RFL are the reason the game is being killed off. Why force teams to have grounds they cannot fill or expenses they cannot afford. As long as the grounds pass stringent health and safety test and are truly safe for all does it matter how many it holds as long as you can get all your fans in and a bit of room for expansion. Money better spent elsewhere than on 70% empty stadium. Why do the idiots as the top feel they are worth their considerable weight in cash whilst making such bad, expensive, illogical decisions. There needs to be some common sense applied. Scenario - You go up to SL so your ground must be this that and the other. Money is spent on the ground - nothing left over for players. You are in debt as a club and back down next year because you couldn't invest in better players - who will pay the debt when fans stop coming because of stupid RFL rules

Well said, I agree with all that you say regarding the RFL.

Couple of discussion points here. The Leeds game parking issue, happened you cannot undo that so it's an arguememt that the residents would use irrelevant of what you could do in the future, possibly not helped by the advice given to some on here to travelling fans about parking.
The RFL are a bit stuck between a rock and a hard place. We all want our sport to expand and to become bigger nationally than what it is.
Problem we have is the top clubs draw pretty decent crowds so have to ensure there facilities can cope, how do you defferenciate between other clubs in the same league who potentially could end up and should be drawing the same crowds.
I think fit for purpose is actually mote important than capacity, you just make those with smaller stadiums all ticket if required. Where the RFL should be focusing is the old run down stadiums, why did football have to change? Because of tragedy, Bradford, Hillsboro, that's the main risk in my view for the likes of cas and wakey
So the RFL are doing the right thing but for the wrong reasons

thats what I said

As long as the grounds pass stringent health and safety test and are truly safe for all does it matter how many it holds as long as you can get all your fans in and a bit of room for expansion

The problem faced by the RFL trying to be the regulators how do you deal with a problem like ours? Where do they set the bar.
In reality trailfinders at the moment "could" possibly cope with say 2000 as it stands, H&S wise it would be ok apart from maybe restricted movement in front of the main stand and amount of toilets available.
We have had crowds much bigger than that, all be it many years ago, so what do you do in our case?
Is insisting on a 10k capacity with 5k seating realistic, maybe not but you have to set the bar somewhere, maybe 5k capacity, but at the moment we could not even do that.
The RFL are doing what they think is best for the sport in my mind, is it actually for the best? Well that's a moot point, the fact Dewsbury could be a temp ground for wakey seems crazy to me, but is that the RFL fault, all those years ago when the club house was built at wakey why did they not spend the money re building that stand, I don't think all the blame is on the sports governing body

Need to apply for a dispenstaion to the RFL by the end of this month if you/RFL think your grounds fall short of Super League standards or you will be deemed to have come at least 6th in the Middle 8s. No top 4 finish, no million pound game regardless of results! RFL has to agree to dispensation by 21 July. (Section A2 of the rules)

Be interesting to know what the RFL and the club have agreed to or not in the next few weeks!