Only if they change them!

Hasn't it always been that way? They've never said it, but it's pretty much a given that Crusader, Catalans and Harlequins will never be kicked out of Superleague.

If there is any shred of truth in this then I hope all the clubs under threat of loosing their franchise and Widnes use this damning evidence to ensure that we all are playing in SL in 2012 or legal action will follow.

Before anybody starts with we all signed up not to challenge the decisions, we also all signed up to a set of rules which the RFL keep bending to suit expansion clubs. Therefore in my mind they can't try and enforce
part of the original rules whilst blatantly ignoring certain others.

What are the voting requirements? Would all the clubs have to agree? And if so, are we (or Cas) going to agree?

No doubt it will be a stitch up with the majority who know they are safe agreeing and maybe even Salford being tipped the wink they are safe and should vote for it.

The really annoying thing is you can see the RFL's thinking here - keep the Crusaders in and the other SL clubs will be very angry, especially anyone who gets kicked out. Someone who gets kicked out could possibly mount a legal challenge to the RFL. But get all of the clubs to agree and there's no basis for a legal challenge - you can't complain about getting kicked out if you agreed to let them stay in, and it'd still be difficult if every other club agreed to it. But if you don't agree to keep them in, what's to stop the RFL looking at your franchise application unfavourably? I'm sure that would be enough to make us, Salford and Cas agree to it.

Good point - its another stitch up

See my post on the cas forum

Sorry, not sure I understand the point you are trying to make,

The problem with all of is that the RFL are entirely to blame.

When the franchises were announced, a lot of league fans seemed to be of the view that it was too early for the Crusaders. The Crusaders fans did not seem the greatest of fans of Leighton Samuels, and posted stuff along those lines. A lot of people were of the view that the RFL should not have given in to the Samuels line that it's either now or never.

Here we are, two years down the line. Samuels has jumped ship and seemingly left the club in a right mess. It seems that most people could see it coming except the RFL, and it showed their weakness, that rather than growing a club it is expansion at whatever cost. And who knows, perhaps in twenty years time, they will have matched London's failure to grow.

I want the Welsh thing to work, I've always wanted that, and I suppose the RFL should do what they can to make it work, but the other clubs, and I include the aspiring Championship clubs, are entitled to feel that they will be treated equally, and they are not.

If Newmarket comes off, the Crusaders thing might be an irrelevance for us, but it would just not be right. If they have failed financially, drop down, build again.

bigalf on the Cas forum said that the clubs are being asked to ignore the financial failings of the Crusaders and allow the franchising thing to be considered as normal, with a financially viable club making way for one that it isn't.

I understand all of that, but my question was to TRB (who didn't appear to be referring to this).