Based on the last round, applications will be due later this year with any promoted team announced in about 12 months from now and confirmation of the others 4 months after that.

Given that the current model has lost so much credibility, we're surely looking at least at a reboot and very possibly the alternatives. Any ideas on when we might get an indication of what the plans are? It has to be pretty soon, I'd have thought.

There will not be a licensing period this time, I think it will be scrapped in time for the SL club Chairmen to come up with something else to vote on to keep them at the top table.

The problem is there is no credibility in the licensing process anymore, Bradford, Salford and their robust business plans going to pot. Castleford and their ground not materialising in the last 6 years when promised time and time again, same goes for Wakefield. In all fairness they should have been cast aside along time ago for not bringing their promises to fruition, that way the governing body can be seen to lay a level and fair platform for all. There would be no fans wanting any clubs to fail then for the small glimmer of hope that their team may just get in from the back of it.

For me the biggest issue is the SL chairmen being able to make it up as they go along. The rfl can obviously bring money into the game as shows with bradford and Salford, Perhaps this is the way forward with the governing Body actually setting out some rules and sticking to them, Be it at SL level, Championship level or whatever.

The dual registration is another good example of SL clubs trying to save money, IMO to the detrement to the game as a whole, It makes a mockery of championship clubs and their competition as has been widely publized in the sporting press. As harsh as it may sound, If a club cannot compete in that competition whether it be SL or CC then they should allow someone to replace them and have a go, Be that a french team, a welsh team, a london team, a traditional M62 corridor team, personally i dont care as long as they get a shot at the big time when they are doing everything asked of them.

Wakefield ground plans progressing nicely.
Get up to speed.

I think whether they go for licensing-lite, full blown franchising, promotion and relegation, a re-election system, or whatever, they need to decide in the not too distant. Fair enough, you don't want them to rush and get it wrong, but I think there's a sense of drift now. Licensing looked kind of pretty (from a SL perspective at least) on paper, and I think it blowing up has thrown the RL's leaders quite badly. It is as if they can't quite bring themselves to admit that it has failed. While I appreciate doing so isn't easy, the sport really needs to think about a future which starts pretty soon. As time passes, options start to narrow.

Licensing has not failed. It is poorly managed clubs which have failed.

If licensing is scrapped there will be no expansion of Super League Europe beyond Britain, and possibly a contraction to the northern heartland. Such a development will guarantee that rugby league in Britain remains chronically underfunded and incapable of competing with Australia and New Zealand national teams, which thrive on the well managed licensing system in Australia.

Will having french teams playing in SL make Britain compete with Australia and New Zealand teams any better ?. unless said french team is filled with English players then NO. Why have english players playing in france when they could play in britain if this is your side of the debate. Also RL in britain is already underfunded, ask the SL clubs why the under 20's were scrapped, Saving money.

Also licensing has failed, Poorly managed clubs poorly designed business plans that were laid in front of KPMG to look at should have seen the fundemantal floors and holes in them and judged them accordingly. Unless thebusiness plans themselves were not worth the paper they were written on , then why have the pretence of licensing in the first place, Some stadiums have not been built out of matchsticks yet, let alone bricks and mortor, all part of the licensing scenaria, and Richard lewis clearly stated that if clubs did not stick to thse promises then they could be removed, again, another pretence that the RFL would actually follow through on "their side of the bargain"

Granting licences to poorly managed clubs that then go on to fail (tbf in part because they lack the support of wealthy benefactors that back some 'better managed' clubs ), then granting newcos that spring up in their place new licences makes it rather difficult, IMO impossible, to take a significant portion of the licensing criteria/grading system at all seriously. Depending on how widely shared that opinion is, that represents a failure. Can anybody genuinely imagine the clubs providing straight-faced applications covering the same ground as last time, again?

Licensing never promised to pick 14 perfect clubs. Just the 14 best. Its not inconceivable that those clubs in SL who went bust, were still a better bet than Halifax.

Jbecuase i am a Fax fan does not make me bitter & resentfull. Its history as far as i am concerned, Halifax were just there to make the whole process justifiable to clubs with aspirations for SL. It doesn't change the fact that Licensing has failed very, very early & continues to do so and will do until it is scrapped, Castleford are also in the mire now, their Application was based on a stadium they had promised three years prior. I believe their business plan was based on being in a stadium that didn't exist & still not a brick laid and now not going to be. ( no disrepect to Cas fans, its not a dig)

Seriously you can't say licensing has worked, P & R failed time and time again and would do again if reinstated without having some kind of criterea to have to comply with first. Licensing doesn't work, P & R doesn't work, perhaps a combination of them both would ?. Who knows, only time will tell, but whilst SL chairmen have their noses in the trough and not looking any further down the road, nothing will change and the games will slowly fade further away.

Thats it, i've had my say, the minute smokey turns up, im off, its boring and i would prefer to burn my ballsack on hot coals.

They backed themselves into a corner by saying it would be 14 teams in Super League early on, instead of the teams that are up to standard, whether it be 10, 12, 14, 16 or whatever.

I think we'll see promotion and relegation return, but with decent minimum standards that must be achieved to reach Super League.

In what way would promotion and relegation have avoided or mitigated the issues seen at Bradford or Wakefield, or now, according to you, Cas?
Pics or GTFO

Very possibly, but necessity demanded that decisions be made in an ad hoc and less than rigourous fashion. It basically had to be made up on the hoof - there was nothing in place to help manage a crisis, because the whole point was that checks were supposedly in place to allow us to see them coming and then prevent them.
Perhaps it has all turned out for the best, but either way we've got where we are by compromising the principles of licensing to irrelevance.
But even if they do intend to carry on regardless, while it'd be pointless and damaging IMO, some sort of [iindication[/i that we're doing so would be timely. There's not much to be gained by looking back, beyond one or two obvious lessons, but there's plenty to be lost by not looking forward.

Im not sure they would need to announce everything is staying the same. Id pretty much assume that until told otherwise.

Saying that I hope there are a few minor changes, certainly the removal of the three year time-frame which benefits no-one. But I don’t think it makes any sense whatsoever to be making major changes right now. The last thing anyone in the game needs is more instability.

I also think that P+R isn’t the default position for the game, if we were to accept this structure as a failure, then P+R would still need to justify itself as the best option, it isn’t just the fallback option we revert to.

Im pretty sure we will see some information coming out soon. Clubs would need a few months to prepare for whatever it is we use going forward if it does change and if it doesnt we will need to know the timetable for bids/decisions.

I've never been convinced of centralizing what should be done to make the game more attractive when it comes to grounds. Surely the balance as to whether money is spent on the team or the ground (or marketing, or whatever) at any particular time is best left with the clubs, who have the most accurate knowledge of their own current situation. Sure, plenty will get it wrong, but why any better or worse than some central authority? Of course there needs to be minimum standards for disabled access and safety, etc. but these exist regardless of the RFL, etc. Defenders of licensing (and to a limited extent that includes me) often site the improvement in some grounds, but I don't think that's clear cut - who's to say they wouldn't have happened anyway?

Talk about a return to some form of P&R is all very well, but personally I doubt whether there's more than Leigh, Halifax, Fev, Sheffield and, in the longer term, Crusaders who are seriously interested in playing in SL. All we're going to end up with is a revival of what Dave Hadfield once christened funny results time towards the end of the season as clubs desperately try to AVOID being promoted.