You mean selective abuse

And too protect the Catalans and London

Quite ridiculous isn't it

Why would it protect London? They've never finished bottom with or without p/r

I dont think finishing bottom is relevent in the modern world of franchising ?

Because like the Catalans if they did finish bottom , their very existence would be brought into question under a P and R system

Dont act stupid , it just makes you look stupider than you already are

I disagree. I think the London club in its current guise would be far more suited to playing in the Chp, unlike Catalans I don't think they'd go to the wall and secondly I dont believe for one minute that with a wealthy backer they'd be in the position they are now if there were P/R

Maybe now or the near future , but 4/5 years ago , there was still hope that the london club could actually make a viable SL club , they get Championship levels of support , but would they still get that level of support in the Championships ?

Explain that one ?

The same as Dildo.

For exactly the reasons I stated. It takes into account the club over a number of years rather than the team in 1 year. If you are so opposed to the strength of the team being the deciding factor then why are you annoyed that Crusaders were brought into Super League?
SL was expanded by 2 places and it took the top 2 teams in the NL. If there had been P&R that year then Crusaders would have been promoted anyway.

Leighton Samuel

First off, possibly not but I think they'd have enough to survive at a better profit/loss ratio than they are now, if we take the Crusaders example, despite being a losing team they get great crowds for a C1 club. In Londons case I think they'd enter the Championship in a much stronger position and as a perfect breeding ground for London youngsters, even if they then were to be cherry picked by SL clubs. The fundamental problem would come when financially all the best talent in the area is being cherry picked by union clubs but is that not already happening? who knows.

Secondly I meant with the finance they have in place, were it to be a P/R season, I don't for one minute think the results thus far this year would have been stood for and they'd have strengthed in the back room and playing staff by round 10. Powell, as much as I like the guy isn't up to it and he's made huge mistakes in his conditioning of the players, similar to that of Lowes' a couple of years back. With P/R I think a new coach would be in now with a couple more players

2 leagues of 10 would be the best way to with 1 up down

That'll confuse 'em

Did they not finish second in that season ?
I'm not trying to be pedantic, but even myself as an advocate of P/R wouldn't suggest 2 up 2 down.

How would that have helped the Bulls and going back to the title of the thread how would it help Fax ?

Because the RFL were funding the Celtic Crusaders by filtering large amounts of money through Leighton Samuels company disguised as ' Community Development Grants ' , the Celtic Crusaders were operating as a full time squad , even the 17 players cars would have taken up half the salary cap in NL 1 , let alone NL 2

And lets not bring up the ' Visa ' issue again shall we , there were some very twitchy bums at Red Hall when that broke