It does say "it is understood" but if true I find it disappointing, selfish and very short sighted.

I guess we are probably taking the stance that if we dont get a new stadium then its the end of the road for us so what the hell. If we do then lets have a bigger slice of the cake.

Again selfish and not likely to win many friends from the rest of the Rugby world.

I'd love for it not to be true.

That’s assuming Sky are happy to invest the same amount of funds for a 12 team league as they would for a 14.

The club should be looking to the future and seeing that a new ground could open up new market which means the £200k or so they would get from a reduction in numbers could be made up with new support, just 1000 extra adults paying £20 each home game for the entire season would fetch in £260K alone.

I'm glad we haven't reverted to a 12 team Superleague. In the short term it may have helped a couple clubs balance their accounts but it would have been detrimental to the game on the whole.

In the long term i'd like to see us move to 16 clubs if financially possible, split into two leagues to help ensure there isn't a fixture overload. In a similar structure to that of America. Eastern & Western, such as

Eastern
Wakefield
Castleford
Leeds
Huddersfield
Hull KR
Hull FC
Bradford
Catalan

Western
Wigan
St Helens
Warrington
Widnes
Salford
Crusaders
Harlequins
Leigh

Wakefield for instance would play everyone in the eastern conference twice and those in the western once alternating H & A each season. Then the top four from each conference would form the play-offs. That would reduce the fixtures to 22 per season, 23 if you include the Magic weekend and ensure there is a continued space for the international programme.

The main downfall would be that two home games would be lost compounded with a smaller slice of the sky money. I'm sure though that the clubs and the RFL could find some way of increasing the fixtures if clubs needed too e.g. Wakefield play 4 western sides twice and 4 once.

On the upside it places more importance on games against those in your conference and may bring higher crowds for derbies. It would also help reduce travel costs for teams and would allow for an East Reps v West Reps (although it hasn't been supported well previously).

If we voted for 12 teams I'm disgusted, however I don't know if that was the case.

I posted something similar to this a while ago. We should start a campaign. I think its the best way forward.

I can confirm that we were NOT one of the clubs to vote for 12 clubs - as wrongly reported in the YP.

Apparently the news was founded on a rumour - proving that there are idiots who can get paid for the same kind of rubbish most of us put on here for fun!

Just to add to the rumour - if you take our team out of the 3 and add in another side who play in white with a red-V, you could be closer to the mark! Now how much can I charge for that??

Amused that anyone could even think we voted for it.

Come on only the Wakey faithfull could believe that

I take back my comments. I did find it strange considering Trinity are largely perceived as the first club in the firing line when it comes to relicensing time.

Just asked on VT about another part of the article, suggesting one club will definitely be promoted. How would that fit with licencing criteria if all current clubs scored higher than them?

The thing is, I can see the business argument for it. If we get the new ground, we should be in regardless, as we tick a lot of other boxes, particularly if we get in the play-offs again, and then it is just a case of getting a bigger share to improve player stock. Add to that the "still at Belle Vue" scenario. If the club tries to carry on, they will want a competitive Championship, including local rivals in the same league ( ) to generate crowd income.

I'm glad that rugby heads prevailed at Belle Vue, not the ring of the till.

Just as an aside, what if the leagues below split geographically? Would be quite a fun league to be in if nearly every match was a Derby. Cas, Fev, Dewsbury, Batley. Would be more atmosphere than Dragons, Salford and Quins games.

Why change the format, 14 teams in the league is just fine.

The way I see it, the Championship club wouldn't have to 'outscore' a SL club. With the A, B and C grading system, the RFL could just decide that 1 or more C graded clubs will not get their licence re-newed because of ................ (fill in the blanks). The gap left would then be filled by 1 or more Championship clubs.

Obviously the strength of the clubs outside SL would dictate whether the RFL would choose to enforce any previous warnings given and actually kick out a current SL club. Lets face it, had the RFL wanted to they COULD have chosen to kick out a number of SL clubs last time round but chose not to. For example, if the RFL want both Widnes and Toulouse in next time round, the RFL might turn round and say Salford and Wakey have lost their licence because the RFL are not satisfied regarding development of a new stadium. However, if the RFL just want say Widnes, then Salford might still get the boot, but they might justify keeping Wakey in by commenting on efforts made to get the new ground and also 1st team and youth development. In short whatever the RFL want, they will spin it so it looks as though they are giving honest and genuine reasons.