yes I think I would be ashamed by that too, a small town club like Cas that has outdone a BIG city team like wakey

to me i think returning to P/R is vital for the future of RL, as a giants fan i can say the best thing that happened to us was when we were relegated after the shambles of the made up merger, i think the rfl should make the championship fully pro by investing some of the sky money there so when a side is relegated its not the end of the world. I also think the ground shouldnt be a major issue in the franchising bid but if it is how come odsal never seems to be mentioned about having to be redeveloped as imo its worse than all the others under threat.

if the last month has taught us anything, the bookies know naff all about SL!!!

thankfully.

If no criteria has been released then how do we know the criteria won't be same as it was? In all a shocking state of affairs, how is a club supposed to strive for any kind of standard when they don't really know what that standard is!

I've joined this thread late so not not sure if this has been covered.

I've never been for the franchise system. It's no longer a sport when clubs aren't judged on merit, just on their business plan. Could you imagine playing a game where no matter what you do, you can never win? That's what's like for clubs in the lower league.

The play-offs have made the seasons more interesting for clubs like Wakefield, who are never going to win the title, but at least have a top eight spot to play for. But for those clubs at the bottom, the season ended weeks ago. We may never have the excitment of the Castleford relegation game ever again.

I meant the exact criteria hasn't been given to us. The clubs will obviously have a better idea as they'll be putting together their applications now before submission.

My understanding - from the various press articles - is that the old system has been replaced to several areas specified from stadia to business aspects. Each criteria within those areas is given an 'exemplary' response as to what an A grade club should be obtaining/doing and the clubs are marked based on that in every area.

Interesting discussion , It seems something is missing from our sport , that being the actual reason we go in the first place


Emotion

The thing about promotion and relegation is that everyone knows where they are at the start of the season - its a level playing field.

We fought hard to get into SL and everyone seems to forget that we didn't get our share of the SL money for the first two years we were in. We have never finished bottom and won't do this season. Therefore, for us to be potentially kicked out based on a set of criteria, which are mainly to do with off-field issues and which conveniently don't apply to all clubs is exactly why the country as a whole doesn't take RL seriously.

Interesting statement coming from the RFL yesterday regarding the next round of franchises which will decided by the so called [iindependent RFL Board
[/i ( yer right independant!).


[sizeAt this stage[/size the Super League will remain at 14 clubs in 2012. If a Championship Club meets the minimum criteria and the Super League competition remains at 14 clubs, a Super League club will be displaced.

'"

Meeting the minimum standards isn't the same as being in the top 14 applications. That makes it sounds like the criteria for Championship clubs is less stringent.

It sounds more like Wakey or Cas are out if the grounds aren't under construction. If they are, however, and admitting a Championship club would involve kicking any other team out, we will move to 15.

This is my complaint about it being promotion and relegation by committee, because it seems to be a moveable feast, depending on which club is at risk.

And Brian McDermott's comments are interesting herehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/super_league/london/8944609.stmrl

Air of uncertainty about the club? Maybe that 14th slot will open automatically?

Think Quins may come into the equation somewhere if you read Brian McD's comments news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 944609.stm

Think Quins may come into the equation somewhere if you read Brian McD's comments news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 944609.stm

mmmm, This stinks of a set up, They are declaring that a SL club will be displaced, what happens if three clubs were all of the same standard, ie you cas and salford, who are they going to choose? They have pre empt the selection process imo and hopefully opened themselves to litigation, to say an independant panel will be involved is pure bull.

it isnt supposed to strive for any specific standard. There isnt a minimum standard clubs need to reach and they are safe.

Clubs need to simply be the best they can, and the best ones will be safe, the worst not. Its a constant and ever evolving process.

In the last round of licensing, clubs were initially assessed and awarded points on reaching minimum standards. In this round of licensing, clubs will be assessed against A Grade criteria. These criteria are designed to reflect the advancing standards within Super League, and take account of the feedback received from clubs following the last round of licensing.

How are the applications assessed?

Clubs are assessed on criteria in 5 key areasNew stadiums or redevelopments of existing stadiums will only be taken into account if the RFL is satisfied that the stadium will be open or the redevelopment finished by the start of the 2012 season.

Timeline

December 2010 – Championship club applications due to be submitted
March 2011 – Successful Championship club announced.
April 2011 – Super League club applications due to be submitted
July 2011 – Successful licensed clubs announced.

I would very much doubt realistically that Wake or Cas or Salfords stadiums will be ready for the 2012 season start. We can live in hope i suppose