good old wiki

no if someone bought a franchise and had lots of cash they wouldn't just be able to move it as the RFL don't actually run a franchise system they run a mambers club, ( a very good friend of mine tried to buy London Broncos when they weent bust withthe idea of merging it with an Nl1 club and playing the game split over a couple of sites as per USA franchise and NRL mergers, SLE voted that they wouldn't be allowed and blocked the registration of the club and company with the rfl)

To answer slim's original question, as far as we know at the moment, the process will be similar to last time - i.e. clubs will be invited to send licence applications into the RFL. However, there are certain criteria to meet to be allowed to apply. Basically only the following will be allowed:

-current SL clubs
-clubs in the Championship in 2011 who have also contested a Northern Rail Final or a Grand Final in 2009, 2010, 2011.

If one of those clubs said they had been approached by a rich buyer who wanted to move them somewhere else, they might be still allowed to apply, but they may struggle to tick some boxes on their application.

that doesn't make sense tbh, they're not franchises then are they?
if i could buy batley for example, then move them to liverpool and had enough money to buy a good team and put the infa structure in place ie youth development why would the rfl turn me down when it came to franchising in 2 years time?

why bother with batley though. why not just create a liverpool team? i don't think you would need to buy an existing team. if you could prove your finances, player potential, ground etc, you could form liverpool, and leave batley to plod along as they are

because initially you'd have to buy batley, invest, get to grand final/ northern rail final, then move to liverpool


tarrraaaa the liverpool bulldogs

Are the grounds such a big issue, i enjoy going to castleford as the atmosphere is great despite the atteendance being around 8,000. It sounds like, from what people have been saying on this forum, that our move of ground has generated more attendees but lessened the atmosphere.


Do we want all super league grounds to have no history or atmosphere?

However Wakefields ground has no atmosphere, I'm always amazed when i watch the match again on telly and hear the chanting from the wakefield fans because i was there and never heard it.

That's the thing, I'd like to see more teams redevelop their stadium rather than move to new ones, although this isn't usually cost effective.

14 teams playing in identikit stadiums like the HJ, Halton Stadium, Leigh Sports village etc where the only difference is the colour of the seats doesn't appeal to me.

That's just nostalgia. Many matches at Wilderspool had a rubbish atmosphere. That last SL match there though had a very special atmosphere - but then that was more down to the occasion than what concrete we were standing on.

Because slim in reality the rfl and super league don't want clubs too near one another as they want to get more money from sky. You buy batley they will tell you to keep it there no franchises just licenses as already said, they have and always will hold the cards to who sits at the top table, money on this occasion doesn't always guarantee entry!!

I've got a better idea.Scrap the franchise system,retain the playoff system but have 1st v 8th,2nd v 7th etc.Have this for all 3 divisions and play 3 finals at Old Trafford on the 3rd sunday in October.
Oh and bring back promotion and relagation. quickly.

It is not just the fact that i like grounds like the jungle, but what is the point in team having the stadia but not the fans. The ground looks rubbish when it is half empty.

For instance - Leigh, Widnes, Harlequins

and get stones as sponsor

i can't believe that money does not talk in these situations, forget batley, say amsterdam insted, if i had several millions the RFL would be stupid not to accept the licence application!

oh well i've just answered my own question.