The toilets are far worse than those iv been to in a while which includes the like of Dewsbury,Keighley Dewsbury which was over 14 years ago,the walk to the turnsytles were very appauling knee deep in mud the lighting in the ground wasnt up to much standard.The stands you they bought from Scarbourgh FC were in bits but will they have a roof.

The fact is that at this moment in time Featherstone Rovers in my opinion is not ready for Super League The club is running the the playing side of things like any Super League club regarding scolarship and I am led to believe better than our neighbours so that's a plus. The club has in my opinion got a Super League coach another plus Crowds are improving and are one of the best in the championship another plus The work from the BOD has improved this year and they are working there socks off another plus. We are arguably the best team outside Super League over the last 2 years a plus

On the negative side our stadium isn't up to standard although things are in place to get it sorted over the next 12 months Our turnover must improve and we must continue to run the club within our means I know the BOD are working with the RFL on what is required

If things are sorted over the next 18 months and clubs that are in S/L are not improving I believe we should be given a chance and see if we can compete with the bottom half of S/L. The extra money from the TV deal more sponsors and Daryl Powell coaching a full time Rovers team I think we wouldn't finish bottom All I hope is that if everything the RFL tell them to do they do and we are given a chance

By the way good luck in the next round we tried our best yesterday but you are a very good team and will probably go all the way

Shame about the toilets and access to the ground, not used these toilets before the ones in the family stand where I always sit are fantastic. The lights were flickering and I am not sure why, typical it happened with superleague fans coming over.

It would have to be in a second tier IMO, as there simply isnt room in any other format. Its something i'd like to see the new administration do now the lump lewis has gone though. Its quite a long post below demonstrating how I think it would work, but if you take the time to read, i think most will find this as a really good idea.

Id have 20 team super league in two tiers of 10 with promotion and relegation between both.

For example....
SL Tier 1................................Tier 2
Wigan................................Halifax
Leeds.................................Sheffield
Saints................................Wakefield
Wire...................................Leigh
Catalan...............................London
Huddersfield........................Widnes
Bradford (under a new..........Salford
board and proper..................Barrow
administration).....................Featherstone
Hull.....................................Batley
Hull KR
Castleford

Top division say has a salary cap of 2.5m, bottom division 1 million.

Under this the championship continues but with one larger divison of the remaining semi professional clubs, and we keep franchising, with applications made every 3 years from championship clubs who feel they can step up. Tier 1 clubs would be guarenteed to stay at each franchising window, with tier 2 clubs and the hopeful championship joiners being franchised for the 10 spots in tier 2. Then, if for example north wales are ready to step back up in a few years they still have an opportunity, and this also gives them a better pathway, as entering tier 2 superleague wouldnt be as demanding as the transition currently between part time and full time super league!

Each team plays each other in their tier home and away, and tier 2 teams host tier 1 teams only giving 28 regular league games. This gives additional income for tier two teams as they have 19 of their 28 fixtures at home, and assists in them competing with tier 1 teams as they only play the best teams at home.

To then make up for lack of home fixtures for tier 1 teams, after a rescheduled wembley at the end of July, tier 1 further breaks up into two groups of 5.

The top 5 play 8 further fixtures (4 home and 4 away), in the play off series - Top two then go to the grand final at old trafford. Bottom 5 play off in a relegation play off series, all playing each other home and away with the bottom two going down. This ensures all tier 1 teams have 13 regular league fixtures as now.

Tier 2 teams only enter the challenge cup at the last 16 stage.

Tier two - Champions go up - The further top 6 have a play off series to determine the second promotion spot and the league ends earlier than tier one, with a promotion grand final at the end of September. The remaining 3 teams dont play for the final few weeks of the tier two season, giving them addition time to restructure for the following season and ensure they are then competitive (There should be no revenue issues for them doing this given tier 2 teams have 19 home fixtures our of their 28 game season, given tier 1 clubs vist them only.)

This would answer all boxes for me. We get great nights like last night, and the other week at places like featherstone, keep these great traditional rugby league areas alive by giving them opportunity to sit at the top table of rugby league, while hopefully avoiding massive one sided games that no one wants to see.

It also allows those in tier 1 to not be held back by lower level super league clubs, and increase the salary cap incrementally as these teams further grow to a level we can at least beat off the threat of union. It also ensures every game should be a cracking highly cometitive game for both tiers which adds to the product..with no boring blow out scores we get in our supposedly super league now, when a top team plays a wakefield, salford or london etc at home - Rather than havng a cracking game one week ie v saints and a dour one the next ie. with wakey, we'd then play really competitve games every week and the SL would be more like the NRL IMO.

Top teams would play tier 2 teams away, however given they would have only 10 glamour ties a year against tier one teams, on most occasions I feel they could raise their game to a level fev did last night and compete and on occasions shock tier 1 teams.

The only critisism I could see with this is that tier 1 teams play more games (36 league games) - However to counter this I would have the league introduce plans like they do in Union, where each player can only play a maximum number of league games - say 25. This further strengthens the game as the tier one clubs, would have to use their salary cap constructively, and give young players chances, and ensure their squad is strong, and not just their starting 17, to have rotation.

This would also add an added tactical element to coaches games, and I feel we'd see many of the tier 2 v tier 1 games, with tier 1 teams fielding 5-6 non regular players (hopefully in a little more moderation than us against widnes ) but this would further make these games even more competitive imo.

