Freds completely correct that so far all Fax have done is talk big. No detail, no finite timescales, nothing but a lot of PR speak that conveniently coincides with the the franchise decision process.

We then hear their fans calling for the heads of both Cas and Wakey as unfit for SL. Why? They both dwarf EVERY Championship club in every aspect of the game. At this point in any Franchising conversation the issue of grounds is inevitably raised. Take a look at our sport and the current financial climate in and outside of the game and then please explain why grounds are being touted as such a critical criteria? Can someone please explain how the sport benefits from the use of a council/privately owned new facility over a club owned older facility. As long as the gound meets the capacity requirements of the club, the relevant HSE regulations and provides and acceptable minimum of food, drink and toilet facilities I would suggest a responsible governing body would be encouraging its members to retain their assets, tighten their belts and weather the current financial downturn with a view to revisiting the games facilities issues when the economy supports such luxuries.

It may be that Fax have such ambitions, in fact I would suggest that every chairman in the Championship has. The question is what are they planning thaty is any different from what the rest of the league is doing?

No argument with what you say. However, the 'governing body' hasn't suggested tightening belts etc. - YET! They may well do that, as a matter of convenience to allow some SL clubs to retain their lofty status. Now that would probably be a sensible thing to do, in the current economic climate, but they should have said it a year ago, not when they announce the successful and unfortunate clubs. To make such an announcement then would leave them wide open, yet again, to accusations of moving the goalposts, to 'suit' certain clubs.

Inevitably, there will be an announcement about clubs going into administration (a la Crusaders) to change the criteria from three years ago. ( a la Widnes)

By the way, we (Leigh) were left with little option other than go for the council built/owned stadium, as Hilton Park was virtually condemned, and was costing crippling sums to maintain, let alone bring up to 'acceptable' standards.

you cant get away from the fact that the rfl have placed an awful lot of importance on stadia.
the three clubs in SL that are most at risk have constantly made and broke promises about there stadiums.not just in the last three years. its time they were brought to book.
if these clubs cannot guarantee that they will be in new stadiums by the start of the 2012 SL season they should be out.

The actual terms were , sign up or have a capacity of 1,000

To play devils advocate on this...

The reasons for the non appearance of the proposed new stadia is not due to failures by the clubs as such, it is due to the government/public funding being with withdrawn either centrally or by local goverment as a result of the recession.

There isn't a club in the land that could finance the building of a new SL compliant ground. Any new stadia requires public funding as a community asset or the kind of private funding the sport just can't attract. To my knowledge Wakey, Cas, Salford and Saints all had committment from their respective branches of local government to support their schemes.

If that situation has changed due to government policy, is it fair to punish the clubs in the manner you appear to be calling for?

Should they all have their franchises withdrawn in favour of clubs with the geographical good fortune to have access to a compliant 3rd party facility?

What is the benefit to the sport of pursuing such a policy?

I am not standing in judgement here, I am just trying to make some sense of both the RFL & SLE's policy and some of the reactions on these discussions across the forums.

I'm sorry Off!, but you know damn well those are not the reasons. Activity only starts prior to the crucial period it happened in 2007, 2010 and no doubt in 1995

i cant comment on castleford because iv'e no idea when they first started to make promises about new stadia or redevelopment,but both salford and wakey have been making promises to the RFL since the late 90's and still not a brick layed.if they cant promise new stadia by june/july then they should be kick out.

I am of the opinion that the RFL will either, not change the current SL set up or it will expand to 16 teams. I just can't see them relegating any of the current SL teams.

I thought that would be the case , until Wakeys problems

But letting Wakefield drop and go out of business will make them look even bigger numpties. What ever happens the result will not suit everyone and I think the RFL will be looking at damage limitation for the next 4 years rather than bold strides.

Sorry Demon but you are going to have to enlighten us on why these clubs are not building new grounds then. If its not for financial reasons, what is it?

I know that when the clubs in question presented the RFL with their proposals they have had local government representation or confirmation of their financial backing, all conditional of course. If local government funding is no longer avaiable, who's fault is it?

As for the statement that you only see and hear of activity at franchise time. It seems rather obvious that the reason you only hear about it in the run up to franchises is because it just isn't news at any other time.

As for increasing the size of SL to retain all current SL clubs and accomodate Widnes? There just isn't enough quality out there to support the current clubs never mind another. Is it in the sports interest to dilute the competition further? I won't even go near the effect on what is left of the international game.

Salford only had local government funding this time around, and they are still funding it. Leigh moved into a new stadium in 2008 and had only had one disatrous season in SL prior to that. The 'protected SL clubs' have had millions of quid since 1995, yet they chose to put it into players pockets instead of putting money aside to improve their facilities.

If Leigh managed to get one, who lets face it are the poor relations to a SL team not far away, then why have Cas/Wakey and Salford been dragging their heels. Salford have been promnising a new stadium since 2002 I think. Because Salfords promises have been accepted in the past the aforementioned clubs seem to think if they can offer a nice drawing on paper the SL will believe them. We had a new Stadium for 2008 and the RFL ignored that one and based our application for a 2008 licence on Hilton Park.

As for you mentioning whats left of the international game, we will shortly be wondering whats left of the domestic game.

How can anyone say that there aren't enough players to go around if the number full time teams increass. No one knows how a young player in the lower leagues will compete if he is given the chance to go full time. I would give young Grixy as an example he was a good player at leigh but is a very good player now he has been full time pro. There is tallent out there and I would say that increasing the full time league will bring more of it to the fore.

I agree ,some people say "he's not good enough for SL" but unless a player is given the chance to try full time rugby how do you know