With the recent announcement that one super league team could be dropped. All the small clubs believe to be in the frame for dropping out the league have moved forward dramatically.

Castleford have announced plans for a new 13000 seater stadium.
Wakefield have promised a new stadium for 2011.
Salford have signed some class players including vinnie anderson, luke patten etc.. ( i think we all know the salford signings)

Is this a smart move by the RFL?

I am actually wondering whether the RFL have announced that one team is going to drop out, to give them a kick up the backside, but are not actually going to kick one out.

Its only a thought, but if they did this then two more championship sides would have to be promoted, or a bye introduced.

Does anybody agree? or am i a bit loopy, and have a bit too much time on my hands?

Well i think they set a president last time round they should have removed 1 club then that way all the SL clubs that weren't preforming on and off the field would know they were in danger of going out

i do hope they are serious about it as if they dont what hope do the Championship clubs have to get into SL

I think Saints should get an automatic 10 point deduction for playing in a sub SL standard stadium next season, the stadium was deemed not adequate when Widnes wanted in so i believe, either that or relegate them until they do have a suitable stadium

If one team dropped out, they would know with half a season of Super League left to play. What incentive would they have? They could potentially win SL and be 'relegated'

Cas with a 13,000 seater stadium...........oh dear........

I think one of the franchise criteria is a 12,000+ stadium.

At least something is being done about it. Surely you cant kick one of them out, if all three of salford cas and wakey have decent stadiums and mid table sides?

This point has been made before. How can you kick a team out if they score as well as other SL teams? I mean it is quite possible for several sides, even though at the bottom end of the table, to meet all the same criteria equally well (or badly!). So how do you pick one to be replaced by a NL1 side?

Fortunately for the the RFL I think they will be able to deem Wakefield not to have done enough to score as highly as any other SL side despite where they finish in the league due to stadium concerns so the RFL can keep its promise.

Making a promise a side will go down and one will come up regardless when you run a franchise system is utterly stupid because unless you have a crystal ball you don't know if any NL1 side will be up too it or if any SL side will deserve to lose it's franchise.

In theory over time all SL sides will be good franchisees so who goes then if a similar promise is made? The side finishing bottom? That would be back to promotion and relegation but only happening once every three years. That still would not mean the side coming up was fit to do so.

As it happens I read somewhere the next round of franchises after this won't be judged on objective criteria at all and SL clubs won't get A, B or C grades. They will decide who goes down subjectively. So if your face doesn't fit, out you go and hello Toulouse.

Dave

By leaving it until halfway through the season, it's unlikely the dropped team will be in with a shout of winning. They won't relegate anyone in the top half, that's for sure.

Widnes got the required tick in that box

They would then have to o off what happens ON the pitch. Work out the worst performing side over the 3 years and drop them. There simply HAS to be some kind of movement between the SL and NL's.

If you compare Salford, Wakefield and Castleford:

Salford appear the weakest on League Position (average last 3 seasons) worse attendances, and probably worse ground........Wakefield are the strongest on League position. So the RFL will be gunning for Wakefield then ???