The more I think of this idea the more convinced I am that its the utlimate model which could overhaul rugby league and solve so many of the problems we have within our game!

Fev had bags of enthusiasm and guts last night but very little skill.

The match itself provided very little rugby.

It was reminiscent to me of how it was playing in Yorkshire in the 1960s before the tackle rules were brought in, because of those Yorkshire clubs. They used to 'stick it up their jumpers', run one step, then just fall over in the middle of the field. Players like Ian Van Bellen were outstanding examples of that tactic.

Fev played to their strengths and good for them.

I am afraid they would get hammered if they were to play on the big level pitches that exist at superleague clubs and Wembley stadium on a regular basis.

I'm sorry that the facilities were sub standard for you.
Conditions for away fans were far from perfect but the club are in the process of developing the ground and that in turn will enable us to provide the facilities you deserve.
Usually with the attendances we get all the facilities are shared so there is no segregation, no away car parking and no away toilets.Some Fev fans didn't want to be seperated but that is the decision the club made which meant that away toilets had to be provided at short notice.
The car parking area was rock hard a week ago but we have had so much rain in the last week that conditions were more akin to a swamp. Sadly we can't control the weather but the conditions on match day is something the club need to be aware of and a back up plan should perhaps be in place.
The floodlights are being upgraded.
Please bear in mind we run U15 U16 U18 U21 and a ladies team but don't get the funding from the RFL that SL clubs get and there is a cost involved to running those teams and with the income we have we have to work with some things take longer to do than we would like.I'd rather see the club develop young players and do the ground alterations stage by stage than pump all available money into the ground and abandon the youth set up. Our boys have beaten SL opposition this year at all levels so that shows we are making progress on the field.
What i will say is that the board do care about supporters and are working their socks off to improve the ground for all fans, home and away and unlike our near SL neighbours who have been making promises for years we will develop our ground, the stands are already there but we can't do it overnight and just need the support of fans from other clubs who are used to all seater modern stadiums.
Only a few years ago we were in administration so the turn around under the current management team has been remarkable.

Phil I don't understand the need for segregation last night, we were in the pub on station road befoer the game with no problem, was going to visit the bar under the Family stand but was prevented by stewards, as previously mentioned away fans toilets very poor with no womens and 1 disabled in not a very good state.
We sat down, good view and dry but obviously lots of work to do, mind you so have Wakey and Cas and they have been going at it for 3 years.

Thats the beauty of two tiers of 10 imo - You an do it in so many ways. Your way could work better as there would be more chance of upsets etc. playing the bottom teams tier one, but the only thing I'd feel with this is would we be short changing the tier 2 teams somewhat by not giving them opportunity to play against the top 5 teams?

I do like your idea though. Two tiers play home and away - then you could have the mini league of top 5 tier 2 and bottom 5 tier 1 wth the top 5 to qualify for tier one next season - with each team only playing teams from the other tier - thus in effect giving all tier 2 sides a chance, albeit slim, that if they compete and beat enough tier 1 sides they make it into tier 1 the following season - that would make every game like a cup final IMO.

The only problem is what to then do wth the other 5 teams in each tier - top 5 play off for the top 5 tier 1 champions takes up 4 weeks - then this is where id bring in the expanded WCC for top 5 super league and top 5 NRL - 5 games against each NRL side takes another 5 weeks, semis and final another 2 and you've got 11 weeks there - which would fit nicely with your idea of the 10 week mini league for the lower tier 1/ upper tier 2 teams with a final stand alone week or the WCC final.

Bottom 5 tier 2 teams then drop into a northern rail cup competition/ european shield with the rest of the championship and the top french sides for the remaining 10 games of the season.

Fits perfectly IMO - The only problem being is could the top tier 1 teams survive with only 9 games home games per season every two seasons. It would be fine when the WCC was here - as you would have 14 games that year similar to now - This is where TV money would hopefully plug a gap, but this is the only potential flaw with your model IMO.

As RL fans what do we really want?
1. High intensity games every week in SL1, to produce an Ashes winning team.
2. The pinnacle to be the envy of other sports and be rewarded accordingly from TV
3. Expand player pool, we lose too many at 19/20 who may be late developers or have their progress blocked by the ageing Aussie, and a FT 2nd tier provides a good home.
4. Reduce imports by having more academies in a FT culture
5. Promotes expansion
6. It gets back to the basic principles of sport, try explaining what we have to play for (Leigh) to a non RL person, they laugh.

Where does the additional £10 million per year come from to fund such a structure?

The logical split would be keep SL money as is, the bigger gates will help and allow a £2m cap. Divide the 4 current SL clubs money that drop together with the £90k from the promoted Championship clubs and you have £500k, that should allow for £1m cap

Before the franchise system we had already got to the stage where automatic promotion and relegation had gone. Wakefield survived at least once because the NL1 champs either didn't want promotion or didn't meet ground criteria. What franchising does is make SL not a closed shop but does impose minimum standards on clubs. It's not perfect but its better than the alternative of P&R which just won't work any more.

As to who it has benefited well Widnes for a start. We also have clubs in new grounds such as Wire, Salford and Saints who went about getting these sorted because they had to in order to keep their places or at least not be in the at risk category.

Also if there are crap teams in SL then the ones outside of it can't be any better otherwise they would have taken the franchise off the likes of Wakefield.

I would have no issue with promotion based on minimum standards as in Football and RU. Hunslet and Dewsbury were denied promotion on minimum standards, both times saving Huddersfield.