I can indeed. It's a potential minefield. But over the years numerous clubs have had no fine or points deduction for a first offence. Some clubs have done nothing wrong at all and been relegated as a consequence of others, ie Cas in 2007.
I'm not a lawyer but, assuming we have one still!!, could we not look back at previous first offences and enquire with the RFL why a points deduction has been the first option here??
And as I typed that I just thought '' what if the club asked for a points deduction instead of a fine?''

I go to a bank fill out a car loan app form and fill in my income details and what I have to pay out etc for a 3 year payment plan. Bank looks it over yep we will give you a loan. During the 3 years I lose my job and find another job with less money but unfortunately miss a payment but I should have seen the bank first to try to sort something out.......etc

Accept the technical breach and points deduction and move on.
If we have grounds to appeal then appeal backed up by previous seasons attendances against attendance from previous season against TV games etc.
Starbug will always be suspicious of RFL even if they gave us sacks of money for being a model club.

So in our 'relegated' season is it realistic that the club might have predicted it would have been on TV as much the following season and our few genuine crowd pulling fixtures would have remained as 3PM kick off on Sundays rather than Thursday evening kick offs.

Not saying its the case , but would surely have been a factor.

The problem in this instance isn't the RFL , they have followed their rules , there is no ' perfect ' system to operate a salary cap , believe me it is better organized now than it was back in 2004 when they introduced it , that was a shambles

Our problem now is the lack of income and turnover via the LSV , I'd suggest that Batley probably turn over as much as us despite only averaging half our crowds , and as the SC works on turnover , we have a continuing problem

Agree. But you did insinuate that RFL was at fault.

right but next season there salary cap will be based on there turnover last season (super league gates} , parachute payments and prize money for where they finish in super league enablin them to stay full time , still think its unfair on them

Sorry? What have I done now?

Not in a ' let's pick on Leigh ' way , more just that's the way the system works sometimes

However, the team being 'booted out' of SL =#FF0000WILL be able to meet the 2,500 average home gate requirement, during their final season in SL. (unless it's Quins!

) Also the 'parachute' payment that the RFL says they will get, will help to soften the blow for them - providing anyone is booted out of SL, that is.

This news is frustrating, coming as it does, so late after the rule infringement. However, we've 'broken the rule' and aren't taking it any further.

What I find slightly surprising is that nobody else seems to have under-estmtaed' their income last season. What about the clubs that were knocked outr of the NRC 'early doors' for instance? Did 'Fax and 'Fev not budget to go further in those competitions?

Aye but getting to the GF, winning the league and getting good pay days on hardacre and briggs kind off gave us a jolly up!