registered a new trading name to clear a multitude of debts from the previous owners, they are stable, as you say it was a planned administration because it would be impossible for the club to operate properly with the weight of debts that weren't anything to do with them. Presumably that's why the RFL were lenient. Widnes on the other hand were in dire straits, players were leaving and as far as I'm aware the club was going out of existence until O'Connor stepped in. Any amount of help from the RFL would have been pointless as there was no owner and the club couldn't function. It's pretty irrelevant now as Widnes have proven themselves to be stable and will be granted a license this time. But when the initial decision was made, it was only a few weeks after this had happened, there was no guarantee that O'Connor was in for the long haul etc, so I don't feel the RFL were wrong to leave Widnes out until they could prove themselves, which they have. Remember there was no guarantee that Leighton Samuel would turn out to be a crook and Crusaders would have been mismanaged the way they were in the South either, they were in a stronger position off the field than Widnes at the time.

Somebody has already replied to your boring question.

I'm sorry but, How can you even begin to justify Crusaders existance in Super League???
Its been a sham from start to finish...and because of this, The game of Rugby League has been severely damaged, and its reputation torn to shreds.
For your sake, I hope Crusaders now make a go of it, because anything less than a spectacular success would result in a worldwide disaster for the future of Super League & Rugby league in general, and embarrassment & anger on a monmental scale.

Apart from his offer a half million pounds cash bond up front.

The argument is the number of games these players have played for the Crusaders IN SL ?

If you cannot answer that then you have no argument

If these players are at the SWS then it is they who should be credited with their development , and to all intensome purposes they are the original Celtic Crusaders based in south Wales

You are a complete muppet, a total shambles of a post if ever i saw one.

You dont know bugger all about Widnes or our ambitions.

Have they ? , then you would have no problem giving me the answer to my question then would you ?