=#4000BF"Mr Stone on the phone for you AGAIN Sarah"




=#FF00BF"For gods sake. Just tell him Im out of the office"

IA, do we have a timetable for the Public Enquiry yet? I know it was muted a couple of weeks back that we were expecting the dates?

Why? The rules have been changed since Widnes went into administration. Plus we are constantly told that the franchise procedure forbids member clubs pursuing any sort of legal action.

If we end up with a very wealthy backer and NM on the horizon and playing out of a SL standard ground until its ready, then based on the bid for the [unext[/u 3 years licence, we are likely to have one of the best 14 bids - its as simple as that

1) contradicted yourself somewhat, the rules are the rules and for franchise all clubs should compete equally and fairly.
2) member clubs of SL cannot sue the RFL. or they would have been sued previously.
3) i was told yesterday that although FPP had been submitted payment had yet to be received.

The rules have been changed to allow clubs to "apply" for a licence despite administration. It will still be a black mark on the application.

The Crusaders will be looked upon very differently. As they are a New club with in a new area with little or no base support, so it was always going to be tough financially as it is for all new businesses. Wakefield however have had over a decade of Super League and over a 100 years established in a hot bed of RL, and as such will not be granted the same leniency as the Crusaders.

Look at it like this the support that the Crusaders have managed to get together in the space of a year at Wrexham is actually outstanding, so with plenty more work the future does look bright for them. Where as at Wakefield the general trend has been that of decline.

You seem to have conveniently missed the other points I made as to why looking at the next 3 years if things pan out as are being predicted, ours will be one of the best 14 bids - it is that simple.

Also you have to look at this way. We are still in Superleague and Widnes are not. It's easier to not let someone in than it is to kick someone out. I am sure there could be some rule changes implemented to change of circumstances thay have already shown this recently.

how exactly? by the time the next licenses are handed out how exactly are wakefield going to be in a better position that other clubs?
you said that the rules had changed since widnes were refused?

widnes weren't in administration when they applied, so the rule change hasn't anything to do with that. I imagine Wakefield won't be in administration for long but it's still lingering over them, and the reason why widnes were refused was because there was little evidence to prove the club was a sable company and could survive in super league.

Sorry but the clues are in my original response to your post. Licence is for the [unext[/u 3 years by the time the applications are submitted if rumours are true we will have extremely wealthy new backer(s), an agreement to play out of a SL stadium and NM progressing in the background. This coupled with the community department etc.. will IMO mean we have one of the best 14 bids and on that basis cannot be kicked out.

I have not missed out the other points I was commenting on the crusaders point. As for the other points, we are yet to see what happens with a new owner, and any promises they might make.

id give it a rest pal, your not gonna get a bite today!










































Come on the Trin!!!!!!!!

She is younger than that mate and never wears an orange vest top to the office... so I understand